A few on here need a reality check

[mandelsons_toenail]

Dingo.

As regards a reality check,

I had a discussion with a manager recently regarding park and loop deliveries.

He told he he didn't see a problem with them, and he enjoyed it.

I agreed with him, the delivery itself isn't the issue, ok we ache a bit and get tired.

I explained to him my problem and no doubt thousands of other posties problem is when they encounter a busy day and are cutting off

The amount of s**t you have to face is disgraceful.

I explained this to the manager, I told him he is the problem.

Maybe managers need a reality check

[Danelectro]

a reality check yeh the bloody union and royal mail need one not us.

why are staff who leave not being replaced, why are we expected to deliver mail to f***ing 4 o clock every wed thur fri and if we cut off we get our name put on a list and any f**k up or complaint leads to conduct code. BULL f***ing s**t.

BTW WE are still lapsing over x mas and we were told after revision that lapsing would be abolished!! yeh right!!!

It looks like Dingo wants your office to ballot for IA - though if the new agreement is to kick the IR framework in to touch and replace it with some new mediation process then god knows if rule 13 is still available or how long before being 'allowed' to use it? Are there any other unions that have decided to 'improve' the IR framework with an employer as untrustworthy as Royal Mail? Or is there anybody all for a new mediation process and if so how would it improve things?

[Sergeant Blast]

Sometimes you have to sacrifice protecting the job in order to protect jobs but sometimes the opposite applies.There is no point in having a full-time job if you can't physically do it.

This is what should be shaping union policy over the coming years.I almost agree that 4 hours using the right methods and subsequent fair workload is a good starting point for a max delivery span.

But I've seen the effect of a 4.15 span in an office mainly delivering to tenements/flats and the subsequent climbing of 70 to 90 flights of stairs day in day out and its causing an increase in mainly joint/muscular health issues so I have my doubts that even at 4 this kind of delivery will not leave members with long term joint/muscle problems.

There really needs to be some independent medical assessment of how stairs(along with other delivery types) are likely to impact on the joints and muscles long term.If this leads to less full time jobs in an office and some of the indoor work is reallocated then so be it. Otherwise a member now in their 50s who has been paying into the union for 30 years could well be out of a job sooner than they'd like.The loss of indoor work on some of the part time jobs could maybe clawed back with the increase in bulky parcels and the need for more parcel/packet drops.

Judging by Dingos leaks and the way he is trying to shape expectations then it doesn't look like this union is anywhere realistic on the workloads they are willing to impose on the membership even when the job is done properly.The lapsing incentive in my office would be nothing more than compensation for the job turning you into a cripple.

Surely our health should be first priority. I rarely hear the union mention it. Our office went through outdoor revisions about 3 years ago. We have had numerous guys off sick with wear and tear related injuries. Bikes were 'kind' to our joints. Walking on hard surfaces in the poor, 'cheap' footwear we are provided with, is not. The rounds in my office, in my opinion are too long (I've worked in others), it's under staffed and relies on enough people to work their day off each day. There are nearly always several off sick so absorption is regulary expected. This job as it is currently, is not worth the envitable premature detioration of our joints. RM clearly don't care about our well being. Nothing new there. However I expect more consideration from my union.

[Ahebban]

It should not surprise anyone that both parties want to publish it at the same time and for Royal Mail the stock exchange announcement is also in their mind.

The sooner the document is out in the public domain, the sooner a proper debate can begin across the whole CWU. Clearly members are not going to be voting on the agreement before christmas so it will give ample opportunity for members to view it, discuss it and allow Reps to report office findings to section meetings etc. What is to be gained in cascading the document down from PEC, under a veil of secrecy, until finally reaching the rank and file - unless there is something to hide and requires a certain 'spin' to sell it to members?

[dvbuk55]

Well judging from what dingo posts, the union would rather see individual action from units as opposed to a unified approach to delivery issues. They will just not face facts. As with BT2010 much of the onus was placed on the unit rep to pick the bones out of it and want to now appear to call wild cats to sort problems out - yet another U-turn or a new way to shove responsibilities for union affairs on the unpaid members of the union who also have a job to do.

[The_Wax_Man]

Again I refer to the LTB below and really want someone to tell me what the outcome was ?? - If the B&H was so well known then, then why the bloody hell has the union not fought this.... or seems it is now not a problem enough to tackle !!!!!



JOINT STATEMENT FAIRNESS, DIGNITY & RESPECT IN DELIVERY

LTB 170/13 Bullying and Harassment – ROYAL MAIL & CWU NATIONAL JOINT STATEMENT FAIRNESS, DIGNITY & RESPECT IN DELIVERY

No. 170/13

Ref: 230.03

Date: 15th March 2013

To: Branches with POSTAL Members

Dear Colleague,

Bullying and Harassment - ROYAL MAIL & CWU NATIONAL JOINT STATEMENT FAIRNESS, DIGNITY & RESPECT IN DELIVERY

Branches will be aware of the problems being encountered in Delivery Offices regarding bullying and harassment and the recent survey carried out amongst delivery members. Discussions between Royal Mail and the Outdoor Department are continuing on this matter and an output from those discussions is the Joint Statement that is included with this LTB.

The Joint Statement is intended to provide an update to our Branches and members of where we are with the discussions and to also provide some clarity around behaviours in the delivery environment particularly from managers, and how our members can expect to be treated.

The Joint Statement makes it clear to all that overtime is voluntary which has been one of the main problems our members have encountered where Managers have been making false statements that completion of delivery is a requirement of all delivery OPGs regardless of how long it will take. To compound this particular problem there have also been reports sent to the Department describing instances where our members have been threatened with the conduct code or removal from their duty if they did not complete their delivery. The Joint Statement is intended to assist in eradicating this type of misrepresentation of the facts and provide clear confirmation to our members that they do not have to work beyond their scheduled finish time if they do not wish to do so. It also reiterates and reinforces the process of safeguarding the mail contained in Appendix B in instances where our members do not believe they will be able to complete their delivery. The Joint Statement also makes it clear that there will be no threat of conduct where our members cannot deliver all the mail by their scheduled finish time and the procedures contained in Appendix B have been followed correctly.

To support the ongoing process of dealing with bullying, harassment and intimidation a workshop is also being designed and will be piloted in the North West to train/coach Managers and Representatives in how to deal appropriately with 'Cut Offs' and workload issues in Delivery Offices. It is anticipated that the workshop will be ready to pilot in about 2 weeks.

Furthermore any one of our members who responded to the survey will be provided with an opportunity, if they so wish, to have their complaint investigated and overseen by an independent party in line with Appendix A of the Joint Statement.

COMMUNICATION WORKERS UNION

URGENT INFORMATION FOR MEMBERS



This opportunity should be brought to the attention of all members in all workplaces so that they are aware of this, which can be done by contacting the Outdoor Department, this can also be done via email to Outdoorsecretary@cwu.org .Further communications via a LTB, the E Bulletin and the Voice will also bring this to the attention of our members. Confidentiality will be preserved.

Whilst work on the overall situation continues the Joint Statement provides a positive intervention at this stage and should help in reducing the number of complaints. We also hope that it will provide our members with a degree of confidence that the Union is working on their behalf to eradicate this unacceptable behaviour from the workplace.

This LTB and associated documentation should be given the widest possible circulation amongst our members and their workplaces. Area/Local Reps should engage with their respective Managers to discuss how the content and spirit and intent of the Joint Statement is going to be embedded in every workplace. CWU Divisional Representatives are requested to organise meetings within their Divisions to brief Representatives on the deployment of the Joint Statement and to ensure that meetings between Managers and Representatives are taking place and that the content of the Joint Statement is being applied accurately and consistently in every workplace.

In instances where Managers do not engage with the CWU or do not make an effort to make sure the Joint Statement is introduced in full and applied consistently then this should be brought to the attention of a Divisional Representative without delay.

Any enquiries to Bob Gibson's Office, quoting reference 230.03

Email address: hnutley@cwu.org

Yours sincerely

Bob Gibson

CWU Assistant Secretary - Outdoor

COMMUNICATION WORKERS UNION

URGENT INFORMATION FOR MEMBERS

[dvbuk55]

Well I'm just wondering is it possible for an entire organisation to suffer memory loss or at least selective memory loss Strange how there is no report available or there is but it was a whitewash.

[tansorboy]

Have any of you established posties stopped to consider that one big reason myself and others come in early (and usually finish early) which you are critical of because it helps the DOMs claim everything's all rosy in the garden IS BECAUSE WE ARE ON 6-MONTH RENEWABLE CONTRACTS?? I have a family to feed and from one who has come from outside the public sector (ironic as now we are the private sector...) I can say the delivery job does provide a living wage and yes, the CWU over the years has ensured this.
I experienced a short spell of unemployment before joining and my Lord was it depressing. To have a decent wage (compared to the crap MW offers that are around for similar manual positions) was a great relief to me, and despite the stress I often feel in the office I enjoy being out on delivery. The thing is, during my first few months I was bitten and advised by a manager NOT to report it as it "has to be logged and you could go down as 'accident-prone' as a result which may affect your chances of another 6-months work." Last week me and a partner had to delivery literally tens of kilos of thick households left from the week before that various posties had ignored when put on the job that previous week for one day at a time only - these were thrown off (4 days worth) all at once by a 'light duties' injured person, and as a reward for delivering them when they weren't ours, did they tell the light-duties person to throw the rest of ours off in exchange for us delivering them?? DID THEY ****!!!
OK, you think this is a digression from the thread, but it's not. My point is, has any deal/negotiation been reached over the use of these 6-month deals? They are a clear invitation for us to be blackmailed and shat upon by being given crap treatment they wouldn't dare give to established posties. My rep did say the buggers were even considering bringing in ZERO HOUR deals, but he said the CWU would never agree, so I hope this was the case. 6-months is bad enough. I know guys who've done 3-years on 6-month deals, which is pointless as after 2 years you have the same redundancy and tribunal rights as someone who's done 2 years on a permanent deal. Obviously after 4 years you have to be permanent by law anyway. My rep has stated that he hoped to get the good 6-monthers permanent contracts to ease their worries. Any ideas??

Exactly.

[The_Wax_Man]

*EDIT*

Just found the July 2013 Joint Royal Mail, CWU, Unite Statement on B&H procedure

Here if anyone wants it - was this the outcome of LTB170/13 ???

http://www.cwu.org/assets/_files/docume ... Proced.doc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[dvbuk55]

*EDIT*

Just found the July 2013 Joint Royal Mail, CWU, Unite Statement on B&H procedure

Here if anyone wants it - was this the outcome of LTB170/13 ???

http://www.cwu.org/assets/_files/docume ... Proced.doc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I wonder who wrote that and how many visits to B&Q paint shelves it took.

[edwardo]

Lets be clear lots of reps and members are frustrated with the lack of Comms and details of the agreement.

My own opinion is that in these days of different options for most carriers and big posters the threat of a strike is often more of a threat then the actual strike. years ago we would go out on strike and return to work and still have all the Mail we started with. Not anymore , there are over 20 major other parcels carriers along with the major suppliers from the internet like Amazon. The CWU were right to use the threat but the continued extensions overplayed our hand and the threat of a strike became an idle threat as the pause meant many members would be difficult to now get out if strike action was called as they had believe there would be a deal.

The CWU negotiators believed they have got a very good deal , which no other company in the UK has given to any union following a share offering or privatisation. It is legally binding and therefore has been written by lawyers which unless your a legally trained individual needs to be explained by the same lawyers to what each section means in lay terms. But it covers the normal threats from privatisation , no break up of the company , no franchising a real threat , no outsourcing an even bigger threat , no two tier workforce.

Other then MPs the pay rise on offer is the best one around of a unionised workforce.

Pensions is subject to a separate deal including some improvements for the scheme set up for new recruits after 2008.

On workplace issues yes there is a new process for dealing with Mail Centre , RDCs and Voc closures. There also a joint statement on the outstanding Mail centre and RDC Voc Closures.

Now on delivery there is an agreement which will review the problems of delivery offices. But let's be clear if anyone is expecting the review to return delivery working to pre methods , job and finish , no absorption and a 3.5 hour delivery span is living in dreamland.

The solutions in delivery are not the same as they were pre 2007. Parcels are growing and so are the advertising mails both unaddressed and addressed. Traffic is not the same during the year but the amount of reserves and walks are which is why you have lapsing. Unless we tackle this then the problems with continue and I understands there will be incentive. Schemes from April. Remember when absorption was first agreed staff got a share via the 50 / 50 scheme.

The review will cover all the issues and will have joint visits.

B&H is covered but if I am honest the only way we can ever eliminate B&H completely is if offices walk if they or any member are targeted.

my understanding is that all the amendments were accepted by the negotiators.

It should not surprise anyone that both parties want to publish it at the same time and for Royal Mail the stock exchange announcement is also in their mind.

No doubt I will get a lot of negative comments but my advice is read the agreement before deciding whether it's a sale out.

grateful for all the info our office gripe is with the union our office is a mess and people going through the motions

[biscuit1957]

There is a few people that live in cloud cuckoo land,there is no company that can do what we do,at the moment they are not set up for it,thats why amazon etc keep coming back to us,we have them all by the balls

[edwardo]

Sometimes you have to sacrifice protecting the job in order to protect jobs but sometimes the opposite applies.There is no point in having a full-time job if you can't physically do it.

This is what should be shaping union policy over the coming years.I almost agree that 4 hours using the right methods and subsequent fair workload is a good starting point for a max delivery span.

But I've seen the effect of a 4.15 span in an office mainly delivering to tenements/flats and the subsequent climbing of 70 to 90 flights of stairs day in day out and its causing an increase in mainly joint/muscular health issues so I have my doubts that even at 4 this kind of delivery will not leave members with long term joint/muscle problems.

There really needs to be some independent medical assessment of how stairs(along with other delivery types) are likely to impact on the joints and muscles long term.If this leads to less full time jobs in an office and some of the indoor work is reallocated then so be it. Otherwise a member now in their 50s who has been paying into the union for 30 years could well be out of a job sooner than they'd like.The loss of indoor work on some of the part time jobs could maybe clawed back with the increase in bulky parcels and the need for more parcel/packet drops.

Judging by Dingos leaks and the way he is trying to shape expectations then it doesn't look like this union is anywhere realistic on the workloads they are willing to impose on the membership even when the job is done properly.The lapsing incentive in my office would be nothing more than compensation for the job turning you into a cripple.

Surely our health should be first priority. I rarely hear the union mention it. Our office went through outdoor revisions about 3 years ago. We have had numerous guys off sick with wear and tear related injuries. Bikes were 'kind' to our joints. Walking on hard surfaces in the poor, 'cheap' footwear we are provided with, is not. The rounds in my office, in my opinion are too long (I've worked in others), it's under staffed and relies on enough people to work their day off each day. There are nearly always several off sick so absorption is regulary expected. This job as it is currently, is not worth the envitable premature detioration of our joints. RM clearly don't care about our well being. Nothing new there. However I expect more consideration from my union.

last Thursday the day of the high winds our c w u rep who is also our health safety rep stood at the managers side , manager said it wasn t that bad out there but use both hands to hold onto van door in case wind blows it off what about staff ????????

[mojothefishmo]

We sent mail back we were delayed by an hr and it was the worse wind ive ever delivered in ,very dangerous even had customers questioning the sanity of managers sending us out in it!!!

[General Mannerheim]

*EDIT*

Just found the July 2013 Joint Royal Mail, CWU, Unite Statement on B&H procedure

Here if anyone wants it - was this the outcome of LTB170/13 ???

http://www.cwu.org/assets/_files/docume ... Proced.doc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The trial based in the North West was entitled Delivery Standards Workshop and is a right load of bolloxs.
all it focuses on is 1~Appendix 3
2.Lapsing and Flexibility.
3. Memo of understanding which just banged on about Delivery standards.
4.Performance vs Design Process Map.which was a nice indoor and outdoor flow chart.
The impression I got from this workshop was it was just to make sure the members got bullied more and there was not one shred of a mention of how fatigue on delivery affects people,apparently they trialed this in Crosby office but couldn't be arsed to supply any evidence on how well it went there,all I got was it's in the Crosby Working document but have yet to see this `document`
Here is a brief taster to the bullshit that these `joint` workshops come out with
"When discussing any issues of poor performance the conversation will be informed by fact not perception(Yeah right! )This is relevant to all parties,including the manager,CWU rep and delivery officer.
So I'm not confident in any new `joint` workshops that these clowns might come out with in the new agreement.