Designs of rm2000 frame

[essexlorraine]

Please can you tell me, does anyone have a rm2000 frame with either 6 wings (3 each side) or a design using 2 flat bases with wings? Normal frame with 4 wings (2 each side) is to high for me, so a require a design that will accommodate my delivery round using lower 3 rows.

[Judgee]

Used to have two flat bases with a double wing on one side. Felt like I'd walked ten miles before I'd even started. Changed it to one flat base in the middle with a double wing on one side and a triple on the other, which was much better. Your best bet is to go for a curved frame as much as possible. The longer straight ones is just far too much walking up and down!

[Tuffers-1875]

Try using the old box fittings from the old days when you had to put so many houses in each box and then had to 'place' the mail into round order on a rural! Not like the softy, namby pampy fittings of today

I didn't give a shiny back then either.

[arnold cheshire]

Please can you tell me, does anyone have a rm2000 frame with either 6 wings (3 each side) or a design using 2 flat bases with wings? Normal frame with 4 wings (2 each side) is to high for me, so a require a design that will accommodate my delivery round using lower 3 rows.

i wouldnt mind one in my garage

[arnold cheshire]

Please can you tell me, does anyone have a rm2000 frame with either 6 wings (3 each side) or a design using 2 flat bases with wings? Normal frame with 4 wings (2 each side) is to high for me, so a require a design that will accommodate my delivery round using lower 3 rows.

do you want to swap one ?

[essexlorraine]

Try using the old box fittings from the old days when you had to put so many houses in each box and then had to 'place' the mail into round order on a rural! Not like the softy, namby pampy fittings of today

I didn't give a shiny back then either.

Yes I used to use one of them back in the old days

[essexlorraine]

Used to have two flat bases with a double wing on one side. Felt like I'd walked ten miles before I'd even started. Changed it to one flat base in the middle with a double wing on one side and a triple on the other, which was much better. Your best bet is to go for a curved frame as much as possible. The longer straight ones is just far too much walking up and down!

Yep my old frame was 2 flat bases 1 wing either side, a lot of walking, but no shoulder pain from reaching over head height, old frame was changed to a '''standard'' frame Now trying to find a design that is expectable all round. Thanks for your input.

[Glenno]

Please can you tell me, does anyone have a rm2000 frame with either 6 wings (3 each side) or a design using 2 flat bases with wings? Normal frame with 4 wings (2 each side) is to high for me, so a require a design that will accommodate my delivery round using lower 3 rows.

Hope this helps


30 November 2012
Agreement on the use of additional 5th and 6th Wings on RM 2000 Prep Frames



No. 893/12


Ref: 540


Date:30th November 2012







TO ALL BRANCHES WITH POSTAL MEMBERS





Dear Colleague,



Agreement on the use of additional 5th and 6th Wings on RM 2000 Prep Frames



Agreement has now been reached with regard to the use of additional wings on RM 2000 prep frames.



Recent revision activity predominantly due to the introduction of new delivery methods has seen a growth in the number of delivery points for each delivery. This has led to a greater demand for larger frames, which in turn has also led to a significant number of Delivery Offices across the country developing potentially unsafe frame configurations outside of the maximum agreed standard of a base and four wings.



As a consequence the Outdoor department met with Royal Mail at their request with a view to expanding the current maximum frame configuration size. It is worth noting that the design of RM2000’s in offices where such extended frame configurations do exist outside of the agreed standard, have been fitted inconsistently, as well as not complying with the Provision and Use of Work Regulations (PuWER), in essence there were no generic standards in terms of safety and safety documentation in existence.



In some workplaces the extension of 5th and 6th wings has seen them held together with bag ties and without suitable support struts rendering the frames potentially unsafe and unstable. RoMec now have bespoke PuWER approved kit available to them to ensure that all frames are now of a sound and robust standard (see page 5, FIRA Report).



FIRA have carried out tests and produced a technical report on an RM2000 Frame to evaluate their stability. They applied weighted loads of 45 Kilogrammes onto each row of the wings of an RM2000 frame (see page 6, FIRA Report) over a continuous seven day period to establish whether the RM2000 conformed to industry standard. This was successfully proven and it was the first time that such work had been undertaken.



The agreement is intended to expand on the menu of options available in Delivery Offices with regard to RM2000’s. For example, the use of “A” and “B” frames can still be an option. Double slotting which is a preferred option in some offices can still continue. However the new agreement will provide an alternative option to alleviate the use of both “A” and B” frames and double slotting where this is called for and where space allows.



The efficient use of space is also a matter which needs to be considered and the agreement to use 5th and 6th wings does not detract from the agreement on space standards within Delivery Offices contained in LTB 070/12. The space standards contained in Indoor Work Methods is a stand-alone agreement with minimum standards which must be met irrespective of any changes in frame size. It is not an avenue for managers to detract from the minimum space standards contained within that LTB.



Options which are now available due to the new agreement:



Extension of packet sorting using 5th and 6th wings; See below one method which can now be introduced to alleviate the issue of packet storage on RM2000 frames. This allows for an element of greater flexibility with regard to sorting packets on RM2000’s.







This is ergonomically more efficient reducing the need to lift packets above shoulder height.



As mentioned previously the use of 5th and 6th wings can alleviate the need for double slotting and also for “A” and “B” frames.



The CWU have been fully involved in all aspects of this trial and support its use where appropriate in line with the agreed documentation (attached) and the agreed space standards.



All agreed documentation is attached to this LTB and includes the report from FIRA (Furniture Industry Research Association), RM2000 preparation guide, RM2000 5th & 6th Wings Safety Assessment (PuWER) SAC1 and the Ergonomics Evaluation of 5 and 6 wings on RM2000 Sorting Frames. Also below is the link to the Indoor Work Methods documentation.



http://www.cwu.org/indoor-work-method-guidance.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Any enquiries to Bob Gibson’s Office, quoting reference 540

Email address: hnutley@cwu.org



Yours sincerely

Bob Gibson
Assistant Secretary


More info +

[essexlorraine]

Thanks Glenno, that might do very nicely indeed,

[glenfiddich]

http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/communit ... 00#p283102" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
some pics here

[bigcol]

Normal frame with 4 wings (2 each side) is to high for me, so a require a design that will accommodate my delivery round using lower 3 rows.

You'd have trouble with my frame. Slots on the top row.

[clashcityrocker]

Normal frame with 4 wings (2 each side) is to high for me, so a require a design that will accommodate my delivery round using lower 3 rows.

You'd have trouble with my frame. Slots on the top row.

I believe RM had to pay compensation to a worker who developed a RSI as a result of slots being placed on the top row of the frame.
It is a serious breach of H&S.
I'd have a word with a WCM pillar and see what they say........

[bigcol]

I believe RM had to pay compensation to a worker who developed a RSI as a result of slots being placed on the top row of the frame.
It is a serious breach of H&S.
I'd have a word with a WCM pillar and see what they say........

WCM

Perhaps I should claim as the bottom row is too low and hurts my back.

Always makes me laugh when I see this kind of language. Anyone who thinks that one case applies to all doesn't have a clue about H&S.

[essexlorraine]

Normal frame with 4 wings (2 each side) is to high for me, so a require a design that will accommodate my delivery round using lower 3 rows.

I believe RM had to pay compensation to a worker who developed a RSI as a result of slots being placed on the top row of the frame.
It is a serious breach of H&S.
I'd have a word with a WCM pillar and see what they say........

It was WCM's actions that got me into the situation I have found myself in, by changing the design of my frame, to a design that is unsuitable for me to work on!!!