Are P&L revisions still going ahead???

[fishtank]

In some areas P&M2007 was never really implemented.
In some areas BT2010 will be stalled due to local issues,lack of planners etc and may never be really implemented.

There are only two really surprising points.
I.The "some" areas are always the same areas.
2.The leadership in "some" areas are always the most vocal in their support for these agreements.

Why do areas that throw all of their considerable weight behind these agreements appear to be the least keen to implement them?

Answer on a postcard...should take a month to get here....

[dvbuk55]

Ah yes...........the "we agree in principle BUT we are a special case, there are other issues, we have agreed locally, we don't think it's a sensible solution in our particular office, we just don't want change" brigade. Which seems to be restricted to the same areas.

[DGP1]

In some areas P&M2007 was never really implemented.
In some areas BT2010 will be stalled due to local issues,lack of planners etc and may never be really implemented.

There are only two really surprising points.
I.The "some" areas are always the same areas.
2.The leadership in "some" areas are always the most vocal in their support for these agreements.

Why do areas that throw all of their considerable weight behind these agreements appear to be the least keen to implement them?

Answer on a postcard...should take a month to get here....

[Cedar_Room]

Hearing our revision has been shifted back AGAIN until end of March.

Thing is,we are so short staffed nobody can be freed up to go & work with the planner as there's nobody to cover their walk.

Royal Mail wont take on any new bod's cos they dont think they'll need them once the revision kicks in!

Catch 22.

[Big Daz]

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.

Try as I might I just cant seem to find anything in BT2010 that says the non sequenced mail revision entails the delivery methods, park and loop, HCTs and LCTs........

Please DO post up the relevant section word for word I have obvisouly missed it

[robd]

a very astute post Fishtank,for some,even job and finish is still alive and well.
What i find the most interesting aspect,is the union should be a cohesive organisation,yet you can have different conditions dependent on what area or branch you belong to,an ironic postcode lottery.
The latest decision on D2D's is even more divisive,2 people can work the same hours,yet one could have to prep and deliver 5 households,with the other having none at all,how on earth is that a fair and equal workload?
more than ever,it's become every man for himself,and no matter how much the union shy away and blame the members,the CWU is responsible for this ridiculous practice.

[Big Daz]

I have no issue with HCT and park and loop as its the workload that appears to be the predominant factor in causing delivery methods revisons to be struggling.

I am finding bike and pouch to be increasingly unsuitable for the increasing level of packets and packages my delivery is having. A HCT seems so much more straightforward.

That said most of the CWU mbrs/OPGS in my D.O think switching away from bikes and pouches is crap and they dont want it. To say they are not looking forward to delivery methods coming along to our D.O in Year 2 of the transformation period is a understatement.


In terms of not being sensible its all about replotting of delivery walks and resigns and ending up on a different duty and re learning the IPS and then doing it ALL OVER AGAIN in 12 months time when 39 hr week sequenced mail and delivery methods come along.

The mbrs still dont see the sense in having two revisions their view is do it ALL in one go.

[Big Daz]

robd

The idea was that DTD into workload meant that with DTD becoming a measured workload the amount any duty gets is taken into account so when revisons take place duties end up being equal. Post revison DTD shouldnt make a blind bit of difference to equal workload.

[AnotherLimey]

robd

The idea was that DTD into workload meant that with DTD becoming a measured workload the amount any duty gets is taken into account so when revisons take place duties end up being equal. Post revison DTD shouldnt make a blind bit of difference to equal workload.

That was the "idea" yes, but in reality?

[fishtank]

The mbrs still dont see the sense in having two revisions their view is do it ALL in one go.

The reason is simple.
No matter what anyone says or how anyone dresses it up these revisions are savings plans.
Royal Mail wanted at least 2 and hopefully 3 savings plans during the lifetime of this agreement.
Nothing proves this more than your own revision Daz.
There is absolutely nothing in it for the members beyond the £200...which would have more or less been theirs anyway under the old colleague share plan.
This is not a reflection on you Daz,simply the reality of the situation without the spin from HQ

[robd]

robd

The idea was that DTD into workload meant that with DTD becoming a measured workload the amount any duty gets is taken into account so when revisons take place duties end up being equal. Post revison DTD shouldnt make a blind bit of difference to equal workload.

Nice 'idea' yes,but is the revision based on an average number of weekly D2D's?
reality is many offices get no official time to prep,and that is the problem,this extra workload isn't factored in,exactly why many revisions are failing.
Even the CWU was working on the assumption of an average 500 delivery points,locally some walks have 3 times as many!!...even if the manager used this calculation,you'd be on a loser straight away.
reality again is managers are not sat running software to determine worload on a daily basis,there preping walks and delivering.

[Big Daz]

At my D.O IWT said 156 hours saving on indoor work and that takes into account 4 sets of DTD I dread to think what IWT would say if DTD wasnt in it. Of course if the time allowed in IWT for prepping of DTD is way off the mark then problems will ocurr. Thinking back to the DTD time document from last year, I cant prep my DTD in that time at all.

[robd]

At my D.O IWT said 156 hours saving on indoor work and that takes into account 4 sets of DTD I dread to think what IWT would say if DTD wasnt in it. Of course if the time allowed in IWT for prepping of DTD is way off the mark then problems will ocurr. Thinking back to the DTD time document from last year, I cant prep my DTD in that time at all.

The same document that actually gives you less time to prep,as your worload(D2D's)increases

[fishtank]

At my D.O IWT said 156 hours saving on indoor work and that takes into account 4 sets of DTD I dread to think what IWT would say if DTD wasnt in it.

That's the biggest con of all "D2D into Workload" and the IWT.
D2D would always have had to be included in the IWT whether it was "in workload" or not because it was always part of your daily workload....it's not as if you had to do it in your own time is it?

[andy2007]

Hearing our revision has been shifted back AGAIN until end of March.

Thing is,we are so short staffed nobody can be freed up to go & work with the planner as there's nobody to cover their walk.

Royal Mail wont take on any new bod's cos they dont think they'll need them once the revision kicks in!

Catch 22.

Perhaps you could remind them that they have access to Agency Workers.

Just more evidence that they can't think anything through!