van sharing

edo10 · Post by **edo10** » 16 Mar 2010, 06:29

can we be forced to drive ? need some clarity on this

donut · Post by **donut** » 16 Mar 2010, 07:35

edo10 wrote:can we be forced to drive ? need some clarity on this

No ...but i was asked to drive and i said i did`nt want to, now rumors started going round the office saying people that have refused to drive will be given crap duties when there is a re-pick due to suitabilty, i did`nt notice seniority in the agreement ?...does anyone know if it`s covered in the agreement ?

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 16 Mar 2010, 08:17

donut wrote:
edo10 wrote:can we be forced to drive ? need some clarity on this
No ...but i was asked to drive and i said i did`nt want to, now rumors started going round the office saying people that have refused to drive will be given crap duties when there is a re-pick due to suitabilty, i did`nt notice seniority in the agreement ?...does anyone know if it`s covered in the agreement ?

They cannot force you to drive as far as I know unless its part of the selection process or in your contract. However, you have to remember that is you have 100 duties in your office and 2% are firms or single driver duties and 10% are within 1 mile of the office then automatically by refusing to drive, or electing not to, then you will only have 54 duties to pick from - where a trained driver will have 100 or perhaps 90 if the 1mile ones are ring-fenced for any reason.

Not saying that donut is wrong in what he said its probably the way rumours work, but in effect if you have less choice then a "crap duty" is more likely isn't it.

donut · Post by **donut** » 16 Mar 2010, 08:28

TrueBlueTerrier wrote:
donut wrote:
edo10 wrote:can we be forced to drive ? need some clarity on this
No ...but i was asked to drive and i said i did`nt want to, now rumors started going round the office saying people that have refused to drive will be given crap duties when there is a re-pick due to suitabilty, i did`nt notice seniority in the agreement ?...does anyone know if it`s covered in the agreement ?
They cannot force you to drive as far as I know unless its part of the selection process or in your contract. However, you have to remember that is you have 100 duties in your office and 2% are firms or single driver duties and 10% are within 1 mile of the office then automatically by refusing to drive, or electing not to, then you will only have 54 duties to pick from - where a trained driver will have 100 or perhaps 90 if the 1mile ones are ring-fenced for any reason.

Not saying that donut is wrong in what he said its probably the way rumours work, but in effect if you have less choice then a "crap duty" is more likely isn't it.

So by what your saying TBT due to not driving i will only be given a limited choice of duties....does`nt this blow the seniority system during a re-pick out of the water ?

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 16 Mar 2010, 08:35

donut wrote:
TrueBlueTerrier wrote:
donut wrote:
edo10 wrote:can we be forced to drive ? need some clarity on this
No ...but i was asked to drive and i said i did`nt want to, now rumors started going round the office saying people that have refused to drive will be given crap duties when there is a re-pick due to suitabilty, i did`nt notice seniority in the agreement ?...does anyone know if it`s covered in the agreement ?
They cannot force you to drive as far as I know unless its part of the selection process or in your contract. However, you have to remember that is you have 100 duties in your office and 2% are firms or single driver duties and 10% are within 1 mile of the office then automatically by refusing to drive, or electing not to, then you will only have 54 duties to pick from - where a trained driver will have 100 or perhaps 90 if the 1mile ones are ring-fenced for any reason.

Not saying that donut is wrong in what he said its probably the way rumours work, but in effect if you have less choice then a "crap duty" is more likely isn't it.
So by what your saying TBT due to not driving i will only be given a limited choice of duties....does`nt this blow the seniority system during a re-pick out of the water ?

No because seniority will be used to allow people to choose their preferred duty that they can do. If when CDVs are brought in then one of the 2 has to be a driver. If you refuse or elect not to drive (as should be your right IMHO) then you can only choose the non driving part of those duties.

Even if you where the most senior person out of the 100 duties, and were therefore entitled to 1st pick, you have by exercising your right not to drive ruled out 1/2 of the available slots on the CDVs.

You are not being given a limited choice because of your refusal. You have a limited choice naturally because you have elected not to drive.

donut · Post by **donut** » 16 Mar 2010, 08:40

But does`nt that discriminate against the people who don`t hold a driving licence ?

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 16 Mar 2010, 08:46

donut wrote:But does`nt that discriminate against the people who don`t hold a driving licence ?

No - what's the point of having 2 non drivers in a van it wont go anywhere. Therefore only drivers can pick drivers slots but can pick non driver slots if they want. Non drivers are limited to non driver slots just by using common sense.

Its right you should have the choice whether or not to drive, (if you can drive) but you cannot complain its discrimination if by you exercising your rights you automatically rule yourself out of a driving slot.

If you can't drive then why would you expect to be able to choose a driving slot. You could always if you wanted learn to drive yourself, but unless there are more driving slots than drivers in an office RM are unlikely to pay to train employees out of their own pocket.

donut · Post by **donut** » 16 Mar 2010, 09:07

Understood.....so for instance someone being a non driver they still could in theory pick any duty due to the fact that you would only need one driver per van or would it be a requirement that both would have to drive ?

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 16 Mar 2010, 10:35

donut wrote:Understood.....so for instance someone being a non driver they still could in theory pick any duty due to the fact that you would only need one driver per van or would it be a requirement that both would have to drive ?

As I understand it although ideally 2 drivers would be the perfect team - 1 driver and 1 non driver can be done it just means that the loops themselves need tweaking to make sure they work. However, if you have a good balanced team that get on well with each other it should work.

andy2007 · Post by **andy2007** » 16 Mar 2010, 10:48

Would RM provide driving lessons, if they need you to drive?
They provide lessons for the Truck Drivers, so why not CDV Drivers?

fishtank · Post by **fishtank** » 16 Mar 2010, 11:06

The problem comes with the deployment.

If you have say 50 walks in an office 10 rurala/business 40 town.

All 10 rurals have to be drivers.
If 40 are merged into say 20 park&loop you need a minimum of 20 drivers.
All cover and leave reserves must be drivers.
Collections obvously must be drivers.
What happens if there are not enough drivers?
Will you be offered the choice..... drive or move to another office/MC.
If you can't drive will there be no choice.

pickaname · Post by **pickaname** » 16 Mar 2010, 13:18

Bag and Bike

Why change?

slave · Post by **slave** » 16 Mar 2010, 15:23

They might keep bag and bike in some places, likewise duties near to an office (can't recall how far away a duty has to be before it becomes cdv) will be a trolley of some description.
Of course if RM try and bunch DOs together as they have tried to in the past then it means some places will have to be vans and nowt else!

fishtank · Post by **fishtank** » 16 Mar 2010, 15:29

slave wrote:They might keep bag and bike in some places, likewise duties near to an office (can't recall how far away a duty has to be before it becomes cdv) will be a trolley of some description.
Of course if RM try and bunch DOs together as they have tried to in the past then it means some places will have to be vans and nowt else!

Well we will be vans and nowt else because we were bunched together more than 10 years ago and stuck in an industrial estate.
That,i would imagine will be the final outcome for many D.Os.

Post by **dvbuk55** » 16 Mar 2010, 16:30

Sherpas Rule wrote:
andy2007 wrote:Would RM provide driving lessons, if they need you to drive?
They provide lessons for the Truck Drivers, so why not CDV Drivers?
I was thinking about this as well, if your office doesn't have enough drivers what are the chances of the RM putting you through driving lessons and test if you promised to drive for them once you've passed?

Erm

None because it would create a precedent. There was a time when that did happen but so many left afterwards they stopped it - I wouldn't imagine they would start the scheme up again.

Having said that if you were prepared to do it in your own time at your own expense they may utilise your services afterwards.

ROYALMAILCHAT

van sharing

van sharing

Re: van sharing

Re: van sharing

Re: van sharing

Re: van sharing

Re: van sharing

Re: van sharing

Re: van sharing

Re: van sharing

Re: van sharing

Re: van sharing

Re: van sharing

Re: van sharing

Re: van sharing

Re: van sharing