Uso agreement

[Mickeybrowneyes]

I dont think you do.

They HAVE input in such things because Royal Mail allows them input due to past agreements

They have air space in pointless “resourcing meetings”, yeah, assuming local managers can be bothered to convene same, but that in no way equates to input, let alone influence.

Unit reps get withdrawn before revisions on some days to work and negotiate duty content and office structure with management and planners.
Area reps help the process or undertake it if their isn't a local rep.
They can have huge influence and input, so your a bit off the mark there.

They undoubtedly enjoy FT release for revision processes but only because it has long been the status quo that they do. Air space and lip service is all that is provided. The days of the CWU and its reps having huge influence and input are, thankfully for us new starters at least, in the long-distant past.

Again I have to disagree.
Even some of the trial offices the reps have negotiated better versions of alternative duty patterns which the company have agreed to which have given members even more days off then the standard for them patterns.
They wouldn't have happened without the reps creative thinking.
Just to add, the union are not the enemy for new starters they are the ones fighting for your contracts to be improved and end the two tier workforce we currently have.

[Smoothbackground]

Again I have to disagree.
Even some of the trial offices the reps have negotiated better versions of alternative duty patterns which the company have agreed to which have given members even more days off then the standard for them patterns.
They wouldn't have happened without the reps creative thinking.
Just to add, the union are not the enemy for new starters they are the ones fighting for your contracts to be improved and end the two tier workforce we currently have.

I appreciate your input, though we will have to agree to disagree on this one. As an aside, it’s worth pointing out the alternative duty patterns don’t really benefit those on new contracts.

[Mickeybrowneyes]

Again I have to disagree.
Even some of the trial offices the reps have negotiated better versions of alternative duty patterns which the company have agreed to which have given members even more days off then the standard for them patterns.
They wouldn't have happened without the reps creative thinking.
Just to add, the union are not the enemy for new starters they are the ones fighting for your contracts to be improved and end the two tier workforce we currently have.

I appreciate your input, though we will have to agree to disagree on this one. As an aside, it’s worth pointing out the alternative duty patterns don’t really benefit those on new contracts.

Granted, it's harder to incorporate the full time new contracts on the the four day weeks or nine day fortnight because of the longer days, 10:50 for four day week because of your unpaid meal relief.
That's why equalisation of terms needs to happen.
If you have been in the business for a couple of years already these changes hopefully shouldn't be too far away.
Royal Mail brought these new contracts in during the strikes, they weren't agreed with the union, the union are trying to reserve them.

[Patmanposts]

Again I have to disagree.
Even some of the trial offices the reps have negotiated better versions of alternative duty patterns which the company have agreed to which have given members even more days off then the standard for them patterns.
They wouldn't have happened without the reps creative thinking.
Just to add, the union are not the enemy for new starters they are the ones fighting for your contracts to be improved and end the two tier workforce we currently have.

I appreciate your input, though we will have to agree to disagree on this one. As an aside, it’s worth pointing out the alternative duty patterns don’t really benefit those on new contracts.

Granted, it's harder to incorporate the full time new contracts on the the four day weeks or nine day fortnight because of the longer days, 10:50 for four day week because of your unpaid meal relief.
That's why equalisation of terms needs to happen.
If you have been in the business for a couple of years already these changes hopefully shouldn't be too far away.
Royal Mail brought these new contracts in during the strikes, they weren't agreed with the union, the union are trying to reserve them.

You are both correct in regards to "the alternative duty patterns don’t really benefit those on new contracts” and 'Granted, it's harder to incorporate the full time new contracts on the the four day weeks or nine day fortnight because of the longer days’.

The latest development (push through duty pattern) was briefed to me and my fellow new start 30 hour contracts last week….. It has now been decided that the only duty pattern that will work in our DO is the "2 in 6 pattern" Reasoning is because of the ratio of full time to new starts…they need the full timers to prep the rounds for us new starts. Same moving day off so that every few weeks i get 2 days off in a row, maybe 3 occasionally but that comes at a cost of having to work 7 0r 8 days in a row. Latest finish time for us new starts will be 15:19 meaning 09:19 start times. There is apparently another duty pattern to pick that would benefit us new starts and that is 2 in 5…this would mean ZERO Wednesdays worked. Buuutttt we will be out voted and this couldn’t actually work in our DO.

[Thommo44]

Does anyone know what shift pattern Ahmed, Bob, Evie and Jane are working? I can’t match it to any of the 7 that were displayed as options.
We had the mini leaflet’USO Reform’ given out today, apparently the core duty will deliver to 7/10 addresses, combined duty to 2/10, not sure what happens to the other 1/10?
It says opportunity for more Saturdays off, sounds vague
It says more balanced work load, more balanced = every loop on every day will be heavier
How will more Saturdays off and an opportunity for more full time roles make the business more financially sustainable?

[kazardaimenu]

Looks like this is getting railroaded through without much of a plan. Have the trials been a success ?

[Thommo44]

Why doesn’t everyone just ask a simple question,

What is the headcount in your office now and what will the projected headcount be after ODM is completed?

In an office of 75 post personal, if the Bob, Evie, Ahmed and Jane model is implemented you could lose 15 of them. If you have 2 or 3 agency workers, where are the rest coming from? If every office implemented it there is no where to transfer to.

The method is the one shown in USO Reform- The posties pocket guide

[A2B]

Why doesn’t everyone just ask a simple question,

What is the headcount in your office now and what will the projected headcount be after ODM is completed?

In an office of 75 post personal, if the Bob, Evie, Ahmed and Jane model is implemented you could lose 15 of them. If you have 2 or 3 agency workers, where are the rest coming from? If every office implemented it there is no where to transfer to.

The method is the one shown in USO Reform- The posties pocket guide

But it's not that easy to work out, as an example will your office have walks put back in?

[clashcityrocker]

Why doesn’t everyone just ask a simple question,

What is the headcount in your office now and what will the projected headcount be after ODM is completed?

In an office of 75 post personal, if the Bob, Evie, Ahmed and Jane model is implemented you could lose 15 of them.

The answer is simple.
We should have 75 but we have 60.
We are already staffed for the changes - which is why we are failing big time now.

[Thommo44]

Why doesn’t everyone just ask a simple question,

What is the headcount in your office now and what will the projected headcount be after ODM is completed?

In an office of 75 post personal, if the Bob, Evie, Ahmed and Jane model is implemented you could lose 15 of them. If you have 2 or 3 agency workers, where are the rest coming from? If every office implemented it there is no where to transfer to.

The method is the one shown in USO Reform- The posties pocket guide

But it's not that easy to work out, as an example will your office have walks put back in?

You would expect so, but if they put the 10 back in that were taken out, you add the DPR and a manager role created on the back of DPR, we will have15 more people delivering a worse service than pre COVID

[Thommo44]

But the question should still be asked, if only to say they don’t know.

[Thommo44]

The answer is simple.
We should have 75 but we have 60.
We are already staffed for the changes - which is why we are failing big time now.
[/quote]

So my numbers are not that far off what their plans were?

[Perseus]

Question regarding 'putting duties back in' to make the new system work. Are they solely DPR's or are they walks that do all items, because surely if it the latter, it doesn't mean more staff, simply more duties to join the '3 into 4' system?

[Acca Dacca]

Question regarding 'putting duties back in' to make the new system work. Are they solely DPR's or are they walks that do all items, because surely if it the latter, it doesn't mean more staff, simply more duties to join the '3 into 4' system?

Not more staff than there is already

Just less surplus

[Perseus]

Question regarding 'putting duties back in' to make the new system work. Are they solely DPR's or are they walks that do all items, because surely if it the latter, it doesn't mean more staff, simply more duties to join the '3 into 4' system?

Not more staff than there is already

Just less surplus

yeah, just as I thought - just spreading the work out even more, or trying to.

Practical example - (in a perfect office)

Say an office has 80 duties and is fully staffed - they need 80 staff to currently be in every week day.
Under ODM, that goes to 60 staff, 40 doing all items on 40 duties, 20 doing packets/IC letters etc on the remaining 40 duties (2 duties each).

All sounds fine on paper until workload becomes unmanageable. To alleviate this, they agree to put maybe 8 duties back in and make them all smaller to spread the work out. These 8 duties would still follow the '3 into 4' principle, so only 6 staff needed per day to cover the 8 walks.

End result, it goes from 80 staff needed per week day, down to 60, but then back up to 66. RM grudgingly accept a compromised decrease in staffing levels.