219/11 - Mail Centre Revisions - BSI Level (85) - Un-agreed

[Big Daz]

219/11 - Mail Centre Revisions - BSI Level (85) - Un-agreed Throughput Rates


No. 219/2011
Ref. L04.11
Date: 8th March 2011




TO: ALL BRANCHES WITH POSTAL MEMBERS & POSTAL DIVISIONAL REPS
For immediate circulation to all appropriate Area/Unit Representatives


Dear Colleagues


Mail Centre Revisions - BSI Level (85) - Un-agreed Throughput Rates


It has been brought to the attention of the Indoor Department that local management are attempting to undertake Mail Centre revisions using an un-agreed BSI rate of 85.


The aim of this LTB is to advise you that no approach has been made by the business to the CWU nationally to discuss any change to the current rate of 75, which has been used to establish duties in measured work areas of Mail Centres since the inception of the Revised Revision Procedures.


I am aware that some discussions have taken place with the Assistant Secretary Outdoor regarding the use of 100 BSI as the benchmark for duty revision in deliveries, but no agreement has been given by Bob Gibson to use this rate.


What is clear is that no agreement has been given by me or any of my colleagues at CWU Headquarters to change the BSI Rate in Mail Centres or the National Databank Planning Values and associated principals currently used to construct duties in Mail Centres.


In view of the above, any attempt by local management to use any process and/or procedure other than the agreed revision methods within Mail Centres should be challenged via the IR framework, including the application of the status quo until the matter has been resolved at national level.


Any failure on the part of local management to abide to current national agreements, including the IR Framework will be viewed as a breach of the Business Transformation Agreement and as such be treated as Executive Action. This position should be made clear in any local discussions that take place.


All enquiries regarding the content of this LTB should be addressed as appropriate to Phil Browne, Acting Assistant Secretary, Indoor Department quoting reference number L04.11.



Yours sincerely


PHIL BROWNE
ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY

[hans solo]

so has the outdoor sec agreed 100 bsi for do,s then
has our wonderful union caved in to more rm demands @anckers

[fishtank]

so has the outdoor sec agreed 100 bsi for do,s then
has our wonderful union caved in to more rm demands @anckers

It is embarrassing that they are even discussing it.

[clashcityrocker]

so has the outdoor sec agreed 100 bsi for do,s then
has our wonderful union caved in to more rm demands @anckers

I am aware that some discussions have taken place with the Assistant Secretary Outdoor regarding the use of 100 BSI as the benchmark for duty revision in deliveries, but no agreement has been given by Bob Gibson to use this rate.

I think what they are discussing is why it is being used by some managers doing revisions when it isn't agreed and is partly responsible for revisions failing.

[fishtank]

I think what they are discussing is why it is being used by some managers doing revisions when it isn't agreed and is partly responsible for revisions failing.

I think you may find that although most offices will not be expected to reach 100BSI after one revision it is the final target.

dingo wrote
Revisons on self starters are driven by the IWT and moving torwards 100 BSi so if your at 80 then it would be silly to remove all the hours to get you too an hundred in one revison. So its not driven by savings but by the tools which were agreed.

So...like i said...it's enbarrassing that union leaders who wouldn't know 100BSI if it bit them on the arse are even discussing the possibility of applying such ridiculous standards to such a physically demanding job.

[Steviea34]

so has the outdoor sec agreed 100 bsi for do,s then
has our wonderful union caved in to more rm demands @anckers

I am aware that some discussions have taken place with the Assistant Secretary Outdoor regarding the use of 100 BSI as the benchmark for duty revision in deliveries, but no agreement has been given by Bob Gibson to use this rate.

I think what they are discussing is why it is being used by some managers doing revisions when it isn't agreed and is partly responsible for revisions failing.

Wrong - Our AREA rep is allowing revisions to take place at D.O'S SET AT 100 BSI, so is he wrong or are Delivery staff getting
shafted again

[DGP1]

Our DO has a rate of 95%..............the upper management want to know why we can't get the other 5% tbh I'm the reason for most of the failures I won't come in early, won't prep my D2Ds at home etc.

[deadbox]

Why are mail centre staff required to work at 75 bsi ( e.g. working 75% of their working day ) BUT delivery staff are required to work 95 ~ 100 bsi ( every working minute accounted for )

[clashcityrocker]

Why are mail centre staff required to work at 75 bsi ( e.g. working 75% of their working day )

Because the other 25% is made up of breaks.

[hans solo]

our iwt is all based on 100 bsi is this wrong should mgmt be allowed to use this against workplace performance cos this is whats happening in our do any ltb to counter this much appreciated

[POSTMAN]

but no agreement has been given by Bob Gibson to use this rate.

So what is the figure then.

[POSTMAN]

Oh and a MC related LTB about MC's being stitched up and not one single MCer posts in it.

[clashcityrocker]

but no agreement has been given by Bob Gibson to use this rate.

So what is the figure then.

I thought the idea was to get everyones EP up to 100 by the end of the 3 year deal. (Indoor element only)
If your office was under 85 that was the target for the first year.
85-94 was to move to 95
and over 95 was to aim for 100.
High performing offices were to remain high performing - though most were only showing as high performing because they were full of knobends starting early and using their cars.

[fishtank]

but no agreement has been given by Bob Gibson to use this rate.

So what is the figure then.

I thought the idea was to get everyones EP up to 100 by the end of the 3 year deal. (Indoor element only)
If your office was under 85 that was the target for the first year.
85-94 was to move to 95
and over 95 was to aim for 100.
High performing offices were to remain high performing - though most were only showing as high performing because they were full of knobends starting early and using their cars.

Royal Mail have always wanted to apply 100BSI to both indoor and outdoor elements.
Offices with "bad practice" were not supposed to count and would never be able to reach the upper decile.
This was supposed to drive "bad practice" from the job.
Savings and poor management got in the way and now by all accounts there are more knobhead offices than ever.
Go figure.

[clashcityrocker]

Savings and poor management?
Who would have thought you would ever see those 4 words used together in one sentence when talking about Royal Mail?