ANNOUNCEMENT : ALL OF ROYAL MAIL'S EMPLOYMENT POLICIES (AGREEMENTS) AT A GLANCE (Updated 2021)... HERE

ANNOUNCEMENT : PLEASE BE AWARE WE ARE NOT ON FACEBOOK AT ALL!

Delivery Best Practice revision

Postal workers discussion forum. Discuss the day to day life in a Blue Shirt.
mondeoman1
Posts: 133
Joined: 28 Oct 2009, 18:19
Gender: Male

Delivery Best Practice revision

Post by mondeoman1 »

Hi, My office is just starting this revision and there are a couple of points i need help with please.

They say we have too many full time staff and need to lose 180 indoor hours. Proposal is to lose 9 staff which would give us a 60/40 ratio, does this go against agreement as it does say 75/25 split and should not be weakened.

Proposal is to move some full timers to other offices through volunteers and if not will move them by last in first out basis, is this allowed?

All full time staff must take 20 mins meal relief before going out and then 20 mins at end of delivery, states the first break is health and safety requirement. Is this true?

Thanks for any advice you can give.
Biker Mouse
Posts: 543
Joined: 19 Oct 2009, 18:37
Gender: Male

Re: Delivery Best Practice revision

Post by Biker Mouse »

75/25 split is Nationally not local and breaks must not be taken at the end of your duty.
clashcityrocker
Posts: 16688
Joined: 22 Sep 2009, 13:50
Gender: Male
Location: strummerville

Re: Delivery Best Practice revision

Post by clashcityrocker »

The 75/25 split is a national average and has nothing to do with your office. 60/40 in your office is not going against a national agreement.
Are they offering Voluntary Redundancy or Early retirement to these full-timers who are surplus to requirement? Or are they talking of Compulsory Redundancy?
You can't stick the whole 40 minute break at the end of your duty. At least 20 minutes has to be scheduled during the duty.

If you haven't actually had the revision, how are they already deciding how many hours you must lose?
The revision should establish the f/t p/t ratio depending on the agreed delivery span and attendance patterns.
The societies of consumption and squandering of material resources are incompatible with the idea of economic growth and a clean planet.
dvbuk55
EX ROYAL MAIL
Posts: 16650
Joined: 02 Jun 2007, 19:17
Gender: Male

Re: Delivery Best Practice revision

Post by dvbuk55 »

The 75/25 split was a NATIONAL figure, so your office could be all part timers and the spirit of the agreement would have been maintained because an office of a similar size could be all full timers.
mondeoman1
Posts: 133
Joined: 28 Oct 2009, 18:19
Gender: Male

Re: Delivery Best Practice revision

Post by mondeoman1 »

clashcityrocker wrote:The 75/25 split is a national average and has nothing to do with your office. 60/40 in your office is not going against a national agreement.

I get the national average now of 75/25, thanks for that.

Are they offering Voluntary Redundancy or Early retirement to these full-timers who are surplus to requirement? Or are they talking of Compulsory Redundancy?

They are not offering VR or ER for surplus staff but say they will move surplus to other office that need full timers on a seniority basis. Compulsory redundancy has not been mentioned.

You can't stick the whole 40 minute break at the end of your duty. At least 20 minutes has to be scheduled during the duty.



If you haven't actually had the revision, how are they already deciding how many hours you must lose?

The planners have been in and run georoute but all we have seen is supposed duty times that are way out.

The revision should establish the f/t p/t ratio depending on the agreed delivery span and attendance patterns.
Apparently the dom says we have too many full time to part time than any other office.


You can't stick the whole 40 minute break at the end of your duty. At least 20 minutes has to be scheduled during the duty.
clashcityrocker
Posts: 16688
Joined: 22 Sep 2009, 13:50
Gender: Male
Location: strummerville

Re: Delivery Best Practice revision

Post by clashcityrocker »

The DOM can say what he likes.
It doesn't make him right.
The societies of consumption and squandering of material resources are incompatible with the idea of economic growth and a clean planet.