I shall be voting "yes"

[jack]

It remains to be seen if it will be adhered to

Never in a month of sundays, my opinion is it will remain futile.

The 75% - 25% FT/PT will never happen.

The 1 in 4 Saturdays off I have never experienced in our office, you get what you've been given especially if your a reserve.

Unmanageable workloads and absorption will only get worse, Moya has already stated she sees more savings in delivery.

Could go on but we all know the score....

[dvbuk55]

It remains to be seen if it will be adhered to

Never in a month of sundays, my opinion is it will remain futile.

The 75% - 25% FT/PT will never happen.
The 1 in 4 Saturdays off I have never experienced in our office, you get what you've been given especially if your a reserve.

Unmanageable workloads and absorption will only get worse, Moya has already stated she sees more savings in delivery.

Could go on but we all know the score....

It doesn't happen now because it currently stands at 69/31 and the new agreement says "predominantly full time" which means what exactly if it was 55/45 it would be predominant but hey are the leadership bothered as long as the cash rolls in. Watch for the subs rise in January and who knows maybe a switch to a single rate...........who knows.

[fishtank]

One of the strands in the National Delivery Review actually states...

13. Exploring the impact of resourcing mix and contract types to identify opportunities to improve efficiency and deal with workload variations

That isn't going to improve matters,It's hard to see how "improving efficiency and dealing with workload variations" can mean more full-time jobs.

[dvbuk55]

One of the strands in the National Delivery Review actually states...

13. Exploring the impact of resourcing mix and contract types to identify opportunities to improve efficiency and deal with workload variations

That isn't going to improve matters,It's hard to see how "improving efficiency and dealing with workload variations" can mean more full-time jobs.

Place that nugget alongside the proposed sum for back pay and............................no contest really because half of the voters won't understand that line and I'm pretty sure the union aren't going to go to any length to explain it plus any other controversial titbits enshrined in the new Agenda for Growth which belies point 13 I would have thought.

[jack]

It remains to be seen if it will be adhered to

Never in a month of sundays, my opinion is it will remain futile.

The 75% - 25% FT/PT will never happen.
The 1 in 4 Saturdays off I have never experienced in our office, you get what you've been given especially if your a reserve.

Unmanageable workloads and absorption will only get worse, Moya has already stated she sees more savings in delivery.

Could go on but we all know the score....

It doesn't happen now because it currently stands at 69/31 and the new agreement says "predominantly full time" which means what exactly if it was 55/45 it would be predominant but hey are the leadership bothered as long as the cash rolls in. Watch for the subs rise in January and who knows maybe a switch to a single rate...........who knows.

So I take it " predominantly full time" means nationwide? because as far as our office is concerned its more like - 60% PT- 40% FT at the moment.... and the gap continues to rise as FT retire (and their walks are absorbed) then replaced by PT contracts.

[dvbuk55]

So I take it " predominantly full time" means nationwide? because as far as our office is concerned its more like - 60% PT- 40% FT at the moment.... and the gap continues to rise as FT retire (and their walks are absorbed) then replaced by PT contracts.

In the same way that 75/25 was a national average so predominantly full time will be a national average but we all know what area that favours. Our office too is around 60/40.

[Dee Plish]

a majority is a majority as they say.

Erm, not as Royal Mail say. When a majority voted YES to industrial action in this dispute, RM construed the figures to make it a none - yes vote.
I wonder if they will use the same bizarre method of calculus to reject a yes vote in this ballot - I am poised to do the maths on this!

[jack]

So I take it " predominantly full time" means nationwide? because as far as our office is concerned its more like - 60% PT- 40% FT at the moment.... and the gap continues to rise as FT retire (and their walks are absorbed) then replaced by PT contracts.

In the same way that 75/25 was a national average so predominantly full time will be a national average but we all know what area that favours. Our office too is around 60/40.

So the moral of the story is ....vote no... because this new agreement is just another dishonest con.

[dvbuk55]

So the moral of the story is ....vote no... because this new agreement is just another dishonest con.

For deliveries it's pretty much more of the same old BT2010 lets just hope more people wake up to what this deal doesn't offer and votes a resounding NO this time around.

[Martin Walsh]

One of the strands in the National Delivery Review actually states...

13. Exploring the impact of resourcing mix and contract types to identify opportunities to improve efficiency and deal with workload variations

That isn't going to improve matters,It's hard to see how "improving efficiency and dealing with workload variations" can mean more full-time jobs.

Fish as you know there are a number of different things within that strand including exploring resourcing methods , seasonal variations etc.

In it is what I previously stated is the use of PDAs to identify actual delivery performance which you did not believe was going to happen.

The review on this subject is quite comprehensive and includes traffic check , methods checks , mix of Mail including D2D.

Some on here believe that there is some magic wand to be used on deliveries but there is not resolving issues of the past won't necessary help delivery staff for the future. TNT will impact on all urban deliveries , the trials in London demonstrate that there are many providers who currently use downstream access who will move to total by pass if it saves money and it does and then on selective items go back to downstream.

Parcels which currently make up almost 50% of Royal Mails revenue are in an highly competitive market where the consumer expects more.

We all know that Monday and Tuesday are normally lighter days , but some have a lot of retentions on a Monday and tracked can be higher. Wednesday is normally the heaviest day with Thursday to Saturday roughly the same. January to March is quite a low traffic period , the lead up to the end of the financial year being heavy , then from May to September lighter with August being the lowest. From September to December being first heavy with Autumn pressure and then Xmas.

Yet apart from Xmas when some have extra firms vans and extra hours all delivery offices have the same amount of HCTs , CDVs , firms etc in August when traffic is at its lowest as they do in October when traffic is at its highest. Most office still have a flat leave spread meaning that in August when there is low traffic they have the same numbers off as in October when apart form Xmas we have the most traffic. This means in the summer absorption often results in people being taken off their duty. In fact in some units vacancies are not being covered to all more absorption.

The role of the working group by visiting offices and speaking to reps and members is to see how this can be tackled. One of the things which can be done is more people who want the school holidays off in July and August could have it when traffic is lower. To help family friendly policies some could have their contract changed to have most school holidays off and meaning when traffic is higher they will work more hours.

The other issues which needs to be explore with PDAs being able to track staff absorption will not be going away. In the summer absorption is at its highest . Whilst no one like absorption , the biggest complaint is unplanned and unfair absorption. Well if I was a local rep and I was once and when there was lapsing during the summer I planned a different duty set for the summer so everyone knew in advance what they were doing in the main and the second was they got to share in any saving made from the lapsing which is where the incentive schemes comes in.

In terms of the current claim that we have not got a 75/25 ratio of the ft to pt , well the 75/25 was the claim after the BT Revisions have finished , clearly we still have loads of revisions to introduce and therefore there still lots of part FTCs who are employed on an fixed term contract who may or may not have a job once the revision has been introduced.

[dvbuk55]

In terms of the current claim that we have not got a 75/25 ratio of the ft to pt , well the 75/25 was the claim after the BT Revisions have finished , clearly we still have loads of revisions to introduce and therefore there still lots of part FTCs who are employed on an fixed term contract who may or may not have a job once the revision has been introduced.

It isn't a claim dingo, it's a published figure and under the current proposed agreement it states "predominantly full time" which means what exactly and how is it proposed to be maintained when the current 75/25, which was at least measurable, is replaced with a nonsense value?

As for the absorption and lapsing in real areas where deliveries have been revised and modernised for at least 5 years, do you not think that RM have utilised every single saving they can? That is the whole crux of the work load issue in delivery there simply is not any more savings to be made more particularly when the revisions were over 3 years ago and the traffic model has changed.

[Martin Walsh]

Dvbuk when did I say that 75/25 was not part of the BT agreement ? All I pointed out was that the figure was expected to be reached after every office had completed their Revisions. Until then there are a number of part time FTCs in units who may or may not have a. Job once revisions have been agreed.

Your next point in terms of your claim that offices have been transformed for 5 years is strange as the agreement was not endorsed until April 2010. The issue of performance is being covered within the agreement where there will be a review of how efficiency targets are set to increase understanding and ensure they are realistic achievable and sustainable in the workplace.

In terms of model weeks well the terms of reference will review whether traffic is accurate. Remember if you lose traffic but you keep the same amount of hours your performance drops and we have seen this with TNT in London.

Traffic models will change as well , parcels are growing and some offices will have an higher productivity. The agreement states you should set your resourcing meeting on the EP you agreed for your revision.

The problem is that some offices and I know that it was the policy of the some Branch's in one division was to agree Revisions at 100bsi on the mis guided believe that when the upper decile was agreed they would get jobs back. Of course the upper decile has never been agreed. It is not surprising that this division had the most problematic Revisions .

No office had to agree 100bsi or a set level of increased performance as it was negotiable which is why some offices have taken more time to agree as they would not give into Royal Mails agenda which was not covered or part of the national agreement.

[dvbuk55]

Dvbuk when did I say that 75/25 was not part of the BT agreement ? All I pointed out was that the figure was expected to be reached after every office had completed their Revisions. Until then there are a number of part time FTCs in units who may or may not have a. Job once revisions have been agreed.

Your next point in terms of your claim that offices have been transformed for 5 years is strange as the agreement was not endorsed until April 2010. The issue of performance is being covered within the agreement where there will be a review of how efficiency targets are set to increase understanding and ensure they are realistic achievable and sustainable in the workplace.

In terms of model weeks well the terms of reference will review whether traffic is accurate. Remember if you lose traffic but you keep the same amount of hours your performance drops and we have seen this with TNT in London.

Traffic models will change as well , parcels are growing and some offices will have an higher productivity. The agreement states you should set your resourcing meeting on the EP you agreed for your revision.

The problem is that some offices and I know that it was the policy of the some Branch's in one division was to agree Revisions at 100bsi on the mis guided believe that when the upper decile was agreed they would get jobs back. Of course the upper decile has never been agreed. It is not surprising that this division had the most problematic Revisions .

No office had to agree 100bsi or a set level of increased performance as it was negotiable which is why some offices have taken more time to agree as they would not give into Royal Mails agenda which was not covered or part of the national agreement.

Well contrary to what you may believe, the way forward also changed deliveries long before BT2010 which has created even more problems. I didn't say that you denied 75/25 wasn't part of BT2010 what I am saying is that is currently not the status quo which is 69/31 and that by inference you assume that there will be an end figure of 75/25 - now no-one in their right mind is going to believe the ratio is going to go up particularly as you say there are still many revisions to go. I would expect the ratio to go down and not up.

We in this area have actually increased the employee count but not on full time employment and it is because of the new build element. Nobody has been employed on a full time contract for years from induction. Royal Mail are perfectly happy to have a part time flexible work force prepared to work overtime and nothing is going to change that, as you rightly say job and knock has gone, which happened before BT2010 at least it did here, and yet you believe the FT ratio is going to increase.

Because the traffic model has changed there is a need to revisit the modernisation tools because the increase in parcels and packets has made the delivery time longer and consequently lapsing is no longer a given, but the managers need to be made aware of that.

[Martin Walsh]

Actually the way forward did not change deliveries. The interim Delivery Agreement and Performance Bonus scheme under the Fit to Deliver Programme change deliveries but that was 2001 when we had two deliveries.

You make an assumption that we will now not get to the 75/25 on the remaining the Revisions and it may get worse then 69/31 ratio. But there are a number of reasons why your wrong. Remember the Revisions which have still not been agreed have had vacancies over the last 3 years and a number of FTCs most on part time contracts ranging from 30 hours down have been recruited against the TM1 of the office. When the revision is eventually agreed those FTCs who have not done 2 years may well not have a job and these are mostly part time. The other aspect is that if the revision reduces full time duties and increases part time duties there is a financial position from Royal Mail and that is do they give a VR out which takes 3 years until they get the cost back and then recruit say a 26 or 30 hour contract.

Of course that's not too say that VR will not be offered and that's not to say some May wish to transfer or buy down hours but my experience is that Royal Mail senior management know it makes no financial sense that in an all full time office to suddenly decrease full time staff by say 15 and recruit 10 part timers. This is part of the reason some revisions have not progressed like some others and the reason why there are so many FTCs.

Your last point about the change in the mixed of Mail is covered within the agreement including reviewing flats , magazines , parcels and d2d it is part of the same strand as fish quoted from and therefore is to be reviewed and actions agreed before May .

[dvbuk55]

Whichever way you want to quote the ifs, ands and buts this deal is far too airy fairy to be voted in by deliveries and we definitely do not want yet another deal to end all deals with or without supposed legal bindings.

It is a difficult position to be negotiated but ignoring the issues in delivery for another 5 months after the agreement is put to the membership just will not do. There has been ample time to see the problems and to address the issues so why are we in deliveries to be side-lined again until AFTER the vote and presumed acceptance. It's all well and good to say "nothing is agreed etc" and then present a partial deal with just a supposed review which may or may not occur once the agreement is in and the urgency has been minimised.