additional changes

[gerardy]

Hi there was hoping someone might know more about this than me,
We were given a choice weather to absorb a part-time duty between two other duties which would result in one of the duties been made up to full-time hours,
or reducing a full-time duty down to part-time ( delivery only )
majority of people did not vote as it didn't effect them.
So the men went for absorbing the duty between the other two duties and keep the full-time duty in the office and thus create another full-time duty. (Agreed with management.)
Since this the manager has put the duty up on the board but has changed the duty start times, even on the Saturday by over an hour just so that he can add on two Saturday collections doing away with more hours from within the office.
Can he get away with this and what can we do to stop this.


Thank-you in advance for helping with this matter.

[rockytony67]

Hi there was hoping someone might know more about this than me,
We were given a choice weather to absorb a part-time duty between two other duties which would result in one of the duties been made up to full-time hours,
or reducing a full-time duty down to part-time ( delivery only )
majority of people did not vote as it didn't effect them.
So the men went for absorbing the duty between the other two duties and keep the full-time duty in the office and thus create another full-time duty. (Agreed with management.)
Since this the manager has put the duty up on the board but has changed the duty start times, even on the Saturday by over an hour just so that he can add on two Saturday collections doing away with more hours from within the office.
Can he get away with this and what can we do to stop this.


Thank-you in advance for helping with this matter.

How did the vote work? and what is the local rep's position on it?

[gerardy]

RM wanted to make savings in the office through effiencey (phase 3)
they wanted to either reduce the 40 hr duty down to 20 hr per week,
or absorb a 20 hr duty between 2 other duties moving one from 30 hrs to 40 hrs. (the other duty is already 40hrs)
the men had to vote on one off these options or RM were bringing one in by executive measure - the men would not stand together and go for a rule 13.
when the vote was done majority didn't vote, (absorbing the duty had the next number of votes,this option was agreed)
Since then the manager is adding additional stuff on to the duties, he is changing the start times (none of these are agreed locally)
the 40hr duty he is still covering with part time staff.
the union rep thought this option was best when the men wouldn't go for a rule 13, since it was creating another 40 hr duty within the office.

A disagreement was lodged and there is a meeting next week about the extra changes been made by the manager, we are looking for some amunition to fire at him.

When a duty is taking an additional part of a duty been absorbed is this classified as a new duty, and does it have to go on the board for resigning, even if the duty holder has said he is happy to increase his hours to accomadate the extra work load.

[BELIAL]

NO SAVINGS

[POSTMAN]

jeeeeze

Seems to me the manager knows your guys have no bollox what with the rule 13 thing and the fact your men rolled over.

Next the cleaner will be lapsed and you'll be cleaning bogs in your break.

Tell your guys i personally say tough!!

Apologies if i've offended YOU.

[HootyMacBoob]

Message to postman is there no way we can have a smilie or a template that says "READ MY LIPS NO MORE SAVINGS" as the message dosent seem to be getting threw and my 2 index fingers have got blisters on them

[POSTMAN]

[POSTMAN]

[POSTMAN]

[HootyMacBoob]

my fingers feel better already POSTMAN

[POSTMAN]

[bogstandard]

RM wanted to make savings in the office through effiencey (phase 3)
they wanted to either reduce the 40 hr duty down to 20 hr per week,
or absorb a 20 hr duty between 2 other duties moving one from 30 hrs to 40 hrs. (the other duty is already 40hrs)
the men had to vote on one off these options or RM were bringing one in by executive measure - the men would not stand together and go for a rule 13.
when the vote was done majority didn't vote, (absorbing the duty had the next number of votes,this option was agreed)
Since then the manager is adding additional stuff on to the duties, he is changing the start times (none of these are agreed locally)
the 40hr duty he is still covering with part time staff.
the union rep thought this option was best when the men wouldn't go for a rule 13, since it was creating another 40 hr duty within the office.

A disagreement was lodged and there is a meeting next week about the extra changes been made by the manager, we are looking for some amunition to fire at him.

When a duty is taking an additional part of a duty been absorbed is this classified as a new duty, and does it have to go on the board for resigning, even if the duty holder has said he is happy to increase his hours to accomadate the extra work load.

what you voted on is not what the manager is now proposing, so go back to your original position (via the IR Framework) and the status quo should remain and tell them that there will now be no savings.
they will then need to bring it in by EA and allocate someone to it, this person would need to refuse this and be suspended then you all walk.
Or your pt accepts the ft position (which is outside of resourcing pt to ft agreements) and your all spannered.
which do you think is more likely to happen ?

never forget the membership is the union not HQ or your div rep or area or local rep. if you choose to move as 1 the momentum will be with you, and you are unstoppable.
You can either put up a fight and get what your after or don't put up a fight and get what your given and be glad of it

If you say "you can" then you can,
if you say "you can't" you can't,
either way you're right.

[johnnyp]

RM wanted to make savings in the office through effiencey (phase 3)
they wanted to either reduce the 40 hr duty down to 20 hr per week,
or absorb a 20 hr duty between 2 other duties moving one from 30 hrs to 40 hrs. (the other duty is already 40hrs)
the men had to vote on one off these options or RM were bringing one in by executive measure - the men would not stand together and go for a rule 13.
when the vote was done majority didn't vote, (absorbing the duty had the next number of votes,this option was agreed)
Since then the manager is adding additional stuff on to the duties, he is changing the start times (none of these are agreed locally)
the 40hr duty he is still covering with part time staff.
the union rep thought this option was best when the men wouldn't go for a rule 13, since it was creating another 40 hr duty within the office.

A disagreement was lodged and there is a meeting next week about the extra changes been made by the manager, we are looking for some amunition to fire at him.


When a duty is taking an additional part of a duty been absorbed is this classified as a new duty, and does it have to go on the board for resigning, even if the duty holder has said he is happy to increase his hours to accomadate the extra work load.

what you voted on is not what the manager is now proposing, so go back to your original position (via the IR Framework) and the status quo should remain and tell them that there will now be no savings.
they will then need to bring it in by EA and allocate someone to it, this person would need to refuse this and be suspended then you all walk.
Or your pt accepts the ft position (which is outside of resourcing pt to ft agreements) and your all spannered.
which do you think is more likely to happen ?

never forget the membership is the union not HQ or your div rep or area or local rep. if you choose to move as 1 the momentum will be with you, and you are unstoppable.
You can either put up a fight and get what your after or don't put up a fight and get what your given and be glad of it

If you say "you can" then you can,
if you say "you can't" you can't,
either way you're right.

Spot on advice

But you should NOT have been agreeing to savings at the moment