3 year pay deal

[aiden01]

Can't be offering much, if any, of a pay rise as the shorter working week was being funded by full timers foregoing pay rises

The SWW was supposed to be funded by efficiency savings.
The efficiency savings didn't materialise so neither did the SWW.

From the company’s accounts productivity is up 1.5% for this year and 1% for last year, don’t believe what they are telling you.

So why dont the cwu publish what the efficency savings were to clarify everything. then we can make our own minds up who is telling lies.

Productivity is cancelled out by the greed and avarice by the CEO £6 million?

Does'nt really answer the question posed.

[citypostie]

Can't be offering much, if any, of a pay rise as the shorter working week was being funded by full timers foregoing pay rises

The SWW was supposed to be funded by efficiency savings.
The efficiency savings didn't materialise so neither did the SWW.

The efficiency savings would/could have been there if management had stopped ghosting overtime with their favourites and made everyone work to time like they were supposed to do instead of allowing hours and hours to just walk out of the doors each day when people finished before time.

They really wouldnt as will be proven when they bring clocking in/off in and make everyone work there ours or as will happen lots of people drag there duties out to fill their hours but actually do no more work unless they can get outdoor performace standards in and enforce them. As for ghosting, yea it might stop that but it will just mean lots of delivering for managers when people dont want to start overtime at 3pm or later and get only the time it takes to actually deliver

[SpacePhoenix]

Can't be offering much, if any, of a pay rise as the shorter working week was being funded by full timers foregoing pay rises

The SWW was supposed to be funded by efficiency savings.
The efficiency savings didn't materialise so neither did the SWW.

The efficiency savings would/could have been there if management had stopped ghosting overtime with their favourites and made everyone work to time like they were supposed to do instead of allowing hours and hours to just walk out of the doors each day when people finished before time.

They really wouldnt as will be proven when they bring clocking in/off in and make everyone work there ours or as will happen lots of people drag there duties out to fill their hours but actually do no more work unless they can get outdoor performace standards in and enforce them. As for ghosting, yea it might stop that but it will just mean lots of delivering for managers when people dont want to start overtime at 3pm or later and get only the time it takes to actually deliver

I think they'll bring in outdoor performance standards first, before the clocking in and out comes in

[Rumple]

Can't be offering much, if any, of a pay rise as the shorter working week was being funded by full timers foregoing pay rises

The SWW was supposed to be funded by efficiency savings.
The efficiency savings didn't materialise so neither did the SWW.

The efficiency savings would/could have been there if management had stopped ghosting overtime with their favourites and made everyone work to time like they were supposed to do instead of allowing hours and hours to just walk out of the doors each day when people finished before time.

They really wouldnt as will be proven when they bring clocking in/off in and make everyone work there ours or as will happen lots of people drag there duties out to fill their hours but actually do no more work unless they can get outdoor performace standards in and enforce them. As for ghosting, yea it might stop that but it will just mean lots of delivering for managers when people dont want to start overtime at 3pm or later and get only the time it takes to actually deliver

I think they'll bring in outdoor performance standards first, before the clocking in and out comes in

These outdoor standards you speak of, let's hope they are sensible and reasonable standards. As it is now, my knee and hip joints ache like crazy by the end of the working week, just about recovering in time to start again on a Monday. I'm sure I'm not alone in this. If long term damage is done due to deliveries being made longer and expected to be completed in an unreasonable time I'd expect a lot of industrial injury claims against RM.

[Phantom]

Can't be offering much, if any, of a pay rise as the shorter working week was being funded by full timers foregoing pay rises

The SWW was supposed to be funded by efficiency savings.
The efficiency savings didn't materialise so neither did the SWW.

That's true but when you've got managers letting staff finish early and still paying them and doing nothing about it then this is the incompetency of mangers and not the staffs fault.
Managers simply will NOT do their job correctly. The so called efficiency savings are there.

BUT! - I don't believe RM want a 35 hour week as this would prevent walks from being made too long and RM want to do the reverse of that to make job cuts.

[LouBarlow]

Why are the union using the one hour promise as their hill to die on? I really don't care about saving one hour over an entire week of working. A pay rise and I am happy. Ten minutes less walking a day isn't going to suddenly transform our lives.

[citypostie]

Why are the union using the one hour promise as their hill to die on? I really don't care about saving one hour over an entire week of working. A pay rise and I am happy. Ten minutes less walking a day isn't going to suddenly transform our lives.

It would be the same as the last hour off anyway, not 10 minutes less walking, it would be the same delivery but 15 minutes of the indoor time.

[clashcityrocker]

Managers simply will NOT do their job correctly. The so called efficiency savings are there.

Isn't that why we have an IR Framework?
How many reps went to disagreement over this?

[matt_1983]

Can't be offering much, if any, of a pay rise as the shorter working week was being funded by full timers foregoing pay rises

The SWW was supposed to be funded by efficiency savings.
The efficiency savings didn't materialise so neither did the SWW.

The efficiency savings would/could have been there if management had stopped ghosting overtime with their favourites and made everyone work to time like they were supposed to do instead of allowing hours and hours to just walk out of the doors each day when people finished before time.

They really wouldnt as will be proven when they bring clocking in/off in and make everyone work there ours or as will happen lots of people drag there duties out to fill their hours but actually do no more work unless they can get outdoor performace standards in and enforce them. As for ghosting, yea it might stop that but it will just mean lots of delivering for managers when people dont want to start overtime at 3pm or later and get only the time it takes to actually deliver

I think they'll bring in outdoor performance standards first, before the clocking in and out comes in

I would be shocked if we as postmen and women were to be told we have to work any faster than we (on average) already do. When youve been a reserve for several years in a very large office, working with close to 100 different posties on various deliveries, you realise that the vast majority work at a very decent pace, and there is very little meat left on the bone in terms of getting the delivery done any quicker.

And 9 out of 10 dont use trolleys, which do slow you down. Surely any delivery performance standard RM would introduce would have to be based on us all using trolleys?

[matt_1983]

Can't be offering much, if any, of a pay rise as the shorter working week was being funded by full timers foregoing pay rises

The SWW was supposed to be funded by efficiency savings.
The efficiency savings didn't materialise so neither did the SWW.

That's true but when you've got managers letting staff finish early and still paying them and doing nothing about it then this is the incompetency of mangers and not the staffs fault.
Managers simply will NOT do their job correctly. The so called efficiency savings are there.

BUT! - I don't believe RM want a 35 hour week as this would prevent walks from being made too long and RM want to do the reverse of that to make job cuts.

Yes people “finish early” but there are sooo many factors involved in what time we each finish, and when you actually look at who has taken their breaks etc, the amount of time being gained is probably not that much at all.

It just always seems so silly to me that there is this obsession with “working your hours” and ghost overtime etc. I can work with one postie on a Monday who can literally be 2 or 3 times faster on delivery than a postie ill work with the next day.

Surely the only fair way of organising our outdoor work is to plan the walks as evenly as possible based on an average pace, and then realise that there will always be people finishing at different times due to obvious differentials in speed of walking etc etc

And you really cant just give people more work to go out and do because they have done their work quicker than others- i know many will disagree with that, but how on earth is it fair that the faster people should be doing more work for the same pay?

Maybe im wrong but all this is coming from a very hungover brain and im welcome to other opinions.

[Sugar]

Can't be offering much, if any, of a pay rise as the shorter working week was being funded by full timers foregoing pay rises

The SWW was supposed to be funded by efficiency savings.
The efficiency savings didn't materialise so neither did the SWW.

The efficiency savings would/could have been there if management had stopped ghosting overtime with their favourites and made everyone work to time like they were supposed to do instead of allowing hours and hours to just walk out of the doors each day when people finished before time.

They really wouldnt as will be proven when they bring clocking in/off in and make everyone work there ours or as will happen lots of people drag there duties out to fill their hours but actually do no more work unless they can get outdoor performace standards in and enforce them. As for ghosting, yea it might stop that but it will just mean lots of delivering for managers when people dont want to start overtime at 3pm or later and get only the time it takes to actually deliver

I think they'll bring in outdoor performance standards first, before the clocking in and out comes in

And 9 out of 10 dont use trolleys, which do slow you down. Surely any delivery performance standard RM would introduce would have to be based on us all using trolleys?

And that's the problem. We were told they had to be used to reduce weight off the shoulder and help towards reducing sick absences through injuries. As soon as managers realised the new deliveries the planners had developed couldn't be done in the time they said they could with the trolleys they were all dumped outside offices and left to rust and job and knock crept back in as standard again. Use of the trolleys was never enforced and a fortune wasted on buying them to only scrap them a few years later.

The whole system is a mess and its just more layering of inaccurate data onto inaccurate data onto inaccurate data and the only way to fix it would be to pull the plug and start from scratch again but there's no way in hell that's ever going to happen because it'll show how much is really wrong and who's to blame.

It just always seems so silly to me that there is this obsession with “working your hours” and ghost overtime etc. I can work with one postie on a Monday who can literally be 2 or 3 times faster on delivery than a postie ill work with the next day.

From experience if someone is 2-3 times faster than me they are usually doorstepping, green binning, not filling in P739's fully, not going up and down each path etc etc etc.

Seen it so many times

[citypostie]

Can't be offering much, if any, of a pay rise as the shorter working week was being funded by full timers foregoing pay rises

The SWW was supposed to be funded by efficiency savings.
The efficiency savings didn't materialise so neither did the SWW.

That's true but when you've got managers letting staff finish early and still paying them and doing nothing about it then this is the incompetency of mangers and not the staffs fault.
Managers simply will NOT do their job correctly. The so called efficiency savings are there.

BUT! - I don't believe RM want a 35 hour week as this would prevent walks from being made too long and RM want to do the reverse of that to make job cuts.

Yes people “finish early” but there are sooo many factors involved in what time we each finish, and when you actually look at who has taken their breaks etc, the amount of time being gained is probably not that much at all.

It just always seems so silly to me that there is this obsession with “working your hours” and ghost overtime etc. I can work with one postie on a Monday who can literally be 2 or 3 times faster on delivery than a postie ill work with the next day.

Surely the only fair way of organising our outdoor work is to plan the walks as evenly as possible based on an average pace, and then realise that there will always be people finishing at different times due to obvious differentials in speed of walking etc etc

And you really cant just give people more work to go out and do because they have done their work quicker than others- i know many will disagree with that, but how on earth is it fair that the faster people should be doing more work for the same pay?

Maybe im wrong but all this is coming from a very hungover brain and im welcome to other opinions.

100% agree with that and that is why all this clocking in/off wont get more work done for the same cost. Anyone rushing, starting early etc to gain a half hour flyer that sees that disappear will just stop doing them things and finish at clocking out time, not carry on doing the same plus more work and then finish at clocking out time!

[elteleltel]

It's actually 12 mins a day and then in Oct another 12 off.
A year later another 12 off so we are heading to 36 mins a day less than currently working ,that's worth fighting for surely.

[Grumpyoldmailman]

It's actually 12 mins a day and then in Oct another 12 off.
A year later another 12 off so we are heading to 36 mins a day less than currently working ,that's worth fighting for surely.

Of coarse it’s worth fighting for, every hour off the week is just under a week and a half a year away from work doing other stuff, it’s bizarre the amount of people who think otherwise. Why on earth would you want to walk away from a deal like that

[postslippete]

Can't afford to cut the working week down by an hour as previously agreed but can afford to pay managers £1000 bonus at Christmas and 2 pay increases for not going on strike. Then pay for all this media to be produced and no doubt using actors.

Got their priorities the wrong way around.

Oh and its now "our business" going by the latest video.

Yeah, this is the thing that is quite striking.

We are last on the list when it comes to pay rises and bonuses yet its us that are the ones that are productive. This covering 1 duty in 6. What would we get for covering an extra loop a day? £10-15 - well times that by 5 or 6 for the week and this should be the weekly pay rise that I think we should get overall.