Tman wrote:How do you know I do disagree? Have I said as much? Before this thread I don't recall mentioning DSA in this context of mail volumes as such, but you did at 10.13 last night, and now somehow I disagree? Twist and turn....Back to the point in question. Given the fact that both the union and RM are claiming that the growth in DSA is causing a major reduction in workload and that this is one of the key factors driving the MC rationalisation strategy why do you disagree with their assessment ?
Looks like you disagree to me.I've never mentioned DSA (unlike you ) as being the cause of collapsed shifts at my MC, because it isn't.
Why do you believe DSA has no impact on the workload? You do know DSA is processed like any other mail, don't you? Without DSA mail the MC would be very under-utilised.
You seem to misunderstand,I've never mentioned DSA (unlike you ) as being the cause of collapsed shifts at my MC, because it isn't.
This is a question prompted by your statement , my position is not relevant or mentioned. Do try not to be patronising, It lends no weight to your argument .Can you explain why the continued growth of DSA is having no impact on the workload at your MC ?
So help me out here .Just for the sake of clarity.
Do you agree with the CWU and RM position that the growth of DSA mail is having a negative impact on MC workloads? Yes or no would be fine.
"Patronising" eh? 
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're using a little ironic self-parody there.