I can say with 100% certainty that RM would have happily given a pay hike in return for what they have given in in the 'unions role in the workplace' - agreed revision tools, agreed work standards, an agreed revision process, an agreed rationalisation framework etc because without these things and without the Unions 'role' they would have made far more money by continuing to expose units locally!
Lovejoy, I would be interested to know if you think Royalmail will honour the things you mention above? If yes, what makes you convinced? also, will the agreed elements be based on fair and realistic workloads? I think the big problem after 2007 is that most posties don't trust Royalmail to abide by agreements. For me personally fair and achievable workloads is just as important as pay.
I suppose if you ask me do I trust RM then no ghostman. I like you probably have too much history with them for that.
On the plus side the process will be overseen by ACAS to ensure that both sides abide by any agreement that is reached.
And yes the work standards will be managable - I think RM were exposed by the panorama program
lovejoy wrote:
If you cannot see that there is 'anything' in the agreement for the membership then you really are not giving an honest appraisal.
1. Removed the 2years pay cealing on VR's
2. VR's open to more of the membership
3. vauge 'commitments' on performance standards.
4. Oppertunity for retraining for staff to become technisions for the new walk sequencing machines, apprentaships including mature staff.
enlighten me if i'm missing anything else.
lots of other things against Lovejoy not least abolishen of delivery spans! on that it's self is a no from me.
I would be with you on the 3.5 hr span if the industry was standing still but it is not - it is changing.
A 3.5 hr span will not protect jobs. the indoor element is skrinking - whether we like it or not and we have a choice - raise the span or become a PT industry.
This agreement does not give RM the green light to carry to push you even further. longer deliverys will be based on different methods. From what I have seen/heard of the CDV (shared vans) guidlines these are almost done.
Answer me this - do you honestly believe that delivering 3.5 hrs with a 16kg bag on your shoulder is easier than 4hrs15 in a shared van and using a HCT?
The span had to be lifted to protect FT jobs but it is about getting delivery members the right equipment - vans, HCTs, Electric HCTs etc
fishtank wrote:Lovejoy wrote
"Agreed work standards. revision tools which will be ready to roll out with the vote."
Why are the agreed work standards not part of the agreement?
Because the key was to get the committment - Now independent engineers etc will be consulted along with ACAS who have experts in this field. They will form an appendix to the agreement is my understanding!
taxi4leighton wrote:we were wanting a "national agreement" which couldnt be" mis-interpeted"by devious managers. and what we have is vague ,wishy-washy statements. our office had Executive Action imposed on us last year, very few hours have been put back into our office since. we know all the so called safeguards regarding delivery standards, health and safety and postpersons physical ability will be ignored. even something as simple as "no private cars on delivery" isnt in this agreement
It is....
Last edited by lovejoy on 07 Mar 2010, 20:57, edited 1 time in total.
so lovejoy without this 4 month intervention we would be on our own eh, well just a couple of questions
1. Will the 75% 25% ratio be national?
2. Will the delivery spans be national e.g none longer than say 3.30hrs?
or will it be LOCAL AGREEMENTS?
Which would mean we do the hard fighting on a office to office basis and you abandon the ones you have already said cant stand up to thier DOMS, and you`s have taken care of the paycuts,longer saturdays and redundancies, oops sorry i forgot to say thanks
I can say with 100% certainty that RM would have happily given a pay hike in return for what they have given in in the 'unions role in the workplace' - agreed revision tools, agreed work standards, an agreed revision process, an agreed rationalisation framework etc because without these things and without the Unions 'role' they would have made far more money by continuing to expose units locally!
Lovejoy, I would be interested to know if you think Royalmail will honour the things you mention above? If yes, what makes you convinced? also, will the agreed elements be based on fair and realistic workloads? I think the big problem after 2007 is that most posties don't trust Royalmail to abide by agreements. For me personally fair and achievable workloads is just as important as pay.
I suppose if you ask me do I trust RM then no ghostman. I like you probably have too much history with them for that.
On the plus side the process will be overseen by ACAS to ensure that both sides abide by any agreement that is reached.
And yes the work standards will be managable - I think RM were exposed by the panorama program
I have no faith whatsoever in Local negotiation, no faith in ACAS overseeing a vast organisation where daily bullying and harassment take place, no faith in Royal Mail sticking to any agreements, no faith in a new and improved mutual respect between the union and managers in the workplace, and no faith in the so called revised tools ready to be rolled out on agreement - so lovejoy where are the safeguards? and I mean the real safeguards - you spout pap for the masses - this is yet another 2007 and we've had enough of that.
Lovejoy you have just shown total contempt for the people who keep you in a comfortable non operational role with your comment about standing up to pathetic DOMS.
Then again i should not be surprised HQ have no idea how bad B&H is by DOMS or maybe dont care.
Maybe we should take a leaf out of the negotation team and follow their example on how to stand up to RM LMAO.
This ain't no baseball game, you get only one chance and you blew it.
If we could get fair and achievable workloads out of this i'm sure everyone would welcome it. I just can't see how we can trust royal mail to abide by it. We need a watertight agreement with no loop holes and no vague statements. from what i've read on here, looks like there is plenty of room for Royalmail to exploit. The big question is will the Royalmail leapord change its spots or continue to be a cheater?
I can say with 100% certainty that RM would have happily given a pay hike in return for what they have given in in the 'unions role in the workplace' - agreed revision tools, agreed work standards, an agreed revision process, an agreed rationalisation framework etc because without these things and without the Unions 'role' they would have made far more money by continuing to expose units locally!
Lovejoy, I would be interested to know if you think Royalmail will honour the things you mention above? If yes, what makes you convinced? also, will the agreed elements be based on fair and realistic workloads? I think the big problem after 2007 is that most posties don't trust Royalmail to abide by agreements. For me personally fair and achievable workloads is just as important as pay.
I suppose if you ask me do I trust RM then no ghostman. I like you probably have too much history with them for that.
On the plus side the process will be overseen by ACAS to ensure that both sides abide by any agreement that is reached.
And yes the work standards will be managable - I think RM were exposed by the panorama program
I have no faith whatsoever in Local negotiation, no faith in ACAS overseeing a vast organisation where daily bullying and harassment take place, no faith in Royal Mail sticking to any agreements, no faith in a new and improved mutual respect between the union and managers in the workplace, and no faith in the so called revised tools ready to be rolled out on agreement - so lovejoy where are the safeguards? and I mean the real safeguards - you spout pap for the masses - this is yet another 2007 and we've had enough of that.
So you missed my reply to your 'no benefits' post then.
Read the agreement - not what you want to read. You are doing exactly what you accused those who read headlines about lump sums etc but in reverse
Lovejoy wrote
"Answer me this - do you honestly believe that delivering 3.5 hrs with a 16kg bag on your shoulder is easier than 4hrs15 in a shared van and using a HCT?"
That is a false argument No-one spends 3.5hrs with 16kg on their shoulder that is not how this job works,I would have thought you would have known the rules on reducing bag weights.
You cannot move the van every 20-30 houses Lovejoy especially with only 1 driver so these vans will simply become mobile pouch boxes not park&loop as it was designed.
It is a half-assed compromise of a delivery method before we even start.
gb93 wrote:Lovejoy you have just shown total contempt for the people who keep you in a comfortable non operational role with your comment about standing up to pathetic DOMS.
Then again i should not be surprised HQ have no idea how bad B&H is by DOMS or maybe dont care.
Maybe we should take a leaf out of the negotation team and follow their example on how to stand up to RM LMAO.
But they are pathetic - The cross picket lines, are yes men/women, they will do anything for their bonus and they in my experience cannot deal with people who stand up to them.
so anyone using a private car on delivery will be taken down the conduct-code road?
will provisions be made for toilet facilities on delivery?
will posties age and physical ability be catered for?
GHOSTman wrote:If we could get fair and achievable workloads out of this i'm sure everyone would welcome it. I just can't see how we can trust royal mail to abide by it. We need a watertight agreement with no loop holes and no vague statements. from what i've read on here, looks like there is plenty of room for Royalmail to exploit. The big question is will the Royalmail leapord change its spots or continue to be a cheater?
i suppose this is it in a nutshell. why can't we have more detailed descriptions of how we will be working so that we know exactly what we are voting on, so we have it written down precisely for future reference?
i don't care too much about the money, but i don't want to be worked to death.
lovejoy wrote:
A 3.5 hr span will not protect jobs. the indoor element is skrinking - whether we like it or not and we have a choice - raise the span or become a PT industry.
This agreement does not give RM the green light to carry to push you even further. longer deliverys will be based on different methods. From what I have seen/heard of the CDV (shared vans) guidlines these are almost done.
Answer me this - do you honestly believe that delivering 3.5 hrs with a 16kg bag on your shoulder is easier than 4hrs15 in a shared van and using a HCT?
The span had to be lifted to protect FT jobs but it is about getting delivery members the right equipment - vans, HCTs, Electric HCTs etc
Sorry to be pedantic i try to aviod carrying 16kg bags if i can help it and i certainly don't ever carry them for 3.5 hrs. 16 kg is the weight limit for the first 2 bags.
Answer me this, what happens at a future buisness savings when RM say to achieve there savings delivery spans will be longer still than 4hrs15 and the national agreement says there are no set agreemnet on delivery spans.....go through the IR framework...call me cynical but delivery spans increase again don't they....even without the buisness savings......what happens when there is a high sick level and duties need to be coverd. again there is no limit on delivery work "get it done"
Hadn't previously appreciated the logic of a 1 hour reduction on working week thought it was a gimic, get it now.
The improvment in VR terms is good especially as so many MC's will be going.
but i'm afraid from me delivery spans is the worst part of this deal. no delivery span no deal!