Sevenoaks revision

[smokerjim]

Just to let you know that the rep has withdrawn all union involvement in the revision ( 6 weeks before it's s'posed to go live - not that it looked likely to go live on that date imo,even if the union bent over backwards to push it through ). No other definate news ( not seen the rep ), but I don't care, I'll keep on doing the job properly before, during and after the revision, happy in the knowledge that if I get any grief, I can demand testing & if I prove I'm up to snuff, hours will need to be put back

[wf]

Now goin on 9 months into our revision
Everyone doing job properly
Very very big office
But brought in a division at a time
No sign of hours being put in
Out of around 15opgs in the division
6 on long term sick including two bosses
Every threat in the book has been used
Don't hold your breath on the hours getting
Put in .I've watched helpless while 20. 30
And 40 year men have been broken.
Union said "prove it doesn't work "
To the men
9 months later still f all

[BELIAL]

Six weeks to go to implementation of our revision and union input is to date_ 0 . We might go to disagreement

[wf]

Sorry to be extremely negative
But ours went to stage 3 disagreement
And again f all

[Glenno]

From what I am hearing the Whole of Kent Invicta Branch have withdrawn from Revision Activity

[steven100]

We voted for revisions, accept your fate.

[Glenno]

We voted for revisions, accept your fate.

Have you had your's then Steven?

[TrueBlueTerrier]

We voted for revisions, accept your fate.

Accept your fate

I would accept my fate if it was fair and achievable, but if people are willing to accept a kick in the nuts or a 9mm in the head - go figure.

[wf]

We voted for revisions, accept your fate.

Unfortunately that's true .
Tho u have to agree that there was
Quite a push from Cwu to get it voted in
So maybe they should sort it now as they
Didn't listen to concerns prior to the vote

[smokerjim]

We voted for revisions, accept your fate.

Unfortunately that's true .
Tho u have to agree that there was
Quite a push from Cwu to get it voted in
So maybe they should sort it now as they
Didn't listen to concerns prior to the vote

In response to both the above, as has been repeatedly said elsewhere, there is a world of difference between what HQ imagines is experienced at the coalface, and what we, at the coalface, actually experience

[wf]

Ours was recommended to us by our
Rep and deputy rep ,who both work
In same place as us
It was not dave and Billy standing preaching
At our work time learning to the naive
Penny pinching short sighted gullible ,easy
Swayed bunch of postmen
Why did the reps buy into this crap
They should of known better

[Martin Walsh]

What members voted for and most CWU Branch`s as well as the executive recommended was the National Agreement on Business Transformation.

Yes the delivery part of the revison agreed that in order to get a £1000 two delivery revisons would have to take place.

But it also agreed the 6 step process , the 1 in 4 Saturdays , there is nothing in the agreement which says you have to work 100 BSI either indoor or outdoors. Ultimately the revison has to be acceptable and voted on by the membership.

The reason why Royal Mail are moving away from introducing too many outdoor revisons is that Royal Mail`s outdoor revison best praticse strategy is either not making the savings they thought it would or even when revisons are agreed that when they deploy them they become disasters.

This is why the new strategy which Rob Jenson who is now the National Delivery and Collections Director has devloped is that they wish to concentrate on indoor revisons. Why because they can plug problems indoors and they generally can make savings outdoor due to absorption.

There are implications of only indoor revisons as most have pointed out , ie it will reduce full time jobs and put more pressure on start times. This is why the joint statement states that there will be further talks.

Now what I want to see more off is offices who do not think Royal Mail`s revison proposal is acceptable then dont agree it. There has been no executive action on revisons as yet. The Nottingham issue concerns trying to discpline of a senior union official and the imposed 1 in 10 absorption plan.

My advice would be to all reps is that they do not need to agree

revisons which are based on 100 BSi indoor or outdoor

They do not need to agree longer spans if 1. they dont wish to have them all be it might affect the amount of full time jobs they have or 2. if there are not weight solutions in place.

If an office wants the 1 in 4 there should be no agreement on any revison until this has been resolved. Remember the generic part of the agreement states that the workplan must support the attendance patterns.

Plus the members in the office must have the final say on the duty set. Remember they are the ones who have to work the plan. Divisional Reps and Area Reps can advise but the call must be that of the local rep and the membership. If the membership reject the agreement then the area rep and divisonal reps must help them get the improvements which the office want in order to get an acceptable agreement which the members will endorse.

Those who say everything is now done local. Well I have to say I have been in the industry since 1984 and it has always been thay way. In fact prior to 1992 when the Branch amalgamations took place , the situration was most offices were actual local branch`s.

Equally what is the alternative that CWU HQs agrees the details of every single delivery office revison by remote control from 150 the Boardway without knowing what the members from each unit wants in the way of start times , delivery spans , earnings opportunites , finish times , part and full time ratio , resigns etc. I know most units would not accept that and there would be a massive outcry.

[gb93]

[quote="

The reason why Royal Mail are moving away from introducing too many outdoor revisons is that Royal Mail`s outdoor revison best praticse strategy is either not making the savings they thought it would or even when revisons are agreed that when they deploy them they become disasters.

This is why the new strategy which Rob Jenson who is now the National Delivery and Collections Director has devloped is that they wish to concentrate on indoor revisons. Why because they can plug problems indoors and they generally can make savings jobs they in
Is this an admission that P&L and delivery methods has been shelved ?
What happens about transformation payments & 39 hour week which was agreed by members ?

[Martin Walsh]

I am not convinced all delivery methods will be shelved as part of Jensons strategy is to have a dedicated team of 20 national planners who will asist the local planners. However what is clear is that the number of delivery revisons they have acctually introduced almost 16 months after the BTA was bought in is less than 20% of the total offices they wanted to have delivery methods revsions within the orginal 3 year time span.

Royal Mail had parked significant numbers of CDVs in a field in Hampshire now a lot have been parked in any available spaces in mail centres. For example in London we have CDVs parked in East , South and the Mount for other areas of the country and have been left idle for months.

Royal Mail`s revisons based on park and loop have in the main been disasters based on the full tools. The only ones which have worked are when the union has changed the plan and not based it on what geo route or IWT says. Some credit has to be given to the detail which is in the delivery part of the agree which does allow full in put and does allow for negotations especially if Royal Mail are pushing the 100 BSI mantra.

Royal Mail have change the angle of their attack which is now going to be based on indoor revisons and whilst not turning off completely outdoor revisons they are now pushing indoor revisons ahead of outdoor revisons. In the North East however the divisonal reps were given a presentation on the new plan and they wanted offices to agree an indoor revison on step 2 of the 6 step process which would be totally unacceptable.

The talks which have been agreed with the joint statement are underway and will hopefully pave a way for the future. The 39 hour week and the lump sums are definately issues to be resolved in the talks.

[wayoutman]

the CWU should be pushing for our bit of the BTA.

stuff the lapsing and P&L.

we want what we agreed, 39hr week, 1 in 4 sats off, weight off the shoulder, £1,000 etc etc etc.

just because their bit has gone sour i dont think we should be negotiating new agreements at all until we ALL get our reward from the 2010 agreement.