Voluntary Redundancy

[PO1]

It's been a long time in coming but it looks like the wait is nearly over.
A preference exercise is about to be started ahead of the duty reviews due to commence in the Crown Office network using the Productivity Matrix. The aim is for a SCI ratio of £1.11 for 2012/13 and duties will be drawn up with this in mind. MTSF terms will still apply to all colleagues.

[capitalbiker]

To satisfy curiosity, is there an English translation available

[Postman Plodd]

to recap

We're going forward with our plans to implement three-dimensional monitored matrix approaches to meet the need for more contemporary reimagining of our holistic asset paradigm shifts.If you're on of those geeks stuck in the 90s that still go for interactive modular capability I can make a window to discuss your interactive transitional projections. This is no time to bite the bullet with our systemised administrative time-phases but due to blue-sky thinking we could revamp and reboot our facilitating incremental alignment.

[PO1]

SCI (staff costs against income) is now the main thing in the Crowns. The Post Office have been told by the government that they have to be in profit by 2015. At the moment for every £1 earned in income it costs £1.18 on average to get it. So it's eigther increase your sales... or reduce your staff.

[capitalbiker]

well it's astart, the words are in English , ity that it's all nonsense or is it!

[johnpmull]

Hello everyone. I hope that the information regarding the preference exercise is correct. I am in a central London office where we live in hope of a VR package. Targets, targets, targets and more pointless targets, to reach a bonus no-body is concerned about except the managers. Mystery shoppers, little talks in the morning, coaching and more coaching about sales . I am always being instructed to state the blindingly obvious, and repeat like a recording the chosen mantra of the day, which has the amazing effect of alienating the customers and driving down footfall thus reducing profits. But so what, Management want to hold us to account for their failings. The cause of the failure in the business is caused by us trying to adhere to their policies and meet targets. They want us to speak to every customer, forgetting that the customer may have heard the same mantra a number of times, and eventually go on line to avoid the frustration of listening to me repeating the same phrase yet again. Our footfall is in free-fall. The management solution? Threats about the mystery shopper, MUP discipline its even mooted that compulsory overtime is coming back!. I would love to hold the management to account and discuss the damage they are doing, ruining the business and damaging morale. This management is hell bent on destroying the business. What an awful job we are in. Lets hope the VR comes soon, I know there will be a stampede in my office, even in this time of recession!

[PO1]

[The BFO]

I fully agree that much of what we endure is deeply tedious, and frustrating, particularly when one sees the amount of waste. But in the end it is at least a job. Is Voluntary Redundancy really something to be desired? Is there alternative work, at comparable pay levels, for those of us that may be displaced? The drive to improve Staff Costs to Income Ratio, 'efficiency and staff cuts' by another name, may result in the reduction of time wasting 'Warm ups', 'One-to-Ones', and all the rest of the nonsense. Time will tell.

My opinion is that the CWU should be looking to protect the jobs of it's members. In our office the Deputy Branch Manager spends almost the entire week doing work that should be properly performed by the Crown Service Consultant grade. Cut a few managers, that will reduce costs...

[Blue8]

There won't be any need for VR they will have bullied us out of the job before it comes to VR!

[PO1]

There won't be any need for VR they will have bullied us out of the job before it comes to VR!

It will come sooner than you think.

[capitalbiker]

Is the figure of 1.18 across the network or just within the Crown network?
If it is at office level then it is a very laudable aim to reduce the sci ratio but can anyone advise how the income side of the raio is arrived at?
is it the value of the income to POL generated by an office, from all sources of activity be they sales over the counter, stamps , tax discs, (even FFS' financial products) etc and any sales ascribed/apportioned from internet sources or is it based on a calculation similar ro the payment structure for sub offices. there is a world of a difference between the two and if the former then an aim if 1.11 is woefully inadequate, for it would mean that the rest of the network would still be subsidising the Crown losses to enable POL to be in profit in less than three years time.
How also is the staff cost calculated? just the staff costs of operating an office ie providing suitable level of staff for the business of that office along with holiday cover and then attendant nic costs? or is there some aportionment of the costs of other backroom functions outwith that office eg Old St, Chesterfield, Swindon stores,CIT to name but a few (each with their hierarchical pyramid of (costly) management tiers) .
Current proposals wrt to Network transformation of the sub office network will see the removal of core payments so that offices will survive or fall purely on the commision they generate from sales, from information so far some offcies will be better on the new format but many others will be worse off and require subsidy from the retail side of that particular site to keep the PO open.
and now we have ill informed field change advisors with three weeks training spreading information about NT with not a clue of the mechanics of running a po and retail business side by side. it is very sad to observe that many in positions of power/authority in POL have no concept of life at the sharp end of business - po or retail.
their actions supported by an equally ill informed Parliament will kill off the Post Office as a national asset.

[PO1]

The aimed for SCI ratio figure of £1.11 is for the Crowns in 2012/13. It is the value of income from all sources, as regards to staffing costs etc. who knows what figures will go there. I would asume it would be all of the costs that are used generate the income factor. In my Crown Office we've been overstaffed for years because of the managed decline in footfall. The Post Office has, in our area, died. It's time to jump ship whilst there's a lifeboat on offer.

[The BFO]

What happens if the 'Operating Model', the agreement on non counter serving work, and the requirement to have a stipulated level of Financial Specialist and managerial cover, means that an office needs more hours than those required to achieve the Staff Cost to Income Ratio?

[The Best of The Best]

What happens if the 'Operating Model', the agreement on non counter serving work, and the requirement to have a stipulated level of Financial Specialist and managerial cover, means that an office needs more hours than those required to achieve the Staff Cost to Income Ratio?

Having studied the "Operating Model" for the past few weeks I raised this very question at a higher level and the response received was that the office would close.

[The BFO]

What happens if the 'Operating Model', the agreement on non counter serving work, and the requirement to have a stipulated level of Financial Specialist and managerial cover, means that an office needs more hours than those required to achieve the Staff Cost to Income Ratio?

Having studied the "Operating Model" for the past few weeks I raised this very question at a higher level and the response received was that the office would close.

I thought that might be the answer...