Office Budgets

drb · Post by **drb** » 11 Apr 2010, 14:03

Your Delivery Office Manager has been given a budget before Christmas.However DO NOT discuss this with them as they have been told that IT HAS TO BE PART OF THE NEW AGREEMENT.

We expect them to try and get away with stuff.In the past some offices have allowed this.Please stop from tomorrow. Download this and show it to them.It is quite clear.

http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?xno2vymwywk

Some of us in the past have allowed stuff to go through.They do this BECAUSE THEY CAN. Deal or no deal. Stop it before it gets in the door.Once duties go they go.

fishtank · Post by **fishtank** » 11 Apr 2010, 14:33

drb this letter only relates to revisions and does not preclude all budget activity.

Dear Dave

Thanks for your letter of yesterday. I’m happy to confirm we have the same understanding on both the issues raised.

When building revisions managers will work with their unit representative in line with our agreed process. Local duty sets and numbers of jobs will emerge from the application of our agreement and not predetermined by office budgets. As discussed, the standards, revision tools and best methods we have agreed will improve efficiency and help managers meet targets, but the budget will not dictate the duty structure.

This will be confirmed at the front of the new revisions process in the local workshop for DOMs and local representatives. The plan for rolling out the fresh approach to revisions is being discussed by our teams and will be confirmed soon.

I will copy this correspondence to Delivery Office Managers to support them in getting the new approach embedded in practice.

Yours sincerely

Dale Haddon
HR Director

drb · Post by **drb** » 11 Apr 2010, 15:06

There should not be any discussions on office budgets as the workshops,(geo route) haven't been done yet with ACAS involvement.The BSi is without stress,fatigue,and you have to be motivated.Royal Mail's BSi is based on budget.

The parameters for the geo route need agreeing. All they did for geo route 2008 is change it slightly,but it was the same thing. It would be best served for reps not to get involved at this point.

viking · Post by **viking** » 11 Apr 2010, 15:09

it seems that ALREADY questions are being asked as to what the agreement actually means. They were the ones who put the whole thing together and its being misinterpreted so what chance do the resty of us have!

drb · Post by **drb** » 11 Apr 2010, 15:12

Not just this deal,but anything. The third parties are still involved,get your divisional and area rep on the case.They will pass it up to HQ.This is definate. They have to support their offices,(area & divisional)

ronpetetrevchris · Post by **ronpetetrevchris** » 12 Apr 2010, 13:09

drb wrote:Not just this deal,but anything. The third parties are still involved,get your divisional and area rep on the case.They will pass it up to HQ.This is definate. They have to support their offices,(area & divisional)

Yep apparently our office has been tasked with savings, not a small amount either -20%

drb · Post by **drb** » 12 Apr 2010, 13:11

Download this :

http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?xno2vymwywk

Print off.Give it to your DOM,and or,your rep!!

postghost · Post by **postghost** » 13 Apr 2010, 23:21

viking wrote:it seems that ALREADY questions are being asked as to what the agreement actually means. They were the ones who put the whole thing together and its being misinterpreted so what chance do the resty of us have!

What is frustrating is that the CWU are to naive to see beyond the skulduggery of RM

Post by **Toddy72** » 15 Apr 2010, 16:15

fishtank wrote:drb this letter only relates to revisions and does not preclude all budget activity.

Dear Dave

Thanks for your letter of yesterday. I’m happy to confirm we have the same understanding on both the issues raised.

When building revisions managers will work with their unit representative in line with our agreed process. Local duty sets and numbers of jobs will emerge from the application of our agreement and not predetermined by office budgets. As discussed, the standards, revision tools and best methods we have agreed will improve efficiency and help managers meet targets, but the budget will not dictate the duty structure.

This will be confirmed at the front of the new revisions process in the local workshop for DOMs and local representatives. The plan for rolling out the fresh approach to revisions is being discussed by our teams and will be confirmed soon.

I will copy this correspondence to Delivery Office Managers to support them in getting the new approach embedded in practice.

Yours sincerely

Dale Haddon
HR Director

What i want to know is does this letter also include mailcentres or just delivery offices as were are negotiating our Business plan at the moment
and they want to get rid of 5 duty's in our Mailcentre

drb · Post by **drb** » 15 Apr 2010, 16:32

The agreement covers all,(mail centres and delivery offices)

fishtank · Post by **fishtank** » 15 Apr 2010, 16:44

drb wrote:The agreement covers all,(mail centres and delivery offices)

He didn't ask about the agreement he asked about the letter.

What i want to know is does this letter also include mailcentres or just delivery offices as were are negotiating our Business plan at the moment
and they want to get rid of 5 duty's in our Mailcentre

drb · Post by **drb** » 15 Apr 2010, 17:00

Clever clogs Fishtank! I wouldn't talk about budgets at all.You see if it gets in,then your Inddor workload tool will be inputed,(as agreed by you),with less duties.What you want to do is plan the duties first with the correct parameters.The last thing you would look at is duties. Remember the BSi,planned motivated,no stress or fatigue.

In your case you could easily state that you would like to see where the agreements take the Mail Centre Rationalisation process takes us.

You could also state that,"of course every business requires a business plan,however yours would have to be via member ratification via the national agreement/or not" and "Thanks for taking the time to talk to me"

I know us lefties would love to "say no" all the time.However give yourself a way out!

Post by **Toddy72** » 15 Apr 2010, 17:22

drb wrote:Clever clogs Fishtank! I wouldn't talk about budgets at all.You see if it gets in,then your Inddor workload tool will be inputed,(as agreed by you),with less duties.What you want to do is plan the duties first with the correct parameters.The last thing you would look at is duties. Remember the BSi,planned motivated,no stress or fatigue.

In your case you could easily state that you would like to see where the agreements take the Mail Centre Rationalisation process takes us.

You could also state that,"of course every business requires a business plan,however yours would have to be via member ratification via the national agreement/or not" and "Thanks for taking the time to talk to me"

I know us lefties would love to "say no" all the time.However give yourself a way out!

Thanks for ur answer

Post by **POSTMAN** » 11 Nov 2010, 16:58

The letter works!!
I know of at least on revision that has been altered because of this stance.

DON'T LET YOUR MANAGERS MUG YOU OFF!

Post by **POSTMAN** » 30 Mar 2012, 22:14

Would we now say that this is now defunct.

ROYALMAILCHAT

Office Budgets

Office Budgets

Re: Office Budgets

Re: Office Budgets

Re: Office Budgets

Re: Office Budgets

Re: Office Budgets

Re: Office Budgets

Re: Office Budgets

Re: Office Budgets

Re: Office Budgets

Re: Office Budgets

Re: Office Budgets

Re: Office Budgets

Re: Office Budgets

Re: Office Budgets