Revisions:Why did it get a yes vote?

[gb93]

Ok,what's a section?
At my place we don't have these.

Postcode section ie N1,N2,N3 etc.
You can have N1 having their revision and the others not to later.

[POSTMAN]

Ok,what's a section?
At my place we don't have these.

Postcode section ie N1,N2,N3 etc.
You can have N1 having their revision and the others not to later.

Well N1 i guess would have nothing to do with the others,it just happens to be they are in the same office as most offices are closing and merging.

[woofwoof]

Ok,what's a section?
At my place we don't have these.

Postcode section ie N1,N2,N3 etc.
You can have N1 having their revision and the others not to later.

yep id say thats it

[belle smith]

There was a yes vote in our office announced today.
69 YES 19 NO
You can't find 69 members who think the duties are achievable though.
That includes 8 staff who were allowed to vote on Monday, having joined the union on.......Monday!

[newspaper]

There was a yes vote in our office announced today.
69 YES 19 NO
You can't find 69 members who think the duties are achievable though.
That includes 8 staff who were allowed to vote on Monday, having joined the union on.......Monday!

at least you got to vote

[TrueBlueTerrier]

There was a yes vote in our office announced today.
69 YES 19 NO
You can't find 69 members who think the duties are achievable though.
That includes 8 staff who were allowed to vote on Monday, having joined the union on.......Monday!

Sounds like Father Christmas put some pressure on them. - Short Terminitis never understand it me.

[belle smith]

There was a yes vote in our office announced today.
69 YES 19 NO
You can't find 69 members who think the duties are achievable though.
That includes 8 staff who were allowed to vote on Monday, having joined the union on.......Monday!

at least you got to vote

Take it you didn't then. To be honest it's not much consolation.

[newspaper]

There was a yes vote in our office announced today.
69 YES 19 NO
You can't find 69 members who think the duties are achievable though.
That includes 8 staff who were allowed to vote on Monday, having joined the union on.......Monday!

at least you got to vote

Take it you didn't then. To be honest it's not much consolation.

we dont even get more satdays off they said the majority of staff in the 1 to 1s wanted to stop as they was

[belle smith]

we dont even get more satdays off they said the majority of staff in the 1 to 1s wanted to stop as they was

WTF!!! Not even attempting to houner the agreement then!

[belle smith]

Sounds like Father Christmas put some pressure on them. - Short Terminitis never understand it me.

Naw the power of inevitability teebs, "it's coming in anyway"

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Sounds like Father Christmas put some pressure on them. - Short Terminitis never understand it me.

Naw the power of inevitability teebs, "it's coming in anyway"

You cant work in my office we have had a vote yet.

One of our refrains along with "Mails Down" is "Its coming in get used to it" and "Lapsing I'll be collapsing".

[POSTMAN]

Bumping this,need as much info as poss.
If your office knew it wasn't going to work,what happened.

[fishtank]

Bumping this,need as much info as poss.
If your office knew it wasn't going to work,what happened.

It's complicated POSTMAN.
If you use the lowest model week it isn't really designed to work.
If you think about it if the duties are achievable now what would happen when the traffic drops...lapsing and more part-timers?
That's the theory behind "flexing up".
Saying that i think RM and pegasus have kicked the arse out of it.

[dvbuk55]

The big issue is that change should be minimal as in little over a year we will be having major full scale revision activty. A lot of mbrs really dont see the point of this revision due to whats due in early 2012.

The DOM has a proposal and Im going to ask the mbrs to instruct me via a democratic ballot if my response to the DOM is to be yes or a no.

Not just your members who see no point in a revision now and really 2012? that's a lifetime away in present circumstances. Why not wait until a planner becomes available and do the delivery methods revision - it can't be that far away certainly in 2011 and certainly would stand you in good stead for the later WSM.

[dvbuk55]

Well I obviously can't speak for other offices but in our office the Rep is very good BUT the promised training on the process for determining the criteria for the changes was not fully understood by either the revision champion, the planner or the rep. The overriding factor was to retain all members both full and part time and much of the revision was based on that and the attempt to get 1in3 Sats. This resulted in part timers working every Thu, Fri and Sat. There was a need for later starts for some on park and loop, one member comes in early and preps both deliveries and finishes earlier whilst the second man returns to the office and delivers parcels for the non park and loop deliveries, this involves 8 out of the 26 CDVs.

The full list of duties were displayed with attendance patterns, times and the detail of the duty and changes were invited from all and sundry and were made. The whole of the revision was voted on and accepted by the membership. The only problem you are left with is the use of vans, trolleys and HCTs in a manner not used before and was therefore a hit and miss affair. Even the previous CDV duties were not using the LCTs and so nobody was truly aware of the time it was going to take with the new duty structures. The changes were rushed without a doubt and mainly to try to get them bedded in before the Christmas press but they weren't forced in, neither have they been signed off by the Rep because there was some doubt about the model week being accurate and so the review of the revision will take place as soon as the failings become obvious over a period of time.....until that time this is a trial period and money has not been paid because the revision has not yet been accepted.

No revision has ever gone smoothly and no revision has ever been as big as this one.