Saturday Night debate ?

[EatMyShorts]

Its will come down to dutys and youth aswell. Remember if your an old codger you aint gona be as fast as these young boys son.

[banner18]

Or you could also think of it this way,

As you are taking 8hrs to do your delivery and a younger man is able to do it in 6-7hrs, would it not the be better financial sense for Royal Mail to lay you off and pay a young man for 7 hrs work rather than you for 8hrs.

By having clocking in and out we would be giving Royal Mail one hell of a stick to beat us with,

I can imagine it now, "Jones was able to do your walk yesterday well within his time, but yet you are always claim overtime when you do it" or " we feel that you are no longer suitable so we're going to let you go and replace you with someone who is more up to the task"

I've done a few years myself, I know that these days I can't do what I was able to do when I was in my 20's, thats why I'm glad for seniority.

The nature of our job is a physical one, the older we get the slower we get, thats a factor of life, don't begrudge the young uns their moment they to will get old like we have done.

What an extremely crass argument that is. You are missing the point that "jones" will no longer use his car, come in early, jump walls, run or work through their break because there would be no point. Of course there are differences due to age in a physical job such as ours, but it is RM's responsibilty to accomodate for that, not discriminate against it.
If it were the case as you suggest that older people would simply be let go to allow younger people in, there wouldn't be an employee over 50 in any physical job in the country.
The fact that you are missing is that once everyone does the job right, the younger ones should not be working for 6-7 hours, then going home. They should be given more work to make them reach their time. There is an agreed standard for work rates and if someone isn't reaching that, it should be dealt with separately.

[smokerjim]

Or you could also think of it this way,

As you are taking 8hrs to do your delivery and a younger man is able to do it in 6-7hrs, would it not the be better financial sense for Royal Mail to lay you off and pay a young man for 7 hrs work rather than you for 8hrs.

By having clocking in and out we would be giving Royal Mail one hell of a stick to beat us with,

I can imagine it now, "Jones was able to do your walk yesterday well within his time, but yet you are always claim overtime when you do it" or " we feel that you are no longer suitable so we're going to let you go and replace you with someone who is more up to the task"

I've done a few years myself, I know that these days I can't do what I was able to do when I was in my 20's, thats why I'm glad for seniority.

The nature of our job is a physical one, the older we get the slower we get, thats a factor of life, don't begrudge the young uns their moment they to will get old like we have done.

What an extremely crass argument that is. You are missing the point that "jones" will no longer use his car, come in early, jump walls, run or work through their break because there would be no point. Of course there are differences due to age in a physical job such as ours, but it is RM's responsibilty to accomodate for that, not discriminate against it.
If it were the case as you suggest that older people would simply be let go to allow younger people in, there wouldn't be an employee over 50 in any physical job in the country.
The fact that you are missing is that once everyone does the job right, the younger ones should not be working for 6-7 hours, then going home. They should be given more work to make them reach their time. There is an agreed standard for work rates and if someone isn't reaching that, it should be dealt with separately.

In addition, if anyone that crossed an age threshold was "let go" because they could not work to the same pace as those 20 or 30 years younger than them, then the union should have RM by the short & curlies, under age discrimination legislation.....that is what that legislation is there for ( not to remove seniority, as RM want us to believe ), and if a 50 year old is suddenly "too slow" or "too worn out" to deliver, either the duties are too arduous, or the employee must be offered an alternative ( ie; indoor sorting ) either way, it is up to RM to offer solutions, BEFORE & INSTEAD OF going straight to stage 3 dismissal / ill health retirement.

( I said "the union should have rm by the short & curlies..." because they've had them like that before last year & in '07, and still didn't do a bang-up job in negotiations

[westlondonpostie]

Or you could also think of it this way,

As you are taking 8hrs to do your delivery and a younger man is able to do it in 6-7hrs, would it not the be better financial sense for Royal Mail to lay you off and pay a young man for 7 hrs work rather than you for 8hrs.

By having clocking in and out we would be giving Royal Mail one hell of a stick to beat us with,

I can imagine it now, "Jones was able to do your walk yesterday well within his time, but yet you are always claim overtime when you do it" or " we feel that you are no longer suitable so we're going to let you go and replace you with someone who is more up to the task"

I've done a few years myself, I know that these days I can't do what I was able to do when I was in my 20's, thats why I'm glad for seniority.

The nature of our job is a physical one, the older we get the slower we get, thats a factor of life, don't begrudge the young uns their moment they to will get old like we have done.

What an extremely crass argument that is. You are missing the point that "jones" will no longer use his car, come in early, jump walls, run or work through their break because there would be no point. Of course there are differences due to age in a physical job such as ours, but it is RM's responsibilty to accomodate for that, not discriminate against it.
If it were the case as you suggest that older people would simply be let go to allow younger people in, there wouldn't be an employee over 50 in any physical job in the country.
The fact that you are missing is that once everyone does the job right, the younger ones should not be working for 6-7 hours, then going home. They should be given more work to make them reach their time. There is an agreed standard for work rates and if someone isn't reaching that, it should be dealt with separately.

I did not mean it to be crass, but more of a wake up call about what I believe are the pit falls of clocking in and out, I was replying to a post which appeared to me was about someone who was just fed up with not being able to finish at the same time as his younger workmates.

By having clocking, we would be just giving Royal Mail another batch of data to use against us and we know how much the pen pushers like data!

How would Royal Mail Management use this data, would they put more pressure on those less able, I mean I can't believe that a Royal Mail Manager would resort to intimidation , Would they implement continuous sorting performance tests? or have certain individuals watched while out on delivery? thus meaning a person could be called into the DOM's office and be told as they were no longer up to Delivery requirements they would be moved to a mail Centre 20 or so miles away whether they liked it or not.
What would they do nxt, put us on performance related pay? the more you sort or deliver the more money you get, not very appealing to those of us slowing down but a great incentive to the young and quick, how would that vote go?

[banner18]

What is wrong with working your hours? If it isn't good enough for the managers, tell them to get a time and motion guy to follow you. The work that anyone achieves is not subjective, it is objective and no manager can just have an opinion that you aren't fast enough and then get you sacked. I suggest that for those who do work hard enough, and know it themselves, have nothing to fear. The only people with something to fear are those that do not work hard enough and invite manager action upon themselves. I have even asked managers directly about my work rate and never had a problem.

This is the reality. Doing the job right and working your hours with clocking in and out, is only a problem for those that either rush and come in early to chase time, or those that swing the lead.
It is a case of those that know they are in the right, do not fear the fight. Anyone fearing the fight must have something to hide.

[calpsy]

Yeah clocking IN and OUT in the morning seems understandable .

Clocking again when you have finished your duty ? Explain how this is possible ?

One bloke finishes 10 minutes from the office . No probs . One bloke finishes 10 miles from the office . GET REAL ! !

You think RM are gonna pay him overtime to wait on a bus and get back to the office ?

Again its people who cant finish on time that come up with this nonsense .

[westlondonpostie]

What is wrong with working your hours? If it isn't good enough for the managers, tell them to get a time and motion guy to follow you. The work that anyone achieves is not subjective, it is objective and no manager can just have an opinion that you aren't fast enough and then get you sacked. I suggest that for those who do work hard enough, and know it themselves, have nothing to fear. The only people with something to fear are those that do not work hard enough and invite manager action upon themselves. I have even asked managers directly about my work rate and never had a problem.

This is the reality. Doing the job right and working your hours with clocking in and out, is only a problem for those that either rush and come in early to chase time, or those that swing the lead.
It is a case of those that know they are in the right, do not fear the fight. Anyone fearing the fight must have something to hide.

Look mate I'm not having a go at anyone, my only fear is where will it all lead to...

In my office no one has to return to the Office except drivers to return their vans and PDA's, I't's job and knock so there is no time built in for returning to the office for walkmen. if they wanted people back they would then have to allow for travelling, meaning they would have to reduce delivery spans by 20-30 mins per day, not likely, so that is where I feel intimidation would be used, you must sort faster, your not walking fast enough or even comparing one persons performance to another, I've seen it used years ago and the poor f****r ended up having a stroke, we only found out what had been going on after it happened and the managers responsible were only moved on to another DO.

You say you have asked your managers about your work rate and you've never had a problem well surely your manager would be just as happy with those returning to the Office before you do, how would you feel if you did have clocking in and out, and your manager was to call you into his office and say to you that he was getting 20 or 30 mins extra sorting from a load of your work mates but not from you and why was that?

At the moment I'm in my 40's I'm fairly fit (except from the occasional twinge in my back and stiff knees in the morning) and I have no problems doing my delivery but what about 10 years time will I still be able to sort and walk as fast or will I have to stop every now and then for a breather?

I know my RDC finishes earlier than I do but he is younger, I'm not sure I would appreciate my manager calling me in tomorrow and telling me I'm not working hard enough as he is comparing me to someone 20yrs my junior.

[somerset]

This is the reality. Doing the job right and working your hours with clocking in and out, is only a problem for those that either rush and come in early to chase time, or those that swing the lead.
It is a case of those that know they are in the right, do not fear the fight. Anyone fearing the fight must have something to hide.[/quote]

[banner18]

What is wrong with working your hours? If it isn't good enough for the managers, tell them to get a time and motion guy to follow you. The work that anyone achieves is not subjective, it is objective and no manager can just have an opinion that you aren't fast enough and then get you sacked. I suggest that for those who do work hard enough, and know it themselves, have nothing to fear. The only people with something to fear are those that do not work hard enough and invite manager action upon themselves. I have even asked managers directly about my work rate and never had a problem.

This is the reality. Doing the job right and working your hours with clocking in and out, is only a problem for those that either rush and come in early to chase time, or those that swing the lead.
It is a case of those that know they are in the right, do not fear the fight. Anyone fearing the fight must have something to hide.

Look mate I'm not having a go at anyone, my only fear is where will it all lead to...

In my office no one has to return to the Office except drivers to return their vans and PDA's, I't's job and knock so there is no time built in for returning to the office for walkmen. if they wanted people back they would then have to allow for travelling, meaning they would have to reduce delivery spans by 20-30 mins per day, not likely, so that is where I feel intimidation would be used, you must sort faster, your not walking fast enough or even comparing one persons performance to another, I've seen it used years ago and the poor f****r ended up having a stroke, we only found out what had been going on after it happened and the managers responsible were only moved on to another DO.

You say you have asked your managers about your work rate and you've never had a problem well surely your manager would be just as happy with those returning to the Office before you do, how would you feel if you did have clocking in and out, and your manager was to call you into his office and say to you that he was getting 20 or 30 mins extra sorting from a load of your work mates but not from you and why was that?

At the moment I'm in my 40's I'm fairly fit (except from the occasional twinge in my back and stiff knees in the morning) and I have no problems doing my delivery but what about 10 years time will I still be able to sort and walk as fast or will I have to stop every now and then for a breather?

I know my RDC finishes earlier than I do but he is younger, I'm not sure I would appreciate my manager calling me in tomorrow and telling me I'm not working hard enough as he is comparing me to someone 20yrs my junior.

You see, I think the exact opposite to you about this subject. At the moment there is no clocking out and look at all the problems we have. Because there is no clocking out, people chase time. Because people chase time, managers don't know where they are in terms of working our hours. Therefore it is without clocking in and out that we have all the problems we have. Your views about different age group ability are greatly exaggerated because the younger guys, especially, rush around, because they can. Under a clocking out system they will not and you will find that the time people take across all age groups, is much the same.
There will be much less intimidation under the clocking out system because there will be a natural equilibrium reached for each duty. For instance, there will be 4 to 5 people covering any one duty on different days. With all of them doing the job right, the natural time that the work takes will surface and will protect us from those that want to break H & S and protect RM from those that are lazy and take their time.

I am aware that RM have pushed for a clocking out system in the past but met with great resistance from the union due to pressure from its members.
It is not true that RM do not want this, they are pushing towards it now with cdv introduction so it is only a matter of time.

[fishtank]

It is a case of those that know they are in the right, do not fear the fight. Anyone fearing the fight must have something to hide.

It may be more sensible to wait until you see what the parameters are for Pegasus before you decide whether there is anything to fear.
You may think you're fast enough....RM may have other ideas.

[chunk]

banner18 wrote

views about different age group ability are greatly exaggerated because the younger guys, especially, rush around, because they can. Under a clocking out system they will not and you will find that the time people take across all age groups, is much the same.

The youngest in our office is about 24 the oldest is about 4 years off retirement.

Anybody suggesting that there is little performance difference is
delusional.
I can keep up with lads in my office 10 years younger but appearances are deceptive.
I dont kid myself when i feel deadbeat at the end of the day that they feel the same!
their faster healing /recovery means that they wont be aching all weekend.
what disguises the fact that most of the older guys in our office are slowing down is the gradual migration
over time
towards different duties eg rurals, bag drops, locker duties etc.
Ive no problem with that it its a sensible choice as you approach 50.
not many come back the other way on a resign!

[BELIAL]

It is a case of those that know they are in the right, do not fear the fight. Anyone fearing the fight must have something to hide.

It may be more sensible to wait until you see what the parameters are for Pegasus before you decide whether there is anything to fear.
You may think you're fast enough....RM may have other ideas.

That is a separate issue and will have to be dealt with regardless of the existence/non-existence of clocking out.
As for finishing on your walk and RM providing no Conveyance back to your office and adding 30 mins. to your walk time as a result ,well i thought the benefits in terms of job retention and reduced workload were self evident. Does anyone think that there might be a health and safety issue with this practice , specifically with the requirement for the Duty of Care , surely an RM manager should be required to ensure your safe return from your walk?BrotherM will know

[andy2007]

First of all, I'd like to point out (for anyone who doesn't already know) that I work indoors, and that I'm all for working all the hours I'm paid. In fact, it was a relief, when they introduced it. Why?
Because when the early finishes first started, we were allowed to finish no more than 1 hour before our official finish time, regardless of how much work we did. But against the advice of our Reps, many of my Collegues insisted that we should offer to do a higher minimum workrate, in exchange for earlier finishes. After failing to convince the "we want to go Home as early as possible" lot, our Reps managed to negotiate this agreement. As a result, we were able to finish 2-3 hours early, but do approximately double what we used to do in 8 hours, before the early finishes. Sounds good in theory, doesn't it?

The problem was, that we have a number of older Posties, who simply couldn't keep up with the younger ones, who were rushing round the Segs, flat out. Which meant that they were seen as being a hinderance to the younger ones going Home early. Which lead to a lot of B&H problems. Now it wasn't that the older lads and lasses weren't pulling their weight. They simply couldn't keep up. It even reached the point, where the Managers didn't bother to monitor the Seggers, because they knew that the work would get done faster, if they left us to it. Believe me. I was f***ing glad I was young, and able to keep up. It's terrible the way some of my Collegues were treated!

Luckily, the early finishes stopped a while ago now, and it's a MUCH nicer place to work now. We do still have the usual problems. Particularly as the Managers still expect us to work at the same speed, but to the end of our shifts now. Which means that the older Posties get hassled by the Managers now, instead of their Collegues. And there are flaws in the way that the minimum workrate is monitored. Which means that with the help of the younger ones, it's not too difficult to hit the targets. But if we ge a large percentage of "flimsies" (bags with thin envelopes in, so you can fit more than twice as many in an RSC/Yorkie), it's virtually impossible. Which means that the Managers start accusing people of not pulling their weight, and falling short of the neccessary targets. Which inevitably leads to threats of action being taken against them.

At least your (admittedly worse) problems with excessive workloads comes from the Managers. Our mess was caused by greedy b*****ds wanting to finish very early, setting a standard that has backfired dramatically!

If theres scope to finish early, you'll always get some people who'll take things too far to achieve it. Whether thats starting early, using their cars, cutting corners on H&S, or a combination of those tactics. It'll always be those who do the job properly, and/or are no longer physically capable of keeping up with their younger Collegues, who'll suffer. Just do as much as you can in the hours you're paid, and if you finish early, do something else back at the DO. That'll remove the incentive for people to take the p**s, and provide ammo for the Managers to put your older Collegues under unreasonable pressure.

We're paid for a certain number of hours. So what's wrong with working all of them?
Is it really worth causing all this trouble for people who work as hard as they're physically capable of doing, but simply can't keep up with you, because of your youth?

[banner18]

First of all, I'd like to point out (for anyone who doesn't already know) that I work indoors, and that I'm all for working all the hours I'm paid. In fact, it was a relief, when they introduced it. Why?
Because when the early finishes first started, we were allowed to finish no more than 1 hour before our official finish time, regardless of how much work we did. But against the advice of our Reps, many of my Collegues insisted that we should offer to do a higher minimum workrate, in exchange for earlier finishes. After failing to convince the "we want to go Home as early as possible" lot, our Reps managed to negotiate this agreement. As a result, we were able to finish 2-3 hours early, but do approximately double what we used to do in 8 hours, before the early finishes. Sounds good in theory, doesn't it?

The problem was, that we have a number of older Posties, who simply couldn't keep up with the younger ones, who were rushing round the Segs, flat out. Which meant that they were seen as being a hinderance to the younger ones going Home early. Which lead to a lot of B&H problems. Now it wasn't that the older lads and lasses weren't pulling their weight. They simply couldn't keep up. It even reached the point, where the Managers didn't bother to monitor the Seggers, because they knew that the work would get done faster, if they left us to it. Believe me. I was f***ing glad I was young, and able to keep up. It's terrible the way some of my Collegues were treated!

Luckily, the early finishes stopped a while ago now, and it's a MUCH nicer place to work now. We do still have the usual problems. Particularly as the Managers still expect us to work at the same speed, but to the end of our shifts now. Which means that the older Posties get hassled by the Managers now, instead of their Collegues. And there are flaws in the way that the minimum workrate is monitored. Which means that with the help of the younger ones, it's not too difficult to hit the targets. But if we ge a large percentage of "flimsies" (bags with thin envelopes in, so you can fit more than twice as many in an RSC/Yorkie), it's virtually impossible. Which means that the Managers start accusing people of not pulling their weight, and falling short of the neccessary targets. Which inevitably leads to threats of action being taken against them.

At least your (admittedly worse) problems with excessive workloads comes from the Managers. Our mess was caused by greedy b*****ds wanting to finish very early, setting a standard that has backfired dramatically!

If theres scope to finish early, you'll always get some people who'll take things too far to achieve it. Whether thats starting early, using their cars, cutting corners on H&S, or a combination of those tactics. It'll always be those who do the job properly, and/or are no longer physically capable of keeping up with their younger Collegues, who'll suffer. Just do as much as you can in the hours you're paid, and if you finish early, do something else back at the DO. That'll remove the incentive for people to take the p**s, and provide ammo for the Managers to put your older Collegues under unreasonable pressure.

We're paid for a certain number of hours. So what's wrong with working all of them?
Is it really worth causing all this trouble for people who work as hard as they're physically capable of doing, but simply can't keep up with you, because of your youth?

[fishtank]

Where do you set the bar on outdoor performance...the slowest...the fastest....the "average"...what about age,disability,gender,build,fitness levels.
I wouldn't touch any of it with a bargepole and if the CWU has any sense at all neither will they.
If they are jointly agreed performance levels then they may be sitting together at an employment tribunal trying to explain away a discrimination case...or two.