Nationally Agreed Guidelines Diagnostics and Interventions..

[POSTMAN]

CWU & Royal Mail Nationally Agreed Guidelines Diagnostics and Interventions Projects 2013


To: Branches with POSTAL Members

Dear Colleague

CWU & Royal Mail Nationally Agreed Guidelines Diagnostics and Interventions Projects 2013

Prior to Christmas 2012 the Department was informed that Royal Mail were sending independent managers into 60 identified offices to try and establish what the problems were with the revisions that had been unsuccessfully deployed.

It subsequently came to light that the independent managers were in fact private consultants from Price Waterhouse Cooper. We made it clear to Royal Mail that we were far from happy with the way this had been carried out and questioned the requirement for private consultants. We also made it clear that we would not be asking any one to cooperate in the exercise.

Following further discussions just before Christmas we were informed that following the initial visits and reports that PWC had provided to Royal Mail the consultants now termed ‘Intervention Managers’ would be re visiting 40 of the previously visited sites to draw up action plans to remedy the ongoing problems. The 40 sites are those with dates alongside them. IN THE LIST DOC BELOW

A meeting was therefore convened specifically to discuss what was going on and to establish what their (PWC) remit was and how long they were being hired for. At this meeting we decided that as they were already in deployment mode we needed to establish CWU involvement in what was taking place and proposed to Royal Mail that if they wanted cooperation national guidelines were required to provide an agreed process that fully involved the CWU. It was agreed that a meeting would be convened ASAP to agree a set of national guidelines. Those guidelines are attached to this document and were cleared with the Postal Executive today.

Branches and Representatives will note that we have now established the remit of PWC as far as this Diagnostic project is concerned and have also put the CWU back at the centre of discussions and fully involved in any actions to be deployed at the identified sites.

PWC have no negotiating rights in the project and any action plan will be owned in the locality by the CWU and Royal Mail. Action plans will be jointly developed following verification of the PWC report and an ‘audit’ by a member of the DRG or nominated substitute to identify any additional issues that need to be factored in. The PWC reports will be shared with the CWU in advance of the visits. Those reports have now been provided to the Department and are due to be shared with the DRG members.

The action plan must be compliant with all national agreements, guidelines and H&S policies and standards. They will also not be simply about office performance and will not involve individual performance.

A mandatory requirement at all units will be to deploy the System Readiness Tool and carry out a base data verification exercise prior to any action plan being deployed in the unit. Any disagreements regarding the application of any of the key action points will be resolved using the IR Framework.

Whilst the way this project has been introduced is not desirable we believe the situation has been recovered to the point where the CWU is now at the heart of the project and in a position to have a positive influence over the outcome.

We clearly have problems at all of the offices identified and it is important that we do what we can to put the revisions right. It is also an objective of this project to establish a generic approach/action plan that can be used in future to assist offices in similar predicaments. However we are also simultaneously in dialogue with Royal Mail to develop an agreed detailed PIR process to hopefully prevent offices getting into this situation in the first place.

Any enquiries to Bob Gibson’s Office, quoting reference 230.03
Email address: hnutley@cwu.org

Yours sincerely

Bob Gibson
Assistant Secretary

list.doc

[obscurityknocks]

Met ours today. Previous to pwc they had worked for royal mail but not in deliveries. Be interesting to see if they agree with us as too why the revision has been a shambles.

[dvbuk55]

A meeting was therefore convened specifically to discuss what was going on and to establish what their (PWC) remit was and how long they were being hired for. At this meeting we decided that as they were already in deployment mode we needed to establish CWU involvement in what was taking place and proposed to Royal Mail that if they wanted cooperation national guidelines were required to provide an agreed process that fully involved the CWU. It was agreed that a meeting would be convened ASAP to agree a set of national guidelines. Those guidelines are attached to this document and were cleared with the Postal Executive today.

How many times are the union going to be buffaloed with the old "full involvement" crap.

[fishtank]

I would suspect if there had been full involvement beforehand they wouldn't need full involvement now.
It will be interesting to see how much support the branches suddenly conjure up since it was obviously lacking during the original revision.

Whilst the way this project has been introduced is not desirable we believe the situation has been recovered

That's just embarrassing.

[hans solo]

well my office doesn,t need interventions then does that mean they have to pay us the 200
what an absolute crock of ****
the guy who did ours only spoke to mgmt and a select few posties no cwu involvement at all

[dvbuk55]

Obviously whatever these projects come up with as a solution to the problems, now that the CWU is "fully involved" be prepared for a joint statement when they implement the changes. Strange how they managed to carry out 60 evaluations without union involvement and come up with 40 offices that require measures to implement the revisions.................and you'd have to assume they will be followed by another 40................with full involvement of course now that "nationally agreed guidlines are in place. When we talk about the union being in disarray you don't have to look too far to see why.

Oh the "Joint Statement" that'll be PCW and RM, who appear to have a new partner

[Lincox]

I have looked at the list doc on cwu website and on here and cannot see the any list of offices engaged in this process. Is anyone else having same problem?

[POSTMAN]

I have looked at the list doc on cwu website and on here and cannot see the any list of offices engaged in this process. Is anyone else having same problem?

Try...

list.pdf

[Lincox]

Thanks postman.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

I will await the outcome with baited breath. New build perhaps.........

[fishtank]

PWC have no negotiating rights in the project and any action plan will be owned in the locality by the CWU and Royal Mail.

I know a bit about one of the offices on the list and how it's revision went.
I also know that the main reason it is on the list is not quality or member's aspirations but pure and simply overspend.
I'm no genius but even i can understand that a plan to tackle overspend will not end well for the members in that D.O.....no matter whether the local CWU/RM team "own it" or not.

[clashcityrocker]

I also know that the main reason it is on the list is not quality or member's aspirations but pure and simply overspend.
I'm no genius but even i can understand that a plan to tackle overspend will not end well for the members in that D.O.

The simplest solution for overspend is to increase the budget.

[celerycelery]

PWC have no negotiating rights in the project and any action plan will be owned in the locality by the CWU and Royal Mail.

I know a bit about one of the offices on the list and how it's revision went.
I also know that the main reason it is on the list is not quality or member's aspirations but pure and simply overspend.
I'm no genius but even i can understand that a plan to tackle overspend will not end well for the members in that D.O.....no matter whether the local CWU/RM team "own it" or not.

Surely though if before the revision the office were not overspending then it must be down to the hours took out during the revision and that needs to be looked at. The staff can't have become shite overnight. If they have taken out too many walks but not accounted for the increase in packets and slower method of delivery into the new walks then your screwed from day one and its destined to fail.

[fishtank]

Surely though if before the revision the office were not overspending then it must be down to the hours took out during the revision.

According to management overspend is caused by...

Incorrect allocation of work against hours i.e. posties taking the piss and finishing early.
Failure to control overtime budgets i.e. posties taking the piss and booking for fun.
Individual performance i.e posties taking the piss.

It's never their fault.

[celerycelery]

Surely though if before the revision the office were not overspending then it must be down to the hours took out during the revision.

According to management overspend is caused by...

Incorrect allocation of work against hours i.e. posties taking the piss and finishing early.
Failure to control overtime budgets i.e. posties taking the piss and booking for fun.
Individual performance i.e posties taking the piss.

It's never their fault.

Incorrect allocation of work against hours i.e. managers failing to plan or prepare or just manage properly.
Failure to control overtime budgets i.e. managers failing to recruit against leaving staff, managers failing to challenge a planner or dsm during revision.
Individual performance i.e. easy answer from a poor manager who cannot manage change so blames us.

It's never our fault IMO