Royal Mails proposed criteria for compulsory redundancies

[walthmstowman]

Another thing to add;

At no time have RM indicated to non driving employees that they are not capable or skilled enough to do the job and would need to get a driving license. But then why would they though when.......we capably do our jobs everyday as intended.

I would challenge the legality of using no driving license to make redundant without any prior advanced notice to non driving employees that they would need a driving license to continue to do the job.

Excellent point and one the union has to look into

[postieblueshirt]

Nevermind in the day

It’s not required for thousands TODAY

Read your contract some say you do have it in your contract depends when you started rough idea i can tell you?

If you work for royal mail now and don't drive then obviously it's not in your contact or you wouldn't be here.

[walthmstowman]

I’m convinced Royal Mail are just making things up on the hoof . With those criteria I can see a load of legal challenges being made .

[norris9]

The people without driving licenses are in their 50's or 60's so a lot of them would probably happily take the redundancy money.

Surprised Royal Mail are happy to pay them off when they could get rid of a lot of people with less than 2 years service for free. It doesn't make any sense. It explains why current Royal Mail management are losing RM £1mil a day.

Does this mean the end of trolley jobs and van sharing?


If this is the criteria for CR, then I would assume it's the same criteria for VR too.

[claretandblue]

The people without driving licenses are in their 50's or 60's so a lot of them would probably happily take the redundancy money.

Surprised Royal Mail are happy to pay them off when they could get rid of a lot of people with less than 2 years service for free. It doesn't make any sense. It explains why current Royal Mail management are losing RM £1mil a day.

Does this mean the end of trolley jobs and van sharing?




If this is the criteria for CR, then I would assume it's the same criteria for VR too.

My van share partner is 41, no license.

[norris9]

The people without driving licenses are in their 50's or 60's so a lot of them would probably happily take the redundancy money.

My van share partner is 41, no license.

Then if axed he can take them to tribunal and win big as I doubt he'd want to go that young. In my depot there are about 5 non-drivers and all 55+.

If Royal Mail genuinely want rid of non-drivers who right now are not a hindrance to the company (at least in my depot), then does that mean their end goal is to have every single person on delivery as an owner-driver, even those who deliver letters. I can only assume so. I have no idea how they get to that point. 100,000+ owner-drivers on a pittance of a wage. I can't see it. They won't get the workforce and if they do it will be unreliable.

[stevejm]

So basically, if you've been conscientious and hardly had time off, you're being penalised by being less likely
to get redundancy, yet lazy/useless staff and staff abusing the sick system will get rewarded. Seems about right....

How is being made compulsorily redundant a reward?

[Ferrari5825]

So basically, if you've been conscientious and hardly had time off, you're being penalised by being less likely
to get redundancy, yet lazy/useless staff and staff abusing the sick system will get rewarded. Seems about right....

How is being made compulsorily redundant a reward?

Well with how the business is going, i think a lot of people who want to go now, would like some form of a pay off rather than leaving without one. But those people may miss out on getting it, because they have learnt other areas of the job and not had much sick. It wouldn't suprise me if the VR is chosen through the same method.

[Acca Dacca]

So basically, if you've been conscientious and hardly had time off, you're being penalised by being less likely
to get redundancy, yet lazy/useless staff and staff abusing the sick system will get rewarded. Seems about right....

How is being made compulsorily redundant a reward?

Well with how the business is going, i think a lot of people who want to go now, would like some form of a pay off rather than leaving without one. But those people may miss out on getting it, because they have learnt other areas of the job and not had much sick. It wouldn't suprise me if the VR is chosen through the same method.

I think it’s pretty disgusting what you have said. People who don’t want to be unemployed in fear of losing their jobs and you are saying they are being rewarded

[Ferrari5825]

So basically, if you've been conscientious and hardly had time off, you're being penalised by being less likely
to get redundancy, yet lazy/useless staff and staff abusing the sick system will get rewarded. Seems about right....

How is being made compulsorily redundant a reward?

Well with how the business is going, i think a lot of people who want to go now, would like some form of a pay off rather than leaving without one. But those people may miss out on getting it, because they have learnt other areas of the job and not had much sick. It wouldn't suprise me if the VR is chosen through the same method.

I think it’s pretty disgusting what you have said. People who don’t want to be unemployed in fear of losing their jobs and you are saying they are being rewarded

Oh get a grip, those people would have been out the door long ago in any other job, its the ones who actually work hard who have to pick up the slack for them. It's fairly demonstrable from comments on this forum that people want to go now and if they miss out on a payoff of any kind because they've shown a little initiative at work, then that's wrong.

[Surreypostie]

Getting sick and tired of the speculation and conspiricies about VR. Nobody knows the criteria. All I know is, jobs are made redundant not people. Redundancy, getting rid of people to employ someone else on worse terms and conditions is a minefield. The only safe way around that is VR, that means giving people that want to go a bit more as an insentive. The ones going to take that in the current climate are the people with not long left or the ones desperate to go or people with other work lined up. For me personally, it would give me about a year, no guarantee I will find another job in that time so a risk as I still need to work, but a risk I am happy to take.

[Acca Dacca]

So basically, if you've been conscientious and hardly had time off, you're being penalised by being less likely
to get redundancy, yet lazy/useless staff and staff abusing the sick system will get rewarded. Seems about right....

How is being made compulsorily redundant a reward?

Well with how the business is going, i think a lot of people who want to go now, would like some form of a pay off rather than leaving without one. But those people may miss out on getting it, because they have learnt other areas of the job and not had much sick. It wouldn't suprise me if the VR is chosen through the same method.

I think it’s pretty disgusting what you have said. People who don’t want to be unemployed in fear of losing their jobs and you are saying they are being rewarded

Oh get a grip, those people would have been out the door long ago in any other job, its the ones who actually work hard who have to pick up the slack for them. It's fairly demonstrable from comments on this forum that people want to go now and if they miss out on a payoff of any kind because they've shown a little initiative at work, then that's wrong.

You mean the thousands of us who took a non driving job years ago? No doubt before you were at Royal Mail.

Lumping us in with people who have poor attendance, poor conduct and/or a lot of customer complaints are you?

[meweavy]

.

[arsenalbob]

So basically, if you've been conscientious and hardly had time off, you're being penalised by being less likely
to get redundancy, yet lazy/useless staff and staff abusing the sick system will get rewarded. Seems about right....

How is being made compulsorily redundant a reward?

Well with how the business is going, i think a lot of people who want to go now, would like some form of a pay off rather than leaving without one. But those people may miss out on getting it, because they have learnt other areas of the job and not had much sick. It wouldn't suprise me if the VR is chosen through the same method.

I think it’s pretty disgusting what you have said. People who don’t want to be unemployed in fear of losing their jobs and you are saying they are being rewarded

Oh get a grip, those people would have been out the door long ago in any other job, its the ones who actually work hard who have to pick up the slack for them. It's fairly demonstrable from comments on this forum that people want to go now and if they miss out on a payoff of any kind because they've shown a little initiative at work, then that's wrong.

That’s right. A lazy attitude to work or poor sick record you would be out the door without a penny. That applied in every industry. But it’s like football, you get rid of your worst players first.

[Ferrari5825]

So basically, if you've been conscientious and hardly had time off, you're being penalised by being less likely
to get redundancy, yet lazy/useless staff and staff abusing the sick system will get rewarded. Seems about right....

How is being made compulsorily redundant a reward?

Well with how the business is going, i think a lot of people who want to go now, would like some form of a pay off rather than leaving without one. But those people may miss out on getting it, because they have learnt other areas of the job and not had much sick. It wouldn't suprise me if the VR is chosen through the same method.

I think it’s pretty disgusting what you have said. People who don’t want to be unemployed in fear of losing their jobs and you are saying they are being rewarded

Oh get a grip, those people would have been out the door long ago in any other job, its the ones who actually work hard who have to pick up the slack for them. It's fairly demonstrable from comments on this forum that people want to go now and if they miss out on a payoff of any kind because they've shown a little initiative at work, then that's wrong.

You mean the thousands of us who took a non driving job years ago? No doubt before you were at Royal Mail.

Lumping us in with people who have poor attendance, poor conduct and/or a lot of customer complaints are you?

Not once did i mention about the drivers license issue, i'm going from the perspective of the processing side of the job (admittedly i should have stated that at first) there are a lot of lazy people in processing.

On the contrary, i certainly wouldn't call delivery staff lazy, you lot have the worst end of the stick and going back to my first point, i think delivery staff who want to leave now deserve the payoff far more than the processing staff who want it.

If i've learnt anything from this job, it's to not bother working hard, or trying to learn new things, you always get shafted for it.