The Blame Game....

[fishtank]

I know some like to blame individual units,reps and members for failing to achieve 1in4 Saturdays,having their start times moved and the general failure of a great many delivery revisions to meet the aspirations of members.
Some units and even whole areas in my opinion have unfairly been painted as weak when again in my opinion they were actually just guinea pigs for a completely untried system with little or no support from either Royal Mail or the union basically because they hadn't a clue what would happen or how to resolve the resultant mess.

I'm sure that in a minority of cases it might be true that offices could have done more to help themselves but i would just like to point out something from the BT2010 Agreement that seems to have slipped the mind of one or two.

When you reach the bottom of the sections headed Attendance Patterns and Duty Structures and Saturday Attendances it clearly states...

Progress on all the issues/objectives above will be jointly monitored and reviewed at national level on an ongoing basis.

So the question is who was doing the monitoring and how did they fail to spot offices and whole areas being turned over?
It's fine waiting until the end to have your go and crowing about how strong you are because you've had the benefit of watching how it can go wrong,that's relatively easy but what are the National Officers and Royal Mail going to do to resolve the issues in offices that were brave enough to or in truth were nominated to do the real hard work,reach into the unknown and go first?

[DGP1]

No 1 in 4 Saturdays for my office because the clampets wanted to stick to our current 1 in 6

[wiganpostie]

One in four has been implemented in our office since P&L began. It's the only good thing about the whole deal. Mind you, some of the lucky part timers get one in three off (they work a four-day week, mon& tues off one week, wed & thurs the next, and fri & sat the final week).

[Ahebban]

Progress on all the issues/objectives above will be jointly monitored and reviewed at national level on an ongoing basis.

You would expect National Officers to be monitoring the BT2010 Agreement as a whole - be pro-active rather than re-active to issues (DMRs, D2Ds, WCM etc, etc). It is all too easy to hide behind paperwork, giving the impression that HQ is 'on the ball' whereas in truth they are (for a large part) still sat in the planning room awaiting someone to knock on the door and let them know the war has actually started.

[97gaz]

[

[bigcol]

One in four has been implemented in our office since P&L began. It's the only good thing about the whole deal. Mind you, some of the lucky part timers get one in three off (they work a four-day week, mon& tues off one week, wed & thurs the next, and fri & sat the final week).

I'd be interested to see a breakdown of how that works for the whole office.

I'm one of the lucky bastards.

Less hours, less days, less miles and more pay. It's brilliant. To think I was against the agreement.

From memory, it's 8 walks out of more than 50.

[dvbuk55]

I'm one of the lucky bastards.

Less hours, less days, less miles and more pay. It's brilliant. To think I was against the agreement.

From memory, it's 8 walks out of more than 50.

Yes bc, in union circles we prefer to call them "winners" as opposed to the more common term of "losers" which refers to the predominant class of delivery personnel. To call them unlucky bastards would be quite crass I think.

[hampshireman]

One in four has been implemented in our office since P&L began. It's the only good thing about the whole deal. Mind you, some of the lucky part timers get one in three off (they work a four-day week, mon& tues off one week, wed & thurs the next, and fri & sat the final week).

Is 'lucky ' and 'part timers' an oxymoron?