Drivers

[hans solo]

well lets put it to the test then vol redundency im up for it but rm arnt cost it will cost them big time cos everyone would go with long enough service and ft status.
i cant drive so i also like the idea of a personal chauffer and he can wait all day on me i aint in no rush for anyone g.i.u.t.

[not me]

]
nonsense
its not a contractual requirement(unless on the newer contracts),I have a licence and dont drive
using your licence for work puts you at risk of having an accident(fault or non fault) that could have a bearing on a drivers insurance
RM did nothing for me to get my licence so they dont dictate what i do with it

No custard it's not nonsense..it's the line in the sand moving that's all.
The new contracts do specify driving so your having an accident/insurance argument is bogus.
The old contracts...well you don't drive and i take it you've never driven for them so you're OK as long as there's a non-driving job for you but if you've already been driver assessed and you decide not to drive you could find yourself surplus to requirements and farmed out to another office.
As i pointed out...the job is evolving,driving will be a part of that evolution...non-drivers will be very rare indeed.
The argument that it's your license won't wash in a private company either...i think we both know that.

you assume wrong
i hold a licence and have driven for RM
I now do not.
surplus smurplus
8 hours in an office is 8 hours
its the same line they trot out in our DO all the time
argument its my licence?
well are RM going to sack me for not using my licence when i didnt take a position that required it
its simple. if you dont provide your licence for RM to check then they cannot legally allow you to drive
then what?

[fishtank]

if you dont provide your licence for RM to check then they cannot legally allow you to drive
then what?

Then your choice of duty will be increasingly limited custard that's all.
I never mentioned anything about sacking or anything about being forced to drive just that the business appears to be moving towards almost complete reliance on drivers and that will obviously limit the choices available to non-drivers,ultimately it could lead to you being considered surplus to requirements at least in the D.O. of your choice.
If that doesn't worry you then that's fine but i think you are in the minority.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

I don't see how they can force you to drive just because you can.

Thy won't force you but when the choice comes down to: Drive for Royal Mail or leave because there are no jobs you are willing, but are able, to do - You'll need to make a choice.

Its that simple, blunt and unpalatable I know, but unless you can come up with a third option there are not many choices.

[daveyeff]

I don't see how they can force you to drive just because you can.

Thy won't force you but when the choice comes down to: Drive for Royal Mail or leave because there are no jobs you are willing, but are able, to do - You'll need to make a choice.

Its that simple, blunt and unpalatable I know, but unless you can come up with a third option there are not many choices.

as it was stated before, maybe they should bring back rm driving instructers, i know i would opt to take my test for free. it would be cheaper for them, to do that, than all the evr,s that could result from a total driving policy being brought in.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

as it was stated before, maybe they should bring back rm driving instructers, i know i would opt to take my test for free. it would be cheaper for them, to do that, than all the evr,s that could result from a total driving policy being brought in.

Hopefully the Union have played this scenario and have plans in place.

[DGP1]

When I started there was a requirement to have a licence..............we lost several new starts because the didn't

Anyway, I like having a van so I'll take the risk of having an accident for that extra bit of freedom it gives me.

[not me]

When I started there was a requirement to have a licence..............we lost several new starts because the didn't

Anyway, I like having a van so I'll take the risk of having an accident for that extra bit of freedom it gives me.

the problem i had/have is some duties on P&L the drivers were getting shafted
the DIMs were allowing a bastardised version of P&L (and still do) that meant the drivers on some duties got shafted
so when my licence was due for renewl for its photo
i didnt bother (not driving just now)
combined with now doing zero OT

[OnAFlyer]

I don't see how they can force you to drive just because you can.

... the job of postman is continually evolving ...

Not evolving, fishtank. Evolution has a point. Evolution is nature's means of getting better, stronger, fitter for purpose.

This whole driving around thing is completely pointless, and worse, it's useless as well.

Using vans is actually quicker - using trollies, PDA's, 2 people working at completely different speeds and walks that are just too long are what make P&L fail.

Nobody in my office who doesn't want to drive is made to, though it's been made clear to them that they could be utilised elsewhere if the situation needed it (if we were in a situation where there weren't enough drivers)

I can understand people not wanting to drive for RM full stop, but these are staff that used their own cars for years right up until P&L - I don't get it.

[ElvisGaddafi]

I don't see how they can force you to drive just because you can.

Thy won't force you but when the choice comes down to: Drive for Royal Mail or leave because there are no jobs you are willing, but are able, to do - You'll need to make a choice.

Its that simple, blunt and unpalatable I know, but unless you can come up with a third option there are not many choices.

If this means redundancy, I'll take it.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

I don't see how they can force you to drive just because you can.

Thy won't force you but when the choice comes down to: Drive for Royal Mail or leave because there are no jobs you are willing, but are able, to do - You'll need to make a choice.

Its that simple, blunt and unpalatable I know, but unless you can come up with a third option there are not many choices.

If this means redundancy, I'll take it.

Unlikely - Redundancies as far as I know can only be offered if the job no longer exists, and that no replacement will be put into that job for a certain amount of time. If you turn down a position that does exist and that you are trained to do, well to be honest I have no idea what would happen next - does anyone have an inkling.


Now if your contract does not mention driving (mine doesn't) and you have not been trained by Royal Mail, then I think you may have a chance of redundancy because the job has changed but again I am not totally sure of this. We realy need someone who knows employment law to checek this thread out. Anyone know someone at HQ they could point in this direction.