A Couple of Emergency Motions for Conference

[fishtank]

2. EMERGENCY MOTIONS ADMITTED TO THE AGENDA

COMP E1 Conference notes with concern Moya Greene’s statement in Birmingham, at the Royal Mail Operations and Modernisation, on March 26th 2012 that 100 Delivery Methods Revisions are failing.

Conference therefore agrees that an immediate review needs to take place to identify the offices which are failing and to resolve these failed revisions.

Conference acknowledges that Delivery Methods Revisions are complex and challenging but it is unacceptable that over 1/3rd of Delivery Method Revisions are deemed as failing.

Conference further agrees that unless these Revisions have been resolved by August 31st, then the CWU will not support any further roll out of Delivery Method Revisions until a satisfactory solution is in place.

The PEC is instructed accordingly.
London Divisional Committee
Nottingham District Amal
South Midlands Postal


E2
Conference notes that there is now a revised timetable for methods revisions which has been sent out this month (March 2012) and which is not agreed with the CWU and will mean yet more delay which for some offices now means until March 2014.

Conference notes that this means that some offices that took part in industrial action in October 2009 will have waited 4 ½ years to see the benefits of the SWW/£1000 and 1 in 4 or better Saturdays off. This is a year beyond the three year Transformation agreement.

At the same time as delaying benefits to our members it cannot be right that Royal Mail is spending millions and withdrawing hundreds of managers for WCM while not resourcing properly to ensure an adequate number of Planners for revisions, thereby condemning thousands of our members to inferior terms and conditions.

The PEC is therefore instructed to object in the strongest possible terms to this revised timetable and to demand from Royal Mail that the resource is immediately put in to ensure revisions are dealt with promptly.

In the absence of such an agreement then Royal Mail will be advised that the CWU is withdrawing all support at all levels within the Union concerning WCM and that we will actively oppose WCM until such time as management have brought in all methods revisions or the benefits to our members.

The PEC is also instructed to take whatever other action it may deem fit so as to apply pressure on Royal Mail to deal with this matter.

The Postal Executive is instructed accordingly.
Western Counties

[oypostie]

Not sure about the second one. I'm quite happy never to receive their bribe if it means my office never goes through a delivery methods revision

[POSTMAN]

I'm all for E1,but shouldn't the below of happened the very next day?

Conference therefore agrees that an immediate review needs to take place to identify the offices which are failing and to resolve these failed revisions.

[dvbuk55]

Dingo will be a bit shocked to hear that only 300+ revisions have taken place as opposed to the 1000 he insists have taken place I'm just wondering what pressure will be brought to bear................leaving the biscuits, only having two cups of coffee.................the list is endless.

[fishtank]

I'm all for E1,but shouldn't the below of happened the very next day?

Conference therefore agrees that an immediate review needs to take place to identify the offices which are failing and to resolve these failed revisions.

The fact that HQ doesn't even know which offices are failing answers that.
The fact that HQ doesn't even know which offices are failing should lead to even more uncomfortable questions.
Why doesn't/didn't the Area Rep know would be my first one.
An Area Rep must know when a DM revision is about to go live.
One visit,one week later,one meeting,one question...should have told them.

[Martin Walsh]

Dingo will be a bit shocked to hear that only 300+ revisions have taken place as opposed to the 1000 he insists have taken place I'm just wondering what pressure will be brought to bear................leaving the biscuits, only having two cups of coffee.................the list is endless.

Maybe Dingo knows more about E1 then yourself !!!

[dvbuk55]

Dingo will be a bit shocked to hear that only 300+ revisions have taken place as opposed to the 1000 he insists have taken place I'm just wondering what pressure will be brought to bear................leaving the biscuits, only having two cups of coffee.................the list is endless.

Maybe Dingo more about E1 then yourself !!!

I'm not entirely sure what that meant but if you could point out the 1000 revisions as opposed to the 300+ that Moya, Senior RM management and now the CWU are accepting............including the, to be generous, 25% failures - then the payment for change will be almost complete as opposed to dramatically incomplete as suggested.

For the much vaunted union involvement there does seem to be a lack of knowledge and communication from Area to HQ wouldn't you say and why would that be?

[hatetheboss]

Delivery methods will always fail, the only offices that will be working will be cutting corners, coming in early, missing meal reliefs, not doing van checks etc

In our office the fact people do not want to do the overtime when flexing up is required has, left us in the s...t
100% BSI, IWT Geo-route ..... pull the other one.

[Martin Walsh]

Dvbuk what I meant it is a London Divisonal Committee motion and I wrote it. I know exactly how many revisons both delivery method and self starter and sequencing revisons which have been introduced and it's a lot more than 373 but hey if you want to believe something different who Am I to argue ?

Now the strange thing is the postal executive are down to either seek the withdrawal of the motion or to ask conference to oppose it. Now maybe some of you should contact your Branch's and say they should support it at least then they will be doing something positive to change the bad revisons .

[dvbuk55]

Dvbuk what I meant it is a London Divisonal Committee motion and I wrote it. I know exactly how many revisons both delivery method and self starter and sequencing revisons which have been introduced and it's a lot more than 373 but hey if you want to believe something different who Am I to argue ?

Now the strange thing is the postal executive are down to either seek the withdrawal of the motion or to ask conference to oppose it. Now maybe some of you should contact your Branch's and say they should support it at least then they will be doing something positive to change the bad revisons .

Well obviously we are at crossed purposes, self starters do not fulfill the criteria required for delivery methods and only delivery methods provide HCTs, LCTs and CDVs - the rest are pointless and are nothing more than table top exercises to give a semblance of compliance. As for contacting Branch - what would be the point, there are failures of revisions attributed by both RM and the CWU and neither appear to be interested in where they are or in rectifying the problems, which are obviously NOT being actioned by Branch. Anyone who has been through a DM revision knows the problems and we've been through 2.

[fishtank]

Now the strange thing is the postal executive are down to either seek the withdrawal of the motion or to ask conference to oppose it. Now maybe some of you should contact your Branch's and say they should support it at least then they will be doing something positive to change the bad revisons .

I'm finding it hard to get my head around the PEC's position on this.
The motion does not ask for the earth and given Moya's supposed support for improving the situation in failing offices it will be difficult for Royal Mail to take the opposite position.
I can only guess that the inclusion of a deadline and the threat to withdraw has spooked them a little or perhaps the thought of admitting past mistakes and revisiting them is too hard to handle?
Head in the sand or head up their arse?...neither fills me with much confidence.

Anyway i support the motion and my branch already know how i feel.
I would support it no matter who wrote it.
Whether my support makes any difference at branch is doubtful but i pay my subs and like to make a noise about it.To be honest i'm just happy annoying people as you already know.

[fishtank]

Emergency Motion E1 – Delivery Method Revisions
An emergency motion was placed before conference covering Delivery Method Revisions that were failing. This followed Royal Mail stating at their own 2 day forum in Birmingham recently that there was around 100
Delivery Offices in that category. The motion called for an immediate review into those offices and for an embargo to be placed on the introduction of delivery methods revisions if the failing offices were not
resolved by 31st August 2012.
During the debate issues around quality of service, scale of change still to come, reviewing the benefits received to date were all mentioned from the conference floor.
In replying to the motion, it was made clear that what Royal Mail deemed as a failing revision was those offices that were not delivering the level of savings which the business had anticipated.
This was a fundamental point for the CWU as from the very start of revision activity following BT 2010 being introduced the union had made it clear to Royal Mail that we did not anticipate/agree with the level of
savings they believed were available through changes to the delivery operation, as they had grossly underestimated the existing level of performance in delivery offices.
It was also pointed out to Conference that a review process already exists and every office should have a 12 week PIR to make sure any issues/problems are addressed in this period. The PIR is an agreed process
with Royal Mail and delegates were reminded that this is the mechanism to deal with outstanding issues.
The motion was not carried by conference delegates.

[clashcityrocker]

it was made clear that what Royal Mail deemed as a failing revision was those offices that were not delivering the level of savings which the business had anticipated.

Using that criteria hopefully all the revisions will be failures.

[fishtank]

it was made clear that what Royal Mail deemed as a failing revision was those offices that were not delivering the level of savings which the business had anticipated.

Using that criteria hopefully all the revisions will be failures.

Well...using that criteria i presume that the other 200 revisions are only a success because they are delivering savings which could mean that from a CWU member's point of view we are actually in a worse position than we thought.
I find the fact that this motion was defeated and the continued reliance on a review process and PIR that is obviously not working to be a complete cop out.
The entire argument seems to be around what a failing revision is not what has caused it to fail and how it can be fixed.
It comes across as a childish refusal to admit that a problem exists at all and a belief that if we just keep moving forward these teething problems will iron themselves out or at least people will stop talking about it long enough so it can be ignored.
Does the CWU have a list of revisions that are failing our members?
If not....why not?

[dvbuk55]

it was made clear that what Royal Mail deemed as a failing revision was those offices that were not delivering the level of savings which the business had anticipated.

Using that criteria hopefully all the revisions will be failures.

Well...using that criteria i presume that the other 200 revisions are only a success because they are delivering savings which could mean that from a CWU member's point of view we are actually in a worse position than we thought.
I find the fact that this motion was defeated and the continued reliance on a review process and PIR that is obviously not working to be a complete cop out.
The entire argument seems to be around what a failing revision is not what has caused it to fail and how it can be fixed.
It comes across as a childish refusal to admit that a problem exists at all and a belief that if we just keep moving forward these teething problems will iron themselves out or at least people will stop talking about it long enough so it can be ignored.
Does the CWU have a list of revisions that are failing our members?
If not....why not?

Did they ask? The presumption is it all revolves around savings and we know that's not true from the postings on here. I mean how far does a disagreement get you these days? I'll bet there are unit reps across the land that are in despair over the support they get from above at all levels. There are none so blind etc.