Greene hits out at Royal Mail criticism

[Martin Walsh]

Fishtank i will respond to you. Postman asked what Dave Ward had said to the conference , I have given this.

Now why would Dave mention to a meeting of competiors , MPs etc about revisons ?

It is true some revisions have not been succussful and this has been raised at the NDG. There has been an audit done as well and this is being pursued but it should also be pursured at Divsional , Area , Local level as well.

Now you make a cheap shot at the one mail centre issue but lets just say some intresting devlopments have taken place over the last week with the assistance of Roger Poole and Acas and lets just say we have a fresh appoach in place. Cannot reveal to much on here but you did ask .

[BELIAL]

Crunch time :neutral:Simple ,no shades of grey. No nifty local/regional/area strategy is going to maintain membership numbers. Does our union think we should do more work for less money?
Me ,I'm non negotiable ,the current workload has exceeded my physical capacity and I'm long term sick as a result. How quick can you go ,for how long? We all got a limit

[DGP1]

Dingo can come and do my pre-vision duty and just wait until it gets revised..................and then I'll watch as he completely breaks physically and laugh my balls off.


You need to get your head out of your arse and actually look at the duties we're meant to do in the time, the more senior union reps. are made to do our work then the less they'll be likely to sing along to RMs tune.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Whatever anyones views on the 2010 BT agreement , it has safeguards in the way of having to reach agreement, pay money for the introduction of revisons , levels of full time workers , MTSF , the overarching objective of avoiding complusory redundancies etc.

Ah I am glad its got safeguards and I am sure that members in:

1. BARNSLEY DO
2. STRATFORD UPON AVON DO
3. DUNDEE EAST DO
4. BARROW-IN-FURNESS DO LA13-LA17
5. LIVINGSTON DO
6. LEEDS LS1/LS2 DO
7. TROON DO
8. BEITH DO
9. DALRY DO
10. KILWINNING DO
11. NORTH WEST DO M27/M28/M38
12. CREWE DO
13. GARSTANG DO PR3
14. SHEEPSCAR DO LS6/LS7
15. DENTON DO M34
16. ADDLESTONE DO KT15
17. BRAMLEY DO LS13
18. CALDERWAY DO WF13
19. RAYLEIGH DO SS
20. WARWICK DO
21. DEWSBURY DO
22. BELFAST DO Tomb St BT7
23. PETERLEE DO
24. SUNDERLAND DO
25. GATESHEAD DO
26. DINNINGTON DO Sheffield

Who think their revisions are not working will be glad about them as well.

Mind you I think the Model week being a quiet one was a mistake as would be the busiest - perhaps choosing the median week would have been more flexible both up and down.

[dvbuk55]

The lowest range was taken from a limited number of weeks - it should have been a much broader average still you live and don't learn apparently.

[Martin Walsh]

TBT other than some postings on here what evidence have you got that all of those are failing revisons ?

Now I dont know if they are or not , but lets look at the full picture, were these revisons imposed by executive action or were they agreed by the members. There have been no reports of any revisons being introduced by exective action.

Now if some of these revisons are failing then what is causing them to fail. Every revision must have a post implementation review.

Now there is a number of things which may mean a revison is failing .

They are :

Has the revison taken too many hours out.

Does the revison need time to bed in ? Most revisons do not work properly at first ?

Has the revision been introduced to close to Christmas. Due to the financial postion of Royal Mail they want to continue to introduce revisons even up to christmas. Previsously revisons have rarely been introduced after November.

Has the revison been planned properly including delivery methods.

There is a meeting this wednesday where a full report will be given on offices which have intoduced revisons, lets see what the local reps , area reps and Royal Mail are saying is the status of play in all divisons.


Equally there are just as many offices which have introduced revisons and are working which you do not hear about as I guess people do not need to moan about them.

[dvbuk55]

Why are revisions failing:


Blah
Blah
Blah
Blah

was the agreement a sack of s**t?
are the union blind?
Unthinking?
Cosy in their comfort zone?

[TrueBlueTerrier]

sorry but I did not say they were failing - I said members of RMC at those offices thought they were failing. Although some of them have had reports in local press about them as well.

Good to see your having a meeting of all those with vested interests from both the CWU and RM in making sure that BT2010 works, except of course those at the bottom of both piles the people actually doing the work. Local Reps will give a true picture I am sure but a second ordinary voice would be valuable as well, unless of course you Ed Davey

BTW its not a criticism merely a suggestion as we all have a vested interest to some degree in BT2010

Edit: there is another reason for a revision failing which you did not mention. Those, if there are any, that have been agreed by Management and CWU but not agreed by the membership. There is no hard evidence this has happened but certainly there is anecdotal evidence on here that it has indeed happened.

[Lincox]

Dingo I appreciate that you are being selective to who you reply, but do you not think that the revisions are failing because they have been based on saving costs rather than what they were supposed to be based on which is implementation of new working practices and modernisation of machinery etc to cope with todays delivery needs.

[fishtank]

There is a meeting this wednesday where a full report will be given on offices which have intoduced revisons, lets see what the local reps , area reps and Royal Mail are saying is the status of play in all divisons.

Why do you distrust the views of the members on this site dingo?
Why would they lie?....exaggerate maybe but lie?
..and why do you believe that the problems felt by those on the front line will necessarily make it to your meeting?

Royal Mail managers will obviously try to downplay any problems.
Area reps will not want to admit being party to botched revisions.
Local reps will not be present.
The steer from Dave and Bob is that modernisation must be seen to be working to defeat privatisation.

Where is the motivation in the room for an open and honest account of the situation?

[DGP1]

[dvbuk55]

[Martin Walsh]

Fishtank I did not say I did not believe the members but lets just say this is a site where a lot want to say their office is the worst or their walk is the longest or hardest etc.

Now in terms of revisons being introduced without the agreement of the members, I just dont buy that , I have been a local rep , area rep and higher for over 20 years and I have very rarely seen something agreed without the members having their vote and certainly not a revison.

If this has happened you have to ask questions of the area reps and why are the members not writing to Headquarters to complain if this has happened.

Now lets not kid ourselves managers are under immense pressure to introduce revisons quickly and in a lot of cases they attempt to take out too many hours. Remember the revisons process is a journey over the life time of the agreement . Therefore you do not have to remove all the hours in one revison.

I know a number of offices which have introduced their revisons without having problems. 6 offices in North West London , we now have close on 6 offices in South East London , we are close to agreement in a few in North London and we have already introduced revisions in WC , W1 and EC without any significant problems. Why because we have made sure they did not take too many hours out in the first revison.

I realise those with intregrated revisons will have a bigger challenge depending what time they recieve their second batch or
if they have delivery methods.

The question i have as I seem to be figure to hate is if you argue so much with me or others on this site., why did you not argue with your manager or rep and ensure that your revison did not come in ? Remember there has never been a revison process which gives the union more involvement if you did not think the revision would work, why did you and the members allow the revison to be introduced in your office ? Oh sorry it was all my fault and CWU HQs.

[dvbuk55]

Funny that remark dingo, "we made sure they didn't take too many hours out on the first revision"..................as I recall the revisions were not supposed to be driven by savings....................unless of course you have far too many hours in the first place

[Martin Walsh]

Revisons on self starters are driven by the IWT and moving torwards 100 BSi so if your at 80 then it would be silly to remove all the hours to get you too an hundred in one revison. So its not driven by savings but by the tools which were agreed. Pehaps you want to re-read the agreement.