Our manager wanted the revision in in November and at our Work Time learning we said Merry Christmas then he changed his mind
Looks like Feb or March
Money saving on you bike
Never mind once the Share Holders get there teeth into it (Cameron and co or even Leighton or Adam) they will be rubbing there hands together with the money they make not saying they have had lots of dosh out of the Hard woring Postman and Ladies
Bongos wrote:Our manager wanted the revision in in November and at our Work Time learning we said Merry Christmas then he changed his mind
Looks like Feb or March
Money saving on you bike
Never mind once the Share Holders get there teeth into it (Cameron and co or even Leighton or Adam) they will be rubbing there hands together with the money they make not saying they have had lots of dosh out of the Hard woring Postman and Ladies
is there a subliminal message in here somewhere??...i've read this post a few times and still reads like the da vinci code.
royalwud wrote:(nottingham) we just had a mini revision in november, i.e.,( shifted a street or to)
Now that was three months ago & we haven't see any of the £200 that was in the 2010 agreement
we were all promised :vcfo
Which leads me to believe that unless the revisions encompass delivery methods and/or wsm then strictly speaking they are not true revisions under the terms of the 2010 and Beyond and may not actually be paid.
so wtf are offices agreeing to let them bring it in via exct action and sh** on them watch mgmt suffer
where are our esteemed leaders in all of this take it all to disagreement everywhere, agree to nothing go to stage 3 then demand rule 13
that will wake lazy folkers up. force attention on senior cwu leadership
Dingo seems to have become almost a joke now on this forum which is a shame as i can see his intentions are good, his downfall is his never ending defense of this terrible agreement, if he were to atleast admit that it were in some ways wrong and a mistake i'm sure he would get some respect to admit that, but i guess thats never gonna happen, such a shame.
royalwud wrote:(nottingham) we just had a mini revision in november, i.e.,( shifted a street or to)
Now that was three months ago & we haven't see any of the £200 that was in the 2010 agreement
we were all promised :vcfo
Which leads me to believe that unless the revisions encompass delivery methods and/or wsm then strictly speaking they are not true revisions under the terms of the 2010 and Beyond and may not actually be paid.
What is a revsion then surely it is where duties are revised. BT210 makes no mention as to what a non sequenced mail revison entails. If duties are revised then the £200 should be paid ASAP after membership acceptance and ideally "upon deployment" which is the phrase in the agreement.
Big Daz wrote:]
What is a revsion then surely it is where duties are revised. BT210 makes no mention as to what a non sequenced mail revison entails. If duties are revised then the £200 should be paid ASAP after membership acceptance and ideally "upon deployment" which is the phrase in the agreement.
I don't want to seem to be defending him but he does his best for the members within his purview, I am sure. His downfall is his undying belief that the CWU has made the right decisions and that this agreement was a good thing and yet time after time it has been shown that there are glaring faults from the trivial to the downright criminal.
Our H&S Rep brought to the attention of the management the problem of LCTs picking up dog crap on the wheels, these obviously have to be folded and put in the van when the need arises. This highlights two points, the health and safety issue of handling something covered in dog crap and the secondary point of people reverting to pouches because of the problem and thereby leaving themselves open to disciplinary proceedings.
If proper trials had been carried out instead of the headlong rush to implement Royal Mails work plan then many of these problems could have been highlighted and properly dealt with. Having now spent the money on Christ knows how many LCTs, this is a problem. It's all very well saying watch where you're going but how many times has anyone stood in it let alone pulled a trolley behind sight unseen.
The ADR took over for 37 days whilst I was off sick so Ive missed all the fun and games. Nothing was agreed by the mbrs when I came back to work but we are closer than before my sick leave so good work there from the ADR
Baically the message the mbrs have given the ADR is that major change is unwanted and not sensible when the WSM/DM revision could be only 12 months away. The sequnced mail machines are due to be in place and running by November this year.
Whilst I was off the mbrs ditched attendance patterns and asked for the proposal to reduce the rural deliveries by one duty to be withdrawn. This was agreed at regional director level. Rather than full scale re plotting of walks it will be collect the assigned piece of delivery straight from the frame and every one stays on their duty.
We have 4 vacant duties so two will be filled by the two OPGs whose delivery is absorbed. The two remaining vacant duties will be advertised. The two duties chosen for this are the two we are asked to absorb at the moment under the flexibilty agreement phase 3 so its pretty much carry on but RML get 80 hours savings from that. A few minor bits and bobs to the revision to sort when the DOM comes back from leave then I will go the mbrs via a meeting and ask them if this is acceptable as its pretty much what they asked for. If they offer no dissent on a majority scale then its away we go sign the revison off implement and wait for the £200 which the DSM has confirmed will be paid for implementing a revised delivery duty/SA collection duty set I have laid out above.
Bongos wrote:Our manager wanted the revision in in November and at our Work Time learning we said Merry Christmas then he changed his mind
Looks like Feb or March
Money saving on you bike
Never mind once the Share Holders get there teeth into it (Cameron and co or even Leighton or Adam) they will be rubbing there hands together with the money they make not saying they have had lots of dosh out of the Hard woring Postman and Ladies
Thats one way of making up for crap wages. Anyway I`m glad to hear Leighton and Crozier are still with us.
Big Daz wrote:Yes and No if that makes any kind of sense?
Baically the message the mbrs have given the ADR is that major change is unwanted and not sensible when the WSM/DM revision could be only 12 months away. The sequnced mail machines are due to be in place and running by November this year.
Our revision took place in November following the principles of the agreement, which is Delivery Methods and WSM begins in February for implementation in March. We didn't think it made sense either but as I understand the agreement neither the CWU nor Royal Mail would accept any hindrance to progress without sufficient cause.................. does the members not thinking it sensible fall under that category? Despite the expenditure made to modernise.............you could hardly call what your office has done modernisation, your office didn't think it was sensible
It seems to me that to expect £200 for juggling a few hours and duties around simply is not under the terms of the agreement. Most offices have done that as a matter of course year on year without any payment whatsoever.
theboropostie wrote:Ours is at level 3 disagreement which might have something to do with things grinding to a halt
Thought you's already had a revision in your office, well in one sector?
Has that gone tits up. and the other sectors gone to disagreement as a result?
Big Daz wrote:Yes and No if that makes any kind of sense?
Baically the message the mbrs have given the ADR is that major change is unwanted and not sensible when the WSM/DM revision could be only 12 months away. The sequnced mail machines are due to be in place and running by November this year.
Our revision took place in November following the principles of the agreement, which is Delivery Methods and WSM begins in February for implementation in March. We didn't think it made sense either but as I understand the agreement neither the CWU nor Royal Mail would accept any hindrance to progress without sufficient cause.................. does the members not thinking it sensible fall under that category? Despite the expenditure made to modernise.............you could hardly call what your office has done modernisation, your office didn't think it was sensible
It seems to me that to expect £200 for juggling a few hours and duties around simply is not under the terms of the agreement. Most offices have done that as a matter of course year on year without any payment whatsoever.
Yet again you overlook the FACT that BT2010 gives nowt as to what a non sequenced mail revision entails. By default it can be anything that CWU/RML further down the chain agree on and they have agreed to to self starter revisions due to RM not having as many planners as it would like and for the CWU wanting to get attendance patterns in (for those D.O's who want them) and to get the mbrs the first payment ASAP)
The mbrs expect £200 for the very simple reason thats senior mangement and senior reps in our area have told them thats what will happen. I trust you support RML keeping their word to the workforce and paying up ASAP after the revised duty set has been accepted and signed off?
No I don't agree to monies being paid out for pissant so called revisions. The fact that there are supposedly insufficient planners, a theory which doesn't hold water, does not give licence to the agreement being changed for some. Small offices should require only minimal planner input.
I trust that you would agree that the workforce WHO AGREED THE 2010 AND BEYOND stick to their word and implement the revisions as detailed in that agreement. You seem to conveniently forget that the non-sequenced revision entailed the delivery methods, park and loop, HCTs and LCTs........or do you consider them not to be sensible too.
