Transformation Lump Sums Tracker

[Geezer]

In Attachment


Transformation Lump Sums Tracker
DRT Report - wk 42
MC-Area Dist-Logistics progress reports 25 Jan 2011
NDG Meeting 27 January 2011 - Narrative summary
V2 Peters Graphs NDG 27 Jan 2011


=====================================================================================================================================================

Dear Colleagues

Please also note that the attached also covers the further involvment of the Independent Chair who assisted as part of the dispute in 2009 and that Royal Mail have agreed in principle for a series of local reps meetings to take place on the deployment of the agreement.

As you will gather from the contents, all is not going according to plan.

=====================================================================================================================================================

Date: Thursday, 10 February, 2011, 8:54



Dear Colleague

Please find attached a copy of the Transformation Lump Sums Tracker which you might find useful. The information attached will be two weeks old as the tracker is working two weeks in arrears due to the amount of data that is required.


Regards

================================================================================================================================================



COMMUNICATION WORKERS UNION


Circulated to the Postal DOCUMENT A
Executive on 8th February 2011 PE No: 21/11
For consideration at the
Postal Executive Meeting
to be held on 8th February 2011



BUSINESS TRANSFORMATION AGREEMENT/STRATEGIC INVOLVEMENT MEETING

In recent weeks the PEC has raised concerns over the lack of quality and factual information to enable Royal Mail and CWU to assess progress to date on the deployment of the Business Transformation Agreement. This was against the background of a number of verbal reports and comments, mostly anecdotal, stating that in some locations there are growing problems.

Whilst it is inevitable that change on such an unprecedented scale and in such a large organisation was always going to be very difficult, it is fair to say we have reached the point where we must put in place more robust measures. There is a real danger that if the national parties cannot succinctly pin down the nature of the main problems and take appropriate action to resolve them – then all aspects of the agreement will be in jeopardy.

This situation has been discussed with Roger Poole and Peter Harwood and as a result Roger has written to all members of the National Deployment Group formalising the agenda in a way that should help everybody identify problems and take corrective action. The new agenda was introduced for the first time at the NDG meeting on 27th January.

In future the intention will be to produce a better formal record of the NDG meetings, which in turn can be circulated to the PEC. This will undoubtedly help both parties track problems – but in itself will still not provide us with an answer to all the issues associated with deployment.

It is self evident that business performance trends, different interpretations of the agreement, quality of service and whether or not the level of savings are achievable will continue to manifest underlying difficulties. In response we must find quicker ways to get issues out on the table and deal with them in the way the agreement envisaged. Therefore, we are recommending the following actions to help us gain a better understanding of all the problems associated with deployment.

1. From now on progress on business transformation will be subject to PEC documentation at the statutory monthly meeting.

This documentation will include minutes of the NDG and the stats covering progress in each function. The latest headline stats are attached to this document.

The officers will discuss the best format for us to place this documentation before the Postal Executive. This will need to ensure a consistent and coordinated approach, whilst providing the opportunity for major issues to be documented in their own right.

2. WCM will be the subject of a separate monthly documented report to the PEC. Again, the officers will determine the best format for this report.

3. Arising from PEC documentation we will develop and agree a format for regular updates to Branches and representatives on the progress of business transformation.

4. It has been agreed with Royal Mail to hold a further joint regional/divisional meeting and this should be diarised before the end of February. We will ensure that this joint meeting is used to re-emphasise the need for the regional/divisional parties to work in accordance with the Deployment Framework Guidelines and provide consistent reports on business transformation progress.

Furthermore, the next divisional reps meeting will focus on our own reporting processes and will be used to identify any common problems with the agreement. We will also ensure that Business Co-ordinating Committees have a renewed focus on deployment.

5. Royal Mail has agreed, in principle to provide the facility for local reps to be released in order to attend a series of meetings around the country. A schedule for these meetings will be concluded by next week and will commence in March. The meetings will be led by the national officers and will focus, amongst other issues, on BT deployment. The intention is for these meetings to be preceded by a major communication to members’ home addresses.

Strategic Involvement

The latest Strategic Involvement meeting was held on the 27th January. At the meeting Royal Mail presented all their latest trends in business performance. The key message arising from this was that revenue is dropping faster than expected and that business transformation was not progressing as fast as the company anticipated. The company then explained that they had amended their plan to recognise that business transformation is now unlikely to be completed until 2015/16. This raised some very important issues over whether or not the company can commit to the aspects of the agreement that benefit our members. In response to the Union raising these concerns Royal Mail gave the necessary verbal assurances. However, we will be seeking such assurances in writing alongside a fuller explanation of the rationale behind this latest development.

To assist the PEC gain a better understanding Royal Mail has agreed to provide a presentation to the Postal Executive on the 17th February.

Summary

The range of measures outlined above should provide the Executive with better information and allow the national parties to accurately assess where we are with deployment of the Business Transformation Agreement.



Recommendation: That we endorse the policy lines stated.




Dave Ward
Deputy General Secretary (P)

[jessicarabbit]

Blah blah blah revisions will only happen now when RM see savings oportunities the doomsday clock of privatisation is tick tick ticking get the cash out quick before we are split up and sold to the highest bidder. £200 maybe given if RM see £££££££ in return

[dvbuk55]

Revenue falling, revisions stalling and yet to hear the big guns everything in the garden is rosy and yet there is a need for a transformation of the union? As the old saying goes "All my eye and Betty Martin".

Quite clearly the revisions aren't working and many areas are failing to abide by the 2010 Agreement.............which according to RM is now going to extend into 2015.........for which, as far as we know, there has been NO agreement...........unless of course it's behind closed doors.

We went into revision in November and have still to be paid...............it looks a little like RM are saving up to pay a few offices when they have the money. We go into the second revision next month.............chances are I'll be retired before we see that money, and before the review of the D&M revisions take place at this rate.

[fishtank]

NDG Meeting 27 January 2011

The data attached reflects the position as at the end of last week. Headline summary points are:

• The number of delivery revisions deployed has increased from 554 (last NDG) to 598. However, this is still 335 behind a scheduled deployed total of 933.
• The number of Mail Centre’s achieving their first payment trigger is now 23. Please note that the previously recorded figure of 22 units had not included Aberdeen MC, as this unit had only achieved the target WS percentage on one occasion (week 38). However, as payment has already been made to colleagues in the unit, it has now been included in the national total.
• The number of Area Distribution revisions deployed now stands at 52, an increase of two since the last NDG.
• The number of deployed revisions within the Logistics function remains at 69.
• The total percentage of frontline colleagues achieving a transformation payment has increased from 34.65% (last NDG) to 37.06%. This percentage represents 50,837 people out of a total of 137,000.
• Total amount of cash paid in transformation payments has increased from £12.4m to £13.08m

[dvbuk55]

It's fine and dandy to set out who has been paid BUT as has been shown on this forum, monies have been paid out for something less than was the agreed revision process. That would mean that the true picture is still not known by either party if the truth was to be told, more nacht und nebel.

As for savings being made.......I would strongly suspect that there has been less of a saving and more of an overspend since the revision last year. We are still running a night shift that was supposed to be "interim" 3 months down the line. Perhaps that would come under the heading of a problem.

[Big Daz]

RML obvisouly didnt anticipate that at my DO mbrs are very hostile to change, thus meaning getting agreement from the local CWU mbrs to a revised duty set is very tricky.

[dvbuk55]

RML obvisouly didnt anticipate that at my DO mbrs are very hostile to change, thus meaning getting agreement from the local CWU mbrs to a revised duty set is very tricky.

That's the whole point though BD, being hostile to change is NOT a reason not to move forward. There has to be a legitimate reason and a reasonable alternative otherwise you will find the changes imposed regardless of the hostility and there would be no help from the CWU because they too are committed to change by agreement and therefore by default so are the members. The fact that the changes aren't going to work doesn't seem to make any difference.

[fishtank]

RML obvisouly didnt anticipate that at my DO mbrs are very hostile to change, thus meaning getting agreement from the local CWU mbrs to a revised duty set is very tricky.

I think to be fair Daz......any members would and should be hostile towards what is in essence a savings plan dressed as a revision which brings no benefits to the members other than a £200 bribe.

I salute your members for holding out so long.

[Big Daz]

To start with attendance patterns and delivery route replotting were issues at the first ballot. Obviously they shake things up a bit in terms of what the DO will look like post revision. Original prposals were altered somewhat but the mbrs still werent happy and voted no for a 2nd time. In the end the proposals voted in this week was to make the two duties absorb a permanent change so the hours comes off the budget, take out a 10 hour weekly SA duty, reduce a Vacant floater duty from 32 hours to 22 hours, remove 15 hours weekly of lapsed SA hours and redeploy the 10 hours from the vacant floater duty to link up with our 20 hour contract man who then goes to a 30 hour contract and starts delivering to the half built new 1250 properties estate. A few other minor operational changes will take place but they do not involve savings.

[dvbuk55]

To start with attendance patterns and delivery route replotting were issues at the first ballot. Obviously they shake things up a bit in terms of what the DO will look like post revision. Original prposals were altered somewhat but the mbrs still werent happy and voted no for a 2nd time. In the end the proposals voted in this week was to make the two duties absorb a permanent change so the hours comes off the budget, take out a 10 hour weekly SA duty, reduce a Vacant floater duty from 32 hours to 22 hours, remove 15 hours weekly of lapsed SA hours and redeploy the 10 hours from the vacant floater duty to link up with our 20 hour contract man who then goes to a 30 hour contract and starts delivering to the half built new 1250 properties estate. A few other minor operational changes will take place but they do not involve savings.

Exactly how many HCT and P&L duties does that encompass? and how many full time duties were created?

[Big Daz]

RML obvisouly didnt anticipate that at my DO mbrs are very hostile to change, thus meaning getting agreement from the local CWU mbrs to a revised duty set is very tricky.

I think to be fair Daz......any members would and should be hostile towards what is in essence a savings plan dressed as a revision which brings no benefits to the members other than a £200 bribe.

I salute your members for holding out so long.

Attendance patterns were on the agenda originally but the mbrs didnt like how they translated into a everyday operational reality. More Saturdays off yes attendance patterns no. Being on a fixed day system (Mbrs voted for that by a whopping great big majority 5 years ago) meant that the number of Saturday off every week duties went down by having attendance patterns. The savings and new duty set we voted for are IMHO viable, take the last three days the troops have proven that OF THEIR OWN FREE WILL. Those of us who think thats a bit daft are left shaking our heads in disbelief. In fact the troops have been showing RML that loosing two urban bike duties is viable since Spring 2009. We all want the right staffing level for a D.O but sometimes its possible that you need less staff. For my D.O the current/just voted for duty set requires more staff than we currently have in post. We now have three vacant FT duties and one vacant PT duty. As a PT who has opted for FT employment I get to apply for one of the vacant FT duties. Hopefully I will get one otherwise its FT reserve for a year

[fishtank]

I'm not questioning whether there were real savings to be made or not.
Just whether turkeys should vote for Christmas...when there is nothing in it for them other than the carving knife.

[Big Daz]

To start with attendance patterns and delivery route replotting were issues at the first ballot. Obviously they shake things up a bit in terms of what the DO will look like post revision. Original prposals were altered somewhat but the mbrs still werent happy and voted no for a 2nd time. In the end the proposals voted in this week was to make the two duties absorb a permanent change so the hours comes off the budget, take out a 10 hour weekly SA duty, reduce a Vacant floater duty from 32 hours to 22 hours, remove 15 hours weekly of lapsed SA hours and redeploy the 10 hours from the vacant floater duty to link up with our 20 hour contract man who then goes to a 30 hour contract and starts delivering to the half built new 1250 properties estate. A few other minor operational changes will take place but they do not involve savings.

Exactly how many HCT and P&L duties does that encompass? and how many full time duties were created?

What a odd question, have you overlooked that my D.O falls into the tabletop revison catergory based on IWT ouputs?

Doing delivery methods was take off the agenda for 2010 at my DO by RML when they decided they did not have enough planners to spare or in your view want to send a planner to do a delivery methods/pegasus revision.


There has been no increase or decrease in the number of duties with HCT as the offical delivery method, that still stands as one duty and we have a total of two HCTs in the D.O. Ocassionally I use the spare one instead of a bike.

No FT duties were created as we are decreasing the number of FT duties by two which is a paper exercise as we absorb the same two duties under flexibilty agreement phase 3 and the troops make it work day in day out with time to spare often.


New FT duties WILL be created in time to allow for housing growth but I would not be surprised in the least if RML want to fund this via savings from the existing duty set up. d

[Big Daz]

I'm not questioning whether there were real savings to be made or not.
Just whether turkeys should vote for Christmas...when there is nothing in it for them other than the carving knife.

The turkeys voted to nip across the road do 10 mins delivery work then carry onto their normal delivery duty. Harmless and viable and well within utlise ALL paid work hours. We are contracted to work X amount of hours a week and if there is genuine time spare then whats the problem?

[fishtank]

The turkeys voted to nip across the road do 10 mins delivery work then carry onto their normal delivery duty. Harmless and viable and well within utlise ALL paid work hours. We are contracted to work X amount of hours a week and if there is genuine time spare then whats the problem?

If that's the case Daz...then the business has just wasted a great deal of money because that ain't a revision..
I applaud you and your members for getting Royal Mail to pay a BTA lump sum for the introduction of P&M2007...4 years after the fact.
Your manager,however...is a complete idiot.