Issues In Deliveries

[drb]

I can see and understand what the issues are with the new agreement and how much it does not,(or does to some), for deliveries. Revisions,executive action,bullying. I still maintain that it is wrong to blame national officers on issues that should be branch/divisional responsibilities.

If I "grab" a post from the other posts on the site,(and I did not have to look too hard either), here is the typical scenario :

Hi, our smallish office is due for 2010 delivery methods very soon. In our office we have no rep and the area rep is off on long term sick leave. Could you wonderful people please pass on any advice and info which would help our office and me out. The view of our office manager is, "he has completely got this under control and if we stick with him on this minor change, everybody will benefit from his expertise?"

It is quite clear here that the 6 step process will not be followed. Do divisional know about this? Probably not. The second point on the above is if the above office are members. The branch should run a "mapping excersise" on members/non members,and liase with the organising department at CWU HQ. Trouble is...that will not be done. It is a branch responsibility.

Thirdly if the first two points are not covered off then you can forget about an IR disagreement coming from that office. After the revision the employers will add that office to the famous list of "successful revisions". Grrr!

I do recall looking at the amount of disagreements last year nationally. Only 70,(yes..just 70), disgreements where submitted to CWU HQ and presented to the PEC last year. All those requesting ballots where granted too.

The question/debate remains in my thoughts. Do we change the structure?

Here is another "teaser". During a postal forum debate,a point of view from a mail centre rep stated,(World Class Mail), that "we should have a rep on every "pillar" so that the CWU are involved". A good point. The problem there is we do not have enough reps to do that! That is my second question: Where is the new blood,(new reps) coming through?

[TrueBlueTerrier]

That is my second question: Where is the new blood,(new reps) coming through?

Just my opinion but - The current structure of the CWU, at branch and more senior levels does not promote reps coming through unless they are politically rather than industrially minded. Even if you have a fantastic rep in a small office who could be a future leader of the Union, he is not going to get the chance because reps at larger offices, even with their own best intentions, have a bigger support base on which to build a voter base and progress up the chain.

The Union structure does need to be looked at as a matter of urgency.

[Martin Walsh]

That is my second question: Where is the new blood,(new reps) coming through?

Just my opinion but - The current structure of the CWU, at branch and more senior levels does not promote reps coming through unless they are politically rather than industrially minded. Even if you have a fantastic rep in a small office who could be a future leader of the Union, he is not going to get the chance because reps at larger offices, even with their own best intentions, have a bigger support base on which to build a voter base and progress up the chain.

The Union structure does need to be looked at as a matter of urgency.

TBT I think its is wider then this, you have lots of good local reps but the role of the local rep and indeed Delivery Office Manager has fundamentally changed, years ago a manager had a lot more freedom to make a decision in negotiations which allowed local reps to get good agreements. Nowadays Royal Mail do not give any freedom to a DOM to reach an agreement and everything is very centralised. It is never going to change as now we are a public limited company shareholders are never going to allow Delivery Office Managers a free run at what happens in their offices. Remember an average delivery office has a spend of 5 million per year.

This is why structure changes make little difference at the policy is going to be in the hands of the directors with very little freedom for anyone below either area rep or local rep.

Now in terms of a rep from a small office not getting elected well look at Dave Ward who was from a fairly small office of Tooting , Bob Gibson Southend , Terry Pullinger from Dartford , Billy from Liverpool , the pec come from offices like Chingford , Camden and Covertry. Divisional Reps come from offices such as Greenwich , Victoria , Enfield , Maidstone , Dartford , Birmingham , Nottingham , Reading , Liverpool. Not all those offices are big and branches do often have good reps come forward. But most branches do judge reps on the basis of do they walk the walk as well as talk the talk and this has often found out lots of reps who can talk a good fight but when you look at their office it is a mess and they have not attempted to resolve that mess.

[Puppetmaster]

That is my second question: Where is the new blood,(new reps) coming through?

Just my opinion but - The current structure of the CWU, at branch and more senior levels does not promote reps coming through unless they are politically rather than industrially minded. Even if you have a fantastic rep in a small office who could be a future leader of the Union, he is not going to get the chance because reps at larger offices, even with their own best intentions, have a bigger support base on which to build a voter base and progress up the chain.

The Union structure does need to be looked at as a matter of urgency.

Many Postmen an women are very unhappy with the national leaders of the Union.
I know a excellent area Rep, who at 1 time was very ambitious, had strong local support from members and in my view had the Potential to go far either in the Union or the Labour Party.
Since seeing the light he is no longer a member of the Labour Party after the Local branch appointed a total outsider to be the local candidate, someone who did not come from the area or had attended any local meetings.

If he progresses in the Union ,his pay will fall as he will not be able to do overtime, also his family life will suffer due to the long periods of booze ups (sorry meetings)
Such a shame as this guy has real talent, and in a fight ,you would want him on your side.
I see his job as area rep hampered by National leaders.

[Martin Walsh]

I don't think anyone will disagree with you that the union needs to be restructured but the debate is how.

1 The power in decsion making has been in Royal Mail very centralised and under a PLC this will continue. Therefore whilst what's makes the postal side of the union unique in the trade union is that we have a local structure where Royal Mail have to discuss changes with them in line with an agreed framework? This will shortly become a legal right. The problem is that a DOM gets not flexibility on the running of his or her office and the DSM micro manages the office as his or her job is on the line if savings or quality is at risk , the Delivery Director controls the DSM and then the Delivery Director is then managed by the Geography Operations Director knows as the GODs.

Most issues now end up being discussed at Divisonal level or at least area level.

Most Branch's only have one officia normally the branch secretary to organise the branch? Royal Mail do not have to fund the release of the this offical and unless the. Branch agrees with the business for an agreed amount of release then the branch has to fund the release and this is a very expensive expenditure as Royal Mail charge for the cost of the coverage of the release. So whilst Royal Mail fund the release of an area rep , not all reps cover just their. Branch delivery offices a number go across branch boundaries.

Now in terms of why some don't want to stand for a Divisonal or area job , well not all want to work outside their normal hours for a vairety of reasons. When your a Divisonal rep whilst you get good pay you signed a variation of contract which means you have no set hours and you have to be there to resolve any issues within your Divisonal at whatever time they occur. The other factor which some don't like is that you spend a great time of your day traveling for instance if your based in Plymouth,you could travel 4 hours for a meeting and have a 4 hour meeting and then travell 4 hours home or you end up staying overnight.

The other factor is that it is a responsible postion and you are often in highly pressurised issues like disputes where there is pressure from members and of course some do not handle pressure that well.

Now in terms of Natioanl postions PEC or NEC some don't like having to travel to Wimbledon and as most ops managers are in London then some have to stay in London for the week and if you do That for 46 weeks per year or Travel around the UK assisting Branch's then it does put strain on relationships and that's another reason why some choose not to stand.

Another reason is what you pointed out that PEC members only get paid their current basic pay and not any overtime they normally do. Now for those who are a fair distance say Birmingham or beyond they get 95 overnight substituance every night they stay in Wimbledon but of course unless they find digs which are cheaper normal hotels around Wimbledon are around 70 pounds per night.

Those from the South East do not gain any overnight substituance and therefore lose their overtime as well.

The CWU. Have long argued that the PEC should be a paid rate similar to a Divisonal rep but Royal Mail do not want to pay for that and not all PEC members are in Royal Mail and the CWU. In particular the BT section would be opposed to the union funding this.

So whilst we all agree to change we should all understand the issues.

[dvbuk55]

Well put dingo - those are some of the minuses are there any plus values?

Well the negatives are there for all to see - now any ideas how we are going to drag the CWU out of the 70s and in to the 21st century? How we are going to create a NATIONAL organisation instead of an insular southern based one. How there are no "winners and losers" but a fair and equal members charter. Where the role of the union leaders is to contest the employers not side with them. Where unity is brought back to the shop floor and where membership of the union is seen as a plus and not a minus.

Just as an afterthought dingo why don't the union spend the money collected, albeit through the good grace of RM, and pay full time union representatives throughout RM. Surely the members deserve to see some uniformity for the money they pay instead of poor and non existent representation in many respects. Pay RM for offices and facilities and have truly independent representatives who are on the shop floor instead of ensconced in offices miles away as a place to hide.

[drb]

Rather then a knee jerk reaction,(and the union structure may be right). However certain issues have arisen since BT 2010,and damage has been done. I can see what certain members are upset or disillusioned with the CWU and certainly why the "promises" of the new agreement sound hollow to them.

The full/part time split has,(since 2010), been abused by management.Thus breaking the unity aspect within the workplace. Offices have had revisions soon after 2010 set at 100 BSI,with later start times and none or minimal revision lump sums. The unrealistic targets passed down to local managers have encouraged bully to a large degree. This all has been on going for 3 years plus. The question is why?

Well I believe the business targeted those areas where they could. No local reps/weak branches/low membership. The national officers,(and there are probably not enough of them), have now,(probably) recognised that the role of HR within the business,(some would say "union busters"), looked at the density of membership throughout the country. Remember they are privy to this info. I wonder whether the national CWU where ready for the closure of DO's and mail centres, and the sheer pace of the business doing so? These closures where not for financial reasons either,(although it was probably disguised as). Those strong membership,(or militant) offices and mail centres diluted the trade union once the closures occurred. Add to that the amount of part time who,(in DO's) we do not see nor communicate. In fact some divisions,(or strongholds) of strong CWU membership densities where geographically split in two, giving regional directors for both. One split would have the mail centre,(a strong CWU membership density), and the other good proactive reps. The result would then be isolation.

I do not believe that the "blame game" on this debate nor on this site helps. It is how we can organise better. As previously stated,we are now a private company so now is the time,(clean slate), to look within our trade union structure and how we are ready and able to deal with issues that quite simply just did not exist some 10 years ago.I remember 15 years ago a branch had an area delivery rep who also had the role of health and safety area rep. That could not happen now,(the issues are far far too many). Add to that the changing face of the mail traffic and the "end to end" mail operators in parts of the country.

However it is not all doom and gloom, the fact that our national officers where able to get the employer to talk to us is a good thing. Some divisions have organised and done some good recruitment in weak areas. There are areas of our trade union in which may have worked 10 years ago but do not now. I believe areas such as the legal side of things are much stronger and would require a lot more training for the legal officers within branches. Political officers within branches are probably more important now then ever,(and they would need to understand their own importance).
Is our education department fit for purpose?
Is the lack of IR reps a cause for concern?

[dvbuk55]

TBH the current CWU philosophy of it's good to talk hasn't actually produced much, but there again the 2 day token strike did nothing either and in strolled BT2010 with all the road show paraphernalia to get a yes vote to be followed by yet another road show for the AFG2014 - which I might add is almost a year after BT2010 expired and London has still to complete modernisation.

I feel the delivery members are being played to suit the ends of the CWU and not to the benefit of the members. A seed change is required and the chattering that supports that from senior members does nothing to actually bring it about and the general consensus is that whereas ordinary members have had to modernise, the union and its senior officers are quite happy to stroll along in the same old way.

[fishtank]

I think that a thread entitled Issues In Deliveries that turns into a discussion about how much PEC members get paid says it all.

This isn't brain surgery and to be honest the union has been talking about change for so long now without actually doing any changing it's became a self parody.

All the union has to do is start listening to its members directly rather than relying on branch promoted opinion, Regulate branch organisation, recruitment and spending more strictly and if necessary close and merge branches or even open new branches,

Question those responsible for representation at Area and Division level far more deeply over their workload and capabilities and if necessary retrain or even in very extreme cases remove some from post.

Get out in greater numbers and at a higher level to problem offices, encourage offices to put reps in place, encourage or even force some local reps to update their training and encourage members to use their branch officers and facilities.

Renew the link between the member and branch and the link between branch and HQ because those are the two places where the union is weakest at the moment.

It's not difficult but we have a past record of overcomplicating the issues and doing nothing about it which obviously suits those sitting with their feet up doing the least they can get away with.

[Martin Walsh]

Fish the thread turn this way because I think the debate on this site has become stale. if you have a different opinion then the norm on here or if you dare be a Mail centre worker your not listened to at all.

The debate on deliveries on here has become laughable. It's based on assumptions and believes rather then any facts. Whilst this is a debating board , those who have a difference are labelled as sell outs or not interested in protecting delivery members. Quite frankly the debate is stale. I would rather deal with the members I meet in different offices every week then spend time debating delivery issues with some who only know what happening in their own office and then imagine this as the norm across the UK .

Now you know what happens in some Branch's if the local rep does not adhere to branch policy they remove the rep credentials which stops him being the local rep? This means that the local rep must abide by national and branch policy otherwise he or she is not the local rep.

you suggest let's listen the members but then will complain if the members vote in the agreement. Branch's should have to meet the members in units at least once every 6 months on a range of issues. Whilst listening to the members is important , some members may not always know to get what they want may mean that they have to change as well and this is where the union needs to explain more.

The fact we are a PLC will change things as well , profit will be the name of the game for the new shareholders and that's why the legal guarantees are so important.

Equally if we want to be honest with everyone , deliveries is going to change again as. Parcels are going to be most profitable market including barcoding , tracking , time specific parcels , returns all changing the role of delivery routes within the next 3 years.

We all want to stop bullying but if some of you think Royal Mail will come out and say we are sorry for bullying you and admit we were wrong and we will promise to not do it again then your wait a long time as if they did millions would be taken off the share price and they won't do it? This is why the union is rolling out the FDAR joint. Statement.

[gluteus maximus]

Totally off topice but:

After watching that film "made in Daganham" last night, it seems to me most top union officials are entrenched in their positions and will do anything to maintain the status quo, to the some what detriment of the members

It seems nothing changes, even nearly 40 years later in the heirachy. It seems the CWU are now advocating putting people into reserved seats, all in the name of "proportionality" More like a job for the boys
Union officials, including area/Branch are more interested in securing their own full time release than their members

Is it any wonder people are losing faith in trade unions

[Martin Walsh]

The trade union movement has moved on along way from the days of the ford dispute which led to equal pay. Who remembers when the dockers and others marched for Enoch Powell ?

Unions have moved on a long way , we were only at the TUC on Tuesday discussing more proportionality in the union including rule changes. yes there are egos in any Political organisation there is even egos on this board.

let's not compare us with ford during the 60s and 70s. In deliveries there are less then 11% women and in Mail centres there are significantly more women.

[gluteus maximus]

The trade union movement has moved on along way from the days of the ford dispute which led to equal pay. Who remembers when the dockers and others marched for Enoch Powell ?

Unions have moved on a long way , we were only at the TUC on Tuesday discussing more proportionality in the union including rule changes. yes there are egos in any Political organisation there is even egos on this board.

let's not compare us with ford during the 60s and 70s. In deliveries there are less then 11% women and in Mail centres there are significantly more women.

I appreciate the reply Dingo, I take it you are a senior Trade Union Official? The reason i say that is that i have done the media courses myself and your response is typical in evading the question being asked by deflection. The point i was making was that the trade union hierarchy has changed little in 40 years, and you then deflect that question on women membership at ford of 40 years ago without addressing the real question being asked

[dvbuk55]

Totally off topice but:

After watching that film "made in Daganham" last night, it seems to me most top union officials are entrenched in their positions and will do anything to maintain the status quo, to the some what detriment of the members

It seems nothing changes, even nearly 40 years later in the heirachy. It seems the CWU are now advocating putting people into reserved seats, all in the name of "proportionality" More like a job for the boys
Union officials, including area/Branch are more interested in securing their own full time release than their members

Is it any wonder people are losing faith in trade unions

And why the number of people who join unions is consistently falling. Perhaps it's time to forget a formal centralised union and move more to a workplace committee and go it alone because as it stands that's exactly what's happening. We have a centralised negotiation making agreements over a number of years and then leave it to the unit rep to negotiate at shop floor level within the constraints of some airy fairy idea of what SHOULD happen but is way off the reality of everyday working. In the meantime the chatterers are moving the goalposts over the length of the agreement BUT the changes are not retrospective, so if you agree a revision two years before new tools, new procedures etc you're stuck with it.

[dvbuk55]

The trade union movement has moved on along way from the days of the ford dispute which led to equal pay. Who remembers when the dockers and others marched for Enoch Powell ?

Unions have moved on a long way , we were only at the TUC on Tuesday discussing more proportionality in the union including rule changes. yes there are egos in any Political organisation there is even egos on this board.

let's not compare us with ford during the 60s and 70s. In deliveries there are less then 11% women and in Mail centres there are significantly more women.

Spoken like a true politician, answer the question you want to answer and not the question asked. You're a career union man dingo plain and simple not an employee of RM and speaking of egos.........................

Proportionality? What on earth has proportionality got to do with delivery issues? If you'd said the failure of the CWU to address the issues that would have been germane but how many women are in delivery posts is irrelevant unless you want to compare the low number in comparison to mail centres is an indication of the work load.