paul/mark van share monday 1c/2c parcels
tue paul 1c parcels mark day off
wed mark paul van share 1c/2c
thurs paul day off mark 1c parcels
friday van share 1c/2c parcels
sat 1c parcels paul
sunday pacels mark
make monday wed fri shifts longer
no need for reserves
alternate sat sunday
Theory is good but the Sunday will be an issue for most of the staff that don't work them.
Sunday's covered by agency/volunteers for legacy contract/non drivers, although we don't need so many drivers on a Sunday anyway?
D2D's are thrown in on a Saturday once all the packets are delivered, plus possibly first thing Monday morning.
paul/mark van share monday 1c/2c parcels
tue paul 1c parcels mark day off
wed mark paul van share 1c/2c
thurs paul day off mark 1c parcels
friday van share 1c/2c parcels
sat 1c parcels paul
sunday pacels mark
make monday wed fri shifts longer
no need for reserves
alternate sat sunday
Theory is good but the Sunday will be an issue for most of the staff that don't work them.
Sunday's covered by agency/volunteers for legacy contract/non drivers, although we don't need so many drivers on a Sunday anyway?
D2D's are thrown in on a Saturday once all the packets are delivered, plus possibly first thing Monday morning.
No idea how to overcome the non driver issues!
True.
Playmail's suggestion seems like an option that could work, pretty similar to the suggestion I made about what we are doing now except I couldn't work out how I would incorporate long/short days. It's a simple idea, it can work with less staff and it successfully prioritises 1C and Tracked and you are not overrun with 2-3 days of mail on a full two rounds (which was never going to work).
I just hope the union don't over complicate things when we actually find out what the model will be but I think many would be happier with something a bit more simple, effective and will reduce fatigue.
paul/mark van share monday 1c/2c parcels
tue paul 1c parcels mark day off
wed mark paul van share 1c/2c
thurs paul day off mark 1c parcels
friday van share 1c/2c parcels
sat 1c parcels paul
sunday pacels mark
make monday wed fri shifts longer
no need for reserves
alternate sat sunday
Theory is good but the Sunday will be an issue for most of the staff that don't work them.
You don't need Sunday in the mix.
It would work as a nine day fortnight without it.
In week two Mark becomes Paul.
One of their planners mentioned something similar.
It's the closest I can get to getting my head around the whole thing.
paul/mark van share monday 1c/2c parcels
tue paul 1c parcels mark day off
wed mark paul van share 1c/2c
thurs paul day off mark 1c parcels
friday van share 1c/2c parcels
sat 1c parcels paul
sunday pacels mark
make monday wed fri shifts longer
no need for reserves
alternate sat sunday
Theory is good but the Sunday will be an issue for most of the staff that don't work them.
You don't need Sunday in the mix.
It would work as a nine day fortnight without it.
In week two Mark becomes Paul.
One of their planners mentioned something similar.
It's the closest I can get to getting my head around the whole thing.
It doesnt work if one of them is a non driver though and its a van share office - no HCTs etc
The non driver cant cover the workload working alone
If you tolerate this, then your paid break will be next
So the sticking points are non-drivers, HCTs, and a general increase in "stuff" you have to delivery if it previously didn't go out.
Even for a van share...not going out everyday means more letters in each bag (bundles of mail). More letters means more weight and more steps equals more fatigue and more time doing each loop. More letters also means less room in the pouch for packets. If you start kicking out packets to be able to fit the letters in you'll have to run round after the loop with packets using the van which adds more time per loop. More little packet piled up in the van means more chance of missing something that's disappeared in the van and having to double back to the previous loop to delivery what was missed (well, at least the tracked ones!) - which means more time.
Even if you redesigned the loops so the walker's loops are longer to handle the mail side but gave them a LWT and the driver does more packets you probably will not speed anything up. The walker will have more fatigue with more steps; and the driver will be worn down getting in and out of the van (if you have never tried getting in and out, and in and out, over and over, it is very wearing) and obviously packets takes a lot longer per drop as you're knocking on doors waiting for an answer and writing cards out so the time increases.
Overall the day is a lot longer and you're more worn down. If the heavy day is followed with a light day maybe it's slightly more doable but, it may not work for everyone or office.
Let’s just go back to a model based on pre COVID, parcels with the mail, one person mopping up the LAT’s, smaller rounds, lapsing in the summer, a workplace with goodwill, and a company making a profit. DPR must be costing a fortune in labour, vehicles and managers. Proper revisions to stop this criss crossing we are doing now
I think our office of just shy of 50 must be somewhat of an anomaly, as we have no non drivers, a situation dating back several years.
Even back in the mid 1990`s when things were very different we never had more than 3 or 4 at any one time, obviously there were more `walkers` but they also had a licence.
I put it down to being a market town covering a widespread rural area with poor transport links, except in a westerly direction.
This should make things easier, bit i am sure the powers that be will still make a mess of it!
It’s pretty clear that they need people to drive to perform the ODM.
If, in an office of 50 staff, with 45 who drive and 5 who don’t - what is to stop them creating a way for the driving staff to perform the ODM (rotating etc) and the non driving staff to continue as they are?
Obviously they’d need to incentivise people to do ODM by way of maybe better attendance patterns- but it’s nothing that hasn’t been done for years in RM with different jobs.
It’s pretty clear that they need people to drive to perform the ODM.
If, in an office of 50 staff, with 45 who drive and 5 who don’t - what is to stop them creating a way for the driving staff to perform the ODM (rotating etc) and the non driving staff to continue as they are?
Obviously they’d need to incentivise people to do ODM by way of maybe better attendance patterns- but it’s nothing that hasn’t been done for years in RM with different jobs.
Unless certain duties still go out every day, which would create yet another tier of workers, I can't see how non drivers can escape the ODM duties? The big issue seems to covering the drivers duties when he's off, perhaps they could just move to another duty on those duties?
Different attendance patterns don’t need to mean different tiers. Plenty offices have different attendance patterns within the unit depending on the shift/job they do.
A current shared van pairing with 2 drivers, using the method posted further up the thread gives a 9 day fortnight option, saving around 30 hours a fortnight, with no day off cover required. Given that the regulator have given the green light to 2C mail every other day, there’s no way RM dont want those savings where they can get them.
