Cutting off

[Dorset Plodder]

As always you speak a lot of sense FT. I wouldn't disagree with any of your points.

Slider has also made a lot of Relevant points that I would also agree with.

All I would say is, "Never judge a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes"! RM has a practice of NEVER making PTers up to FT, regardless of how many hours they are working Regularly. Don't know what the Record is (perhaps that should be a Separate Post ) as far as I'm concerned the CWU/RM should authorise ANYBODY that has worked, say a 12 month period on a certain number of hours, to be made up to a substansive FT Duty that matches those hours! Obviously the work is there!

Sorry I was thinking this Business actually gives a Damn about it's Employees...when in fact all it cares about is how much it's Managers can "Screw" out it's staff to fill their own pockets! Slider you are pissing in the wind...whilst I appreciate your situation....Plan your exit strategy and seek alternative employment.

[Sliders]

I don't think spillie was having a go,i think he was making the point that you don't take a part-time job expecting full-time hours.
You may hope for them,you may have no choice because there is bugger all else out there but you know that the only thing guaranteed at the end of the week is your contracted hours.
That is what you should base your decision whether or not to take the job on because the OT can dry up with no notice at all.
So the question is...if the OT was not available would you be forced to jack in a job that you accepted on the basis of part-time contracted hours?
It's not an attack it's a genuine question.

The answer to your question is, I scrape by, which is not much better than being on the dole, in fact it may be worse than dole, but at least I have the satisfaction of actually getting off my arse and doing something, instead of sponging off the state.

In todays climate, I like many others who are desperate for a job, do not have the luxury to pick and choose jobs on whether or not they are full time. I applied for jobs that were available regardless of the hours. Of course if I had a choice I would have choose a full time position and I applied for tons of them, but they are hard to get, at least they were for me, and I like many others have to make the best of what is available.

I am not saying roll over and let the mangers do what the hell they like, I am saying that if someone wants to work over time, its not a bad thing, especially if it means they can afford more things for their family and help them pay off debts. Its easy to say cut off when your on a 40 hours a week permanent contract, its not so easy when your on £170 odd pound a week and need the extra money to pay bills and survive.

And like I have said, if you want anyone to blame for the inbalance's in the percentage of full-time and part-time workers, then look no further than the union ,where many who complain about working overtime, are members. Royal Mails current recruitment polices were put in place well before I began working for them or many other part-timers who work for them, why did the union not complain about it then ? why do the union not complain about it now ? why did the senior full-time workers not stand up against these changes when they became implemented ? This is why I find it a bit hypocritical that some people blame part-timers that do not cut off, for the current Royal Mail recruitment policy.

[spilie]

sliders i take all your points but to blame the cwu is unfair , we have had numerous strikes over many things in the last 10-15 years and a lot of people would say we are worse of despite this, but to think it is a unions fault that companies all over the world are exploiting the workforce is naive , the situation you describe yourself to be in, is because thats the way big business likes it you are that eager to work and you will do it for less than the next man because its a job, i dont doubt your honesty or pride but we as workers shoulder some of the blame because we allow it to happen

[Sliders]

I know what your saying spilie, and I can see the point of view of the people who cut off; all I am saying is that its not as straight forward to say, don't do overtime as it stops full-time positions becoming available, especially when you need the money like I do.

I mean lets face it if the union cannot or do not want to do anything about the number of part-timers being recruited increasing and the number of full-timers decreasing, then what makes anyone think that, part-timers not doing overtime will change RM policy on this ? Because I don't think it would make a difference at all. if I or any other part-timer refused to overtime, what would stop managers from employing another temporary part-timer on a rolling contract to cover the parts of duties not being done ? I mean come on, there is no shortage of people just like me, who want a job, and would take a part-time job at the click of a finger, so I doubt RM would find it hard to find a new temp part-time employee to cover these cut off duties.

[cliffeyhez]

What a thoroughly civilised discussion!

[Lounge Lizard]

I know what your saying spilie, and I can see the point of view of the people who cut off; all I am saying is that its not as straight forward to say, don't do overtime as it stops full-time positions becoming available, especially when you need the money like I do.

I mean lets face it if the union cannot or do not want to do anything about the number of part-timers being recruited increasing and the number of full-timers decreasing, then what makes anyone think that, part-timers not doing overtime will change RM policy on this ? Because I don't think it would make a difference at all. if I or any other part-timer refused to overtime, what would stop managers from employing another temporary part-timer on a rolling contract to cover the parts of duties not being done ? I mean come on, there is no shortage of people just like me, who want a job, and would take a part-time job at the click of a finger, so I doubt RM would find it hard to find a new temp part-time employee to cover these cut off duties.

If it wasn't for the CWU there would be an even higher proportion of part timers. The CWU is widely criticised for the deal two years ago that stopped payment for delivering Door To Doors but don't forget that integrating Door To Doors into the workload was the only way of getting a commitment from Royal Mail of 75% full time, 25% part time. New to the company you evidently aren't aware that things could be worse than they are - and you yourself admit that you can't find better elsewhere.

[Cheetah]

I know what your saying spilie, and I can see the point of view of the people who cut off; all I am saying is that its not as straight forward to say, don't do overtime as it stops full-time positions becoming available, especially when you need the money like I do.

I mean lets face it if the union cannot or do not want to do anything about the number of part-timers being recruited increasing and the number of full-timers decreasing, then what makes anyone think that, part-timers not doing overtime will change RM policy on this ? Because I don't think it would make a difference at all. if I or any other part-timer refused to overtime, what would stop managers from employing another temporary part-timer on a rolling contract to cover the parts of duties not being done ? I mean come on, there is no shortage of people just like me, who want a job, and would take a part-time job at the click of a finger, so I doubt RM would find it hard to find a new temp part-time employee to cover these cut off duties.

If it wasn't for the CWU there would be an even higher proportion of part timers. The CWU is widely criticised for the deal two years ago that stopped payment for delivering Door To Doors but don't forget that integrating Door To Doors into the workload was the only way of getting a commitment from Royal Mail of 75% full time, 25% part time. New to the company you evidently aren't aware that things could be worse than they are - and you yourself admit that you can't find better elsewhere.

Valid point but what has the union done touphold the 75/25 agreement

Truth is RM can promise the CWU the world nowadays to sign off on a deal and know they do not have to deliver it . The last two disputes the union had the support of the workforce and made poor agreements, they know they've lost the support of their members

[Sliders]

I know what your saying spilie, and I can see the point of view of the people who cut off; all I am saying is that its not as straight forward to say, don't do overtime as it stops full-time positions becoming available, especially when you need the money like I do.

I mean lets face it if the union cannot or do not want to do anything about the number of part-timers being recruited increasing and the number of full-timers decreasing, then what makes anyone think that, part-timers not doing overtime will change RM policy on this ? Because I don't think it would make a difference at all. if I or any other part-timer refused to overtime, what would stop managers from employing another temporary part-timer on a rolling contract to cover the parts of duties not being done ? I mean come on, there is no shortage of people just like me, who want a job, and would take a part-time job at the click of a finger, so I doubt RM would find it hard to find a new temp part-time employee to cover these cut off duties.

If it wasn't for the CWU there would be an even higher proportion of part timers. The CWU is widely criticised for the deal two years ago that stopped payment for delivering Door To Doors but don't forget that integrating Door To Doors into the workload was the only way of getting a commitment from Royal Mail of 75% full time, 25% part time. New to the company you evidently aren't aware that things could be worse than they are - and you yourself admit that you can't find better elsewhere.

As cheetah said, if the CWU did such a fantastic job at getting RM to agree to the 75 % full-time 25 % part-time, then why are so many people complaining about RM not sticking to this agreement ?

[Lounge Lizard]

Valid points, Cheetah and Sliders, and I fully accept that the CWU has its limitations, but without them wouldn't we all be further down the line towards part time at best, self employed piecework like Netherlands at worst ?

[Sliders]

Valid points, Cheetah and Sliders, and I fully accept that the CWU has its limitations, but without them wouldn't we all be further down the line towards part time at best, self employed piecework like Netherlands at worst ?

Valid points from you also Lounge Lizard, there is no doubt the CWU has done a lot of good, but it has also made a lot of mistakes. And lets not forget that the top brass are getting well paid for there job, so maybe as members, we should expect more for our money.