North London Delivery revisions

[cloherty1976]

Really if dingo has got that for his members surely it's up to your individual reps to get that for there members. To me what's done is done and you can moan as much as you want but it's not going to change things. You will always have strong and weak representatives , some that look after themselves and some like an easy life. But really I think you should worry about your own individual areas and not worry if someone is better or worse off than yourselves. Most will always moan whatever the reps agree good or bad..

[chrisj]

At least I have not reported you to Moya or to the CWU for abusing your position and winding people up on an internet forum...

To debate, you have to know how to debate and you have to take what others are saying on board as well as have your opinion... And where your opinion is in the minority, you have to lick your wounds. This site is a little militant but that is not what most of the thread is about. A lot of the post here is about supporting each other as posties and/or as Union members.

If your comment continues to alienate some sections and in some instances belittle, dismiss and gloat about other people's misfortune, you can only have yourself to blame.

There is nothing special about your posts - like I said, I have read things back to 2009 before the last agreement - you spout the same things regardless of what is happening on the ground away from your base.

Exactly chris and the fact that the majority of the rest of the country was currently performing above 85EP before BT2010 was even negotiated was already known by the union so all this talk of manning up, sticking together, getting the best out of agreements and solidarity was just complete and utter bullshit.

If you bothered to read the above post from Fish and take it in then you would have seen that an office already working at 85EP with a 10 or 15% improvement is already close to 100. That is probably what happened with N6...

So, it is not always about the Reps agreeing to 100BSI, it is more than the revision will take them to that level otherwise what will be the point of Revision and paying them £1000.

Dont bother with the charade of the debate. There will be very little to debate after the Votes and then you can go back to your job and we can go back to discussing the real issues that affect us all...

[fishtank]

its not their fault that reps in other areas agreed to higher rates

Really if dingo has got that for his members surely it's up to your individual reps to get that for there members.

I don't know why this is so difficult to understand you can't set the rate lower than your current performance so in the majority of cases the reps had no choice but to set these higher rates. That was Bob's agreement. You could have the most 100% solid, hardcore members and that won't change.

It screwed over the more efficient offices and left the inefficient offices as the winners and the union knew it would before they even signed the agreement which makes the sight of Bob Gibson blaming the reps and members even harder to stomach.

[chrisj]

here is a quote from me... I am talking about efficiencies and about your way of winding people up not about your local Reps or all workers in London...

You can see that from the list some offices are far more efficient than others... Why?

So it is perhaps unfair to lump all of them together but that is dingo's fault for making the argument 'us' and 'them'. It will be interesting to see about some other offices in London - some will be even less efficient, I guess.

[Martin Walsh]

Chris , I will just continue to do what I am elected to do represent the members I am accountable for.

The difference is I don't blame everyone else for everything bad in Royal Mail , some of us take responsibility and do something about it.

I support all members who suffer injustices but in London we have a policy which has been there for over 30 years if you want a unit wants the support of the branch and the division then they have to first get the support of their office.

Now fish has said that the average was 85 where did he get that figure from because that was nowhere near the figure Royal Mail presented to the CWU in 2009 .

In terms of a debate I have been on this site for a number of years I like a debate but I like to think I have a bit more class then constantly attack a poster rather than debate the issue but each to their own.

Bernard I posted what I did because I think sometimes we all need to deal with facts rather then what we believe , just because something happens in your office does not mean it happens in offices 3 hours away. Now in terms of why some offices are higher then others in North London is because their starting base was higher most had a 200 pound revision prior to their £800 revision.

[dvbuk55]

here is a quote from me... I am talking about efficiencies and about your way of winding people up not about your local Reps or all workers in London...

You can see that from the list some offices are far more efficient than others... Why?

So it is perhaps unfair to lump all of them together but that is dingo's fault for making the argument 'us' and 'them'. It will be interesting to see about some other offices in London - some will be even less efficient, I guess.

I'm surprised they're not on Gardening Leave or whatever other pastime keeps them occupied.

[cloherty1976]

here is a quote from me... I am talking about efficiencies and about your way of winding people up not about your local Reps or all workers in London...

You can see that from the list some offices are far more efficient than others... Why?

So it is perhaps unfair to lump all of them together but that is dingo's fault for making the argument 'us' and 'them'. It will be interesting to see about some other offices in London - some will be even less efficient, I guess.

I'm surprised they're not on Gardening Leave or whatever other pastime keeps them occupied.

Can posties have gardening leave? I thought it was just managers.

[chrisj]

Thank God we have a website like this to give us a chance to know what is happening in different parts.
http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/communit ... 42&t=50323" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(it is shame that started only last year - there are some many threads on here where one can find out vaguely what is happening elsewhere so no need to patronise)

It is like listening to RM or reading their Courier sometimes when some continually says just because it happens in your office does not mean it happens everywhere - yes, of course, Sherlock but sh*t is still happening.

So 4 years after the introduction of Modernisation and efficiency saving, we have an office that is just moved from e.g 56EP to 66EP. And you wonder why some people are shocked and depressed about some getting away with things...

[OnAFlyer]

Fish my understanding is that a lot of North East decided to agree to an higher indoor EP some 100 as they believed when the upper decile came they would get more full time jobs.

I do believe they did get some part timers a full time job. However recent figures in the North East has shown that they have over 50% part timers. However if you do agree a higher EP then if a full timer leaves or gets dismissed then a part time normally stands a better chance of getting a full time job.

Whereas if your in a lower EP office when a full timer leaves then a part time normally comes in.

The real issue is that performance in delivery offices is based on a system which most DOMs do not understand and actual hours worked are not recorded which gives a total false reading.

Most senior managers and reps say when the work is available there is no difference in a postmens performance , the issue is to whether the work is there at the available time or wether there is enough work for the hours.

How does higher efficiency equal more FT jobs? Surely less hours means less FT work, it certainly does in our office.

Do all the north London staff come in on time, take breaks etc? If so then all the data should have been accurate and there shouldn't be one office working at 66ep and others at 90+.

It's no good you saying people are attacking the London membership, you've basically come on here and gloated that they all got great revisions and if other offices didn't it's all their fault.

The CWU is a NATIONAL union, all the reps from local to national are supposed to be singing from the same hymn sheet but they're not. The blame for that can only lie with the CWU itself. This new agreement and what you've said makes it clear it's every office for themselves.

[Martin Walsh]

On a flyer I said and it helps to read what I said before commenting , if your revision has come in at 100 then if you have a full time duty holder dismissed then it is more likely their job will be filled at full time and therefore a part timer will have the chance to go full time. Whereas if your in an office witch is say at 70 EP and a full time duty holder leaves then it is more likely that the duty will then be downgraded to part time , this will increase the EP in that office !

We are a national union but offices start at different time , have different duty patterns , different hours for part time staff , different spans , different travel times , some have all CDVs , some have all HCT , some have a mix , some have more times deliveries , some have more tracked , some are outhouses from their postcode , some have an higher ratio of full timers , some have longer Saturdays , some have more overtime , some have more d2d and some offices in areas where the cost of living is lower have more droning power for their wages.

The only reason why we still have national agreements is that offices can decide what suits their members. Do you really think if the union came out with a national agreement saying everyone has to be working at this rate , doing this span and start and finish at this time , have this number of full time duties , all part times must now work at one set of hours say 20 , that all offices cannot have more than this level of overtime that such an agreement would be voted in ?

[Glenno]

Dingo you might be right , you might be wrong, but how can you justify offices working at 64% bsi or what ever and then claim the Union has done a good deal when other offices are over 100% bsi, you have in my opinion split the Membership with no end game, would you like to elaborate and not gloat

[dvbuk55]

TBH why would he be bothered he's not doing any work @ 66 or 100 BSI.............. on second thoughts depending on your understanding of BS he could be well over the 100 % BS

[aiden01]

really dingo why do you bother you just get hammered time after time by the same people.

[BernardBresslaw]

Dingo, the fact is local reps are not receiving the same degree of support as London reps, which is why they are agreeing to unrealistic workloads in their offices. I have only been in this job 6 years and I have seen the area rep set foot in my office precisely 3 times, let alone anyone higher up! There needs to be more involvement on a local level instead of the approach now which consists of one poor sod trying to change the world on his own.

There is a two tier structure to the union, and like it or not, the way most folk think, is that the union doesn't care about what happens outside London. The evidence tends to support this hypothesis.

[dvbuk55]

really dingo why do you bother you just get hammered time after time by the same people.

I ask myself that same question many many times - why does he bother,...... d'you think it's like a masochistic thing?