Used to be in 6 nights a week, now...

[massdebate121]

Before Christmas, me and five others were in 5 or 6 nights a week. Since Christmas, Angard have taken on countless other casuals. This means that we're lucky if we're in for 2 nights a week. Has any other office had this problem? Oh, and who else has to finish at 6.15am instead of 6am as it used to be?

[Verging]

The taking on of additional casuals after Christmas has meant we get much less work. Plus they are still taking them on

[Justanotherstar]

6:15? lucky you!!! we work till half past...well most of us...theres a select few that duck out at 6 (mainly the ones with relatives working there )

[eglantina1]

This definitely seems to be the case. Last year I had fairly regular work one or two evenings per week and occasionaly Saturdays, but since Christmas I've hardly been offered anything and when I have it has been too short notice to get to the mail centre where I worked.
All last year they had a pool of Angard staff who were experienced workers and I doubt if there was ever an occasion when there weren't enough of us available. So I have no idea why they kept on some of the new casuals to add to the pool and make it an more of a scramble to get the few jobs that are going. Nice for them (the new casuals) but not logical in terms of value for money for Royal Mail. Especially as some that were kept on this Christmas were absolutely useless.
In fact I've now given up trying to get Royal Mail work even though I actually quite enjoyed it and have another job on a similar casual basis but one where I will have more notice of when the work is available.

[Verging]

This definitely seems to be the case. Last year I had fairly regular work one or two evenings per week and occasionaly Saturdays, but since Christmas I've hardly been offered anything and when I have it has been too short notice to get to the mail centre where I worked.
All last year they had a pool of Angard staff who were experienced workers and I doubt if there was ever an occasion when there weren't enough of us available. So I have no idea why they kept on some of the new casuals to add to the pool and make it an more of a scramble to get the few jobs that are going. Nice for them (the new casuals) but not logical in terms of value for money for Royal Mail. Especially as some that were kept on this Christmas were absolutely useless.
In fact I've now given up trying to get Royal Mail work even though I actually quite enjoyed it and have another job on a similar casual basis but one where I will have more notice of when the work is available.

Our MC think it is "cheaper" for RM to have none AWR casuals in than AWR qualified in terms of actual cost - not necessarily more cost effective as a AWR qualified person should be more effective than a new untrained casual. Main problem is management do not accept or consider efficiency of casuals just the actual number and cost of the casuals.

We had a case last year where a lot of Angard AWR casuals were booked, in advance for a once, for a week and the Thursday before that week we got cancelled. MC called in Agency workers from a local agency (presumably cheaper) then had to call in a few Angard casuals at short notice during the week on a daily basis (the normal situation for us). So the MC were attempting to use cheaper untrained casuals at the expense of AWR qualified casuals. The Angard person that calls us in appeared a little angry at the time as they had booked us then had to cancel us as the MC claimed there was no work for us.