2009 Pay talks

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Whilst I understand Door to Door is unpopular to some members. The fact is that its is work which is increasing in a declining market. Look at todays announcement of the Cowley workers laying off 850 workers do you think they would turn away work. The fact is that in some areas there are over 50% part timers converting Door to Door into workload would assist some who would want to increase their hours as well as protect full time jobs else where.

The reason why D2Ds are unpopular is because the current agreement is too weak and not fit for purpose.Management are using the payment of D2Ds as a reason for them to say that prep should be done on your own time and office with weak or no union representation and falling in line with this incorrect management ruling.

We on "the shop floor" know that when D2Ds are increased no prior preparation by management will be made. Weight on delivery issues will be ignored hoping we will just get on with it. No extra Safe Drops or Pouch Boxes will be made available.
There will be no increase in payment, gio-routed(Pegasus) walks will not be re-done to reflect a higher call rate, or greater weight on delivery. No ruling will be made for cover staff to do them (or not) when the duty holder is off sick. No ruling will be made whether they have to be included in collapsed walks.

If the Union want the shop floor on board with an increase in D2Ds then they have to address the issues in my 2nd paragraph, otherwise they will confirm the suspicion that they are out of touch. Keeping them may be a good strategic move to keep FT posts (though I don't agree with that argument as you have to do them whether PT or FT), but there is no point if those below branch level reps feel their concerns have not been addressed.

BTW you said branch reps had agreed an approach to D2Ds but I have never been approached or consulted on D2Ds so how come full time officials, who do not have to do D2Ds, say they have the backing of postal delivery workers.

[Spedley]

... and there hasn't been an increase in D2D payments since they started. If thee payments had risen inline with inflation it would be 3p per item rather than the 1.67p we currently get.

[banner18]

Whilst I understand Door to Door is unpopular to some members. The fact is that its is work which is increasing in a declining market. Look at todays announcement of the Cowley workers laying off 850 workers do you think they would turn away work. The fact is that in some areas there are over 50% part timers converting Door to Door into workload would assist some who would want to increase their hours as well as protect full time jobs else where.

The reason why D2Ds are unpopular is because the current agreement is too weak and not fit for purpose.Management are using the payment of D2Ds as a reason for them to say that prep should be done on your own time and office with weak or no union representation and falling in line with this incorrect management ruling.

We on "the shop floor" know that when D2Ds are increased no prior preparation by management will be made. Weight on delivery issues will be ignored hoping we will just get on with it. No extra Safe Drops or Pouch Boxes will be made available.
There will be no increase in payment, gio-routed(Pegasus) walks will not be re-done to reflect a higher call rate, or greater weight on delivery. No ruling will be made for cover staff to do them (or not) when the duty holder is off sick. No ruling will be made whether they have to be included in collapsed walks.

If the Union want the shop floor on board with an increase in D2Ds then they have to address the issues in my 2nd paragraph, otherwise they will confirm the suspicion that they are out of touch. Keeping them may be a good strategic move to keep FT posts (though I don't agree with that argument as you have to do them whether PT or FT), but there is no point if those below branch level reps feel their concerns have not been addressed.

BTW you said branch reps had agreed an approach to D2Ds but I have never been approached or consulted on D2Ds so how come full time officials, who do not have to do D2Ds, say they have the backing of postal delivery workers.

Exactly the point here! Its the practicalities behind the increase in D2D thats the whole issue. Nobody wants to refuse work that will help fill hours and retain full time workers but the fact is that RM will do nothing to ensure proper means are in place to handle extra D2D. Everybody knows how awkward just 3 lots can be along with your mail. Pouch drops, pre-prepping of D2D, day off cover of D2D etc... have to be dealt with before throwing it all at the posties.

I would be in favour of extra D2D provided all these issues were dealt with fully and D2D was fully absorbed into workload along with an appropriate weekly increase in pensionable pay instead of D2D payments.

[Martin Walsh]

True blue the way conference works is that your Branch elects a delegation for conference and they make their decesions on the basis of a joint vote. Other issues are based on Branch Policy which may have been carried at the AGM. Annual conference is the policy making vechile of the CWU.

Now in terms of the issues you suggust well thats already policy as the motion states " In order that our central concerns in terms of delivery arrangements remuneration , weight on delivery , workload implications, call rates etc need to be agreed.

Yes it is right that no increase has been made since the last agreement and that needs to be tackled but to do get an increase then we need to tackle the quality and to do that we need to convert it into work load.

[dvbuk55]

You might be long in the tooth dingo but you aren't as long in the tooth as I am.

I work on the shop floor I don't talk about it from a distance and I see the practicalities of increasing the workload without a thought as to how that is going to translate.

I haven't always worked for Royal Mail and have seen the ins and outs of union business for nigh on 40 years - you strike me as a person who takes criticism personally and yet doesn't answer the question, being blind sided on your own opinion.

Now - here's another question - how many postmen/women don't do households but leave them for a colleague who does them on his/her day off or after their duty and with an increase would then have more to prepare.

How do you propose to increase the workload across the board or is it just delivery again?

Most delivery offices don't have canteens dingo they have vending machines - so I could be a vending machine cowboy.

I ask again - how do you propose to protect full time jobs? Having it shown as workload? Wake up - it's already part of the workload. Part time? I ask again - was that not part of the savings for bonus payments.

Am I negative - you're bloody right I am because nothing in your proposed plan does anything to increase payment, when the preparation is already part of normal work where on earth is the increase in workload other than weight? There needs to be a bit more meat on the bone other than some agreement at conference which is just that. As for 5 being the magical number - because RM says it is hard to get work - lets see how hard it would be if the cap was lifted.

[BELIAL]

It really is time to bite the bullet on Door to Door if we increase the number not only will we be able to protect full time jobs going forward we will be able to achieve a supplement 52 weeks per year for delivery staff.

Can we have a written ,cast iron guarantee on that? Going forward

[dvbuk55]

We should be looking to increase the households BUT we need an increase in payment and a more professional way to present them to the customer - shrink wrapped and it poses no problem and prep is down to a minimum. It's all very well to spout about having 5 lots 20% a day etc etc but we need to have an agreement in place and not go running pell mell into a system that does not lend itself to delivery procedures.

[silverback]

There is only one certainty....THE NUMBER OF D2D WE DELIVER WILL BE INCREASED. The CWU and RM agree on this.
I expect there will be yet another agreement that is vague and open to miss interpretation and we on delivery will
have to lump it and get on with it.

[DGP1]

We should be looking to increase the households BUT we need an increase in payment and a more professional way to present them to the customer - shrink wrapped and it poses no problem and prep is down to a minimum. It's all very well to spout about having 5 lots 20% a day etc etc but we need to have an agreement in place and not go running pell mell into a system that does not lend itself to delivery procedures.

I would be better if they where all put into one A4 envelope which itself could carry advertisements.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

We should be looking to increase the households BUT we need an increase in payment and a more professional way to present them to the customer - shrink wrapped and it poses no problem and prep is down to a minimum. It's all very well to spout about having 5 lots 20% a day etc etc but we need to have an agreement in place and not go running pell mell into a system that does not lend itself to delivery procedures.

I would be better if they where all put into one A4 envelope which itself could carry advertisements.

TBH envelope would not be attractive to potential D2D customers (the ones sending them out) as the receiver would just bin them. A clear plastic cover would at least let the customer see what's in it before they throw them out.

There is one fly in the ointment though, sometimes you get residential only D2Ds which you should not deliver to firms, and sometimes you get deliver to all types. How would a prebundled system cope with these.

[dvbuk55]

We should be looking to increase the households BUT we need an increase in payment and a more professional way to present them to the customer - shrink wrapped and it poses no problem and prep is down to a minimum. It's all very well to spout about having 5 lots 20% a day etc etc but we need to have an agreement in place and not go running pell mell into a system that does not lend itself to delivery procedures.

I would be better if they where all put into one A4 envelope which itself could carry advertisements.

TBH envelope would not be attractive to potential D2D customers (the ones sending them out) as the receiver would just bin them. A clear plastic cover would at least let the customer see what's in it before they throw them out.

There is one fly in the ointment though, sometimes you get residential only D2Ds which you should not deliver to firms, and sometimes you get deliver to all types. How would a prebundled system cope with these.

You wouldn't it would be a catch all system - as for plastic it is waterproof - how many days have you been out with a single flysheet that looks like papier mache after ten minutes. Whatever system we adopt it needs delivery officers to be involved at the basic level - and not the same ones who trialled the shoes! As for the competition - TNT aren't our biggest threat - it's free and local newspapers - how many flyers do you get in yours - we get at least 5 per week and there is a market which we could exploit.

[dvbuk55]

Forget TNT - they aren't going to enable an E2E system which they would have to do. There are loads of independant leaflet companies - look in your local paper - they cannot do a nationwide posting as we can they are more localised and charge proportionately less.

Just as a matter of interest does anyone know what RM charge - if the price has gone up in the last 10 years how come the payment hasn't?

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Forget TNT - they aren't going to enable an E2E system which they would have to do. There are loads of independant leaflet companies - look in your local paper - they cannot do a nationwide posting as we can they are more localised and charge proportionately less.

Just as a matter of interest does anyone know what RM charge - if the price has gone up in the last 10 years how come the payment hasn't?

price list available at http://www.royalmail.com/portal/rm/cont ... d=36400685" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Martin Walsh]

Dvbuk its been a long day and I dont intend to get into a war of words with you but I want to put the record straight.

Yes you might work on the shop floor but part of my role as a rep is to resolve disputes aqnd problems when they arise and I frequent numerous offices for instance I am adressing members at one of the largest delivery offices in the country tommorrow morning and then meeting two more delivery offices members to discuss an office relocation and then attneding a mass meeting attended by Unit Reps and members alike. So I do listen and I do know what members are thinking about on issues.

But and there is a but sometimes in elected postions you have to show leadership. Its easy being popular but much harder to tell members what they dont want to hear and thats where leadership comes in. Do you really think that we believe in converting Door to Door into workload just to make the job harder for our members ? If we did tell me why as its been the policy to introudce Door to Door into workload since 1992 have we not introduced it before .

I tell why because we are looking for the right agreement which means that we gain an increase in Door to Door whcih becomes a supplement paid to delivery staff only, whilst protecting full time jobs and making sure weight on delivery is tackled. With regards to Door to Door in plastic sleves management have suggusted this may be something which they might consider as it is used in other countries the problem being is that Royal Mail only want to pay for one item as the 5 will be attached within the plastic sleeve by atuomation. This is unacceptable to the union.

Look Belial , no i cant guartnee that it will safeguard full time jobs but what I can tell you that surely more work being converted into workload will help. Remember currently some areas already do five , where as some post codes only do one or two. Any additionaly work will assist areas in protecting full time job.

Why do you think Royal Mail are opposed to the idea of converting Door to Door into workload. The simple reason is that it would increase traffic within an office and therefore make it harder to achieve their savings and cut full time jobs.

Its time some got real over the challenges we face. Flats machines whilst not working anywhere near what they were bought for are reducing indoor work. Royal Mails trail on crash sorting in mail centres will increase the amount of inward sorted mail available. Plus there was a national meeting on walk sequencing last Friday which confirmed Royal Mail`s strategy for deliveries which will be revealed shortly.

It is for all those reasons why we need to convince the members that now is the time to deal with the issues on Door to Door. In addition Bob Gibson National Delivery Blue print which includes D2D has been adopted by all Divisons as moving document.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

With regards to Door to Door in plastic sleves management have suggusted this may be something which they might consider as it is used in other countries the problem being is that Royal Mail only want to pay for one item as the 5 will be attached within the plastic sleeve by atuomation. This is unacceptable to the union.

Why - there might be wiggle room there - increase the payment to somewhere between 4 and 6p per sleeve based on weight and hey presto we have an agreement. Just something to chew on.