Hi all, need a bit of advice, am I right in thinking that if you Lapse you don't Flex up? and if so where is the reference to this?
Is is it P&M or the Way forward, I was under the impression that Lapsing was under P&M and that then entitled you to have extra Summer leave slots, Flexing Up was about extenuating circumstances in the pipeline ie breakdowns, unpredicted traffic volumes etc, is it possible/ practicle to do both Post Revision
Your thoughts appreciated
I may be getting two phrases confused but if Flexing Up is the same as flexing it is totally voluntary, working 30 minutes of your time to be given back within the same week.
Sidley wrote:I may be getting two phrases confused but if Flexing Up is the same as flexing it is totally voluntary, working 30 minutes of your time to be given back within the same week.
ok sidley if you Lapse should you be expected to Flex also?
The theory behind flexibility is that if something unforeseen happens that would normally mean that members would be booking overtime or extra resources might be needed,instead flexibility can be used to minimise the cost to business.
The theory behind lapsing is that spare time inside your contracted hours is utilised to reduce business costs.
If you have time inside your contracted hours for lapsing there would obviously be no need to introduce flexibility.
If you need to introduce flexibility there is obviously no time inside your contracted hours for lapsing.
So no the two things are not compatible.
fishtank wrote:The theory behind flexibility is that if something unforeseen happens that would normally mean that members would be booking overtime or extra resources might be needed,instead flexibility can be used to minimise the cost to business.
The theory behind lapsing is that spare time inside your contracted hours is utilised to reduce business costs.
If you have time inside your contracted hours for lapsing there would obviously be no need to introduce flexibility.
If you need to introduce flexibility there is obviously no time inside your contracted hours for lapsing.
So no the two things are not compatible.
Fish, you have hit the nail right on the head, but these are just words between us, there must be a reference point to this in an agreement or policy somewhere
Glenno wrote:Fish, you have hit the nail right on the head, but these are just words between us, there must be a reference point to this in an agreement or policy somewhere
The very first point in the Phase 3 agreement on Absorbing hours states...
• To jointly identify/implement genuine opportunities to absorb outdoor and/or
indoor workload where time exists within approved attendance times/normal
paid work hours.
If you are also asking members to flex above their approved attendance times/normal
paid work hours then there are obviously no genuine opportunities to absorb outdoor and/or
indoor workload.
Q.E.D.
Glenno wrote:Fish, you have hit the nail right on the head, but these are just words between us, there must be a reference point to this in an agreement or policy somewhere
The very first point in the Phase 3 agreement on Absorbing hours states...
• To jointly identify/implement genuine opportunities to absorb outdoor and/or
indoor workload where time exists within approved attendance times/normal
paid work hours.
If you are also asking members to flex above their approved attendance times/normal
paid work hours then there are obviously no genuine opportunities to absorb outdoor and/or
indoor workload.
Q.E.D.
Cheers Fish, I have researched the reference to Phase 3 and the Flexing and to me they should not be used in the same sentence, hence the title to the thread, I might add that I am not the Local Rep but this conversation has taken place between me and him, and we seem to be poles apart, also we Lapse, Flex, Absorb, clear everyday, hit 100 BSI regular, have been thru a full revision and the DSM still comes for more SAVINGS when other units in the area havn't even had a DM revision, fair & manageable workload for all my arse, will keep this info handy for future reference, very close to tipping point now, cheers again
Flexing Up was a phrase used to describe the additional resources brought in when traffic is above model week.
It is different to the 30 minute flexing.
If you are flexing up, you shouldn't be lapsing.
But here's a situation.
Due to sickness/whatever the office is 3 duties down.
They have sufficient indoor hours to cope with the indoor operation but the DOM brings in 2 full-timers on their day off to cover 2 of the walks.
You now have approx. 6 excess indoor hours which you use to lapse the third uncovered duty.
The societies of consumption and squandering of material resources are incompatible with the idea of economic growth and a clean planet.
clashcityrocker wrote:But here's a situation.
Due to sickness/whatever the office is 3 duties down.
They have sufficient indoor hours to cope with the indoor operation but the DOM brings in 2 full-timers on their day off to cover 2 of the walks.
You now have approx. 6 excess indoor hours which you use to lapse the third uncovered duty.
If the office is 3 duties down it is likely to be short that indoor time as well.
It's possible it could be 3 part-time duties but even they are unlikely to be delivery only so some indoor time will be lost due to the 3 absences.
It is of course possible that the office could afford to lapse those indoor hours completely due to lower than expected volumes but I still don't see where the 30 mins flexibility could be invoked.
If all of the above happened and say a van was 30 mins late then you wouldn't necessarily have the scope within your delivery to absorb the sick absence duty and if you asked people to flex over by 30 mins to cover absorbtion it would be outside the terms of the phase three absorbtion agreement which states that it must be within approved attendance times/normal paid work hours.
quod erat demonstrandum.
It's just a smart-arsed way of saying the case is proved.
It basically means in this example that by definition the 30 mins flex is to be used when there is too much workload and not enough hours and absorbtion when there are too many hours and not enough workload therefore the two states cannot reasonably exist at the same time.
My dom wants to bring in a system where absorbtion (outside) is worked out at resourcing based on a formula eg so many k down on model = lapse 1 walk.
Because it would be too late to change on the actual morning he wants to then do it anyway and pay them back the next day by banging in the hours and getting them home early, am i alone in thinking this is a bit dodgy? He has the idea from a neighbouring office where it has been working for some time.
