The 2015 Business Plan, VR and The Part-Time Ratio.

[fishtank]

It has became clear that the main thrust of the 2015 Business Plan is to remove full-time staff from delivery, the problem with that is very few offices have surplus staff only potential and dubious surplus indoor hours based on a worst case scenario of declining traffic and increased competition.

The plan to get around this was to offer buy-downs to existing staff to remove these hours but because of the new tax position and the fact that Royal Mail are not flexible around attendance patterns after a buy down there were very few takers.

The new plan is to offer full VR in offices even if they don't have surplus hours and back-fill these vacancies with 24 hr part-time contracts, existing staff will pick up the "slack" indoor work.

A couple of questions.

Is it entirely lawful to offer redundancies on this basis given that only part of the job will be "redundant"?

Do we not have a legally binding agreement commiting the business to a 75:25 full-time/part-time ratio?

If this is no longer sustainable why isn't anyone (business or union) being honest with us?

I know...that's 3 questions.

[taxi4leighton]

my big fear is if they try to restore us working 6 days a week
that would solve alot of problems for them and save millions
it would be a nightmare for us

[slinder123]

the union will not allow royal mail to play the cards that way . they fought on our behalf for a 5 day week and a 75 /25 ft /pt ratio i for one would vote heavily against any tricks like the mentioned vr when a office is low enougth on staff

[clashcityrocker]

Is it entirely lawful to offer redundancies on this basis given that only part of the job will be "redundant"?
Do we not have a legally binding agreement commiting the business to a 75:25 full-time/part-time ratio?
If this is no longer sustainable why isn't anyone (business or union) being honest with us?

1. If the VRs being offered are on the current terms I don't think we need to worry ourselves overly with the legal niceties.
Better VR than compulsory redundancy or "performance issues".
(Incidentally we have 12 VRs on the table and not enough takers. Reducing the workforce by VR simply might not work)

2. I thought the last agreement spoke only vaguely of a majority f/t workforce.
And I think that is in the business as a whole and not just on delivery.
(Oh no - the MCs are going to shaft us again )

3.Because
a) they are all muppets.
b) they don't have a clue
c) they don't give a toss.

[rubberbond]

the union will not allow royal mail to play the cards that way . they fought on our behalf for a 5 day week and a 75 /25 ft /pt ratio i for one would vote heavily against any tricks like the mentioned vr when a office is low enougth on staff

Yeah right, they have done a sterling job so far . Not. What chance are we going to have to vote on this,under what circumstances? Royal Mail will just ignore any agreement like they always do.
Legally binding ,my arse.

[Postie45]

The new plan is to offer full VR in offices even if they don't have surplus hours and back-fill these vacancies with 24 hr part-time contracts, existing staff will pick up the "slack" indoor work.

Where did you get info that this is the plan ?

[Martin Walsh]

Allowing a full time to go on VR and recuit in a 24 hour contract has been around for some time. It is legal but it is a very expensive way for Royal Mail to go for as the average cost of a VR is 50 k and if you are backfilling 24 hours and really only making 15 hours of full time duty reduandant then it will take more than 3 years before Royal Mail make a real profit on that saving.

Due to the change in tax law buys downs are no longer attractive. The issue is that every office has to do a review which shows whether an office is still seeing traffic growth or its is seeing decline. The issue is that whilst a decline may see a small impact in lowering a call rate the realitity is this will be offset by an increase in attendance calls or new delivery point growth. The problem is that if traffic has declined then the issue is you don't need as many hours indoors. Hence the move to more part time posts. The reality is that 24 hour contracts working over 5 days is a risk to the business and three is a lot of evidence that 24 hour contracts end up getting more hours to complete which makes a mockery of any saving on a full time duty.

The Agenda for growth did not say 75/25 as it is legal document and could have meant if there was any change it could be used in court but both parties know that 75/25 was the principle. Which is why walk optimisation is a danger which the CWU has to oppose.

Now let's be clear the union and the members are facing a tidal wave of change which is unprecedented whether that is unfair competition which will eventually destroy the USO if not reigned in , we have a more demanding shareholder who even wants to ditch not profit items altogether , Ofcom are coming into review Royal Mail starting in London , walk optimisation and bench merging all game changers.

those who mock the CWU ! How would you like to face the above without a union ?

[clashcityrocker]

Which is why walk optimisation is a danger which the CWU has to oppose.

What is walk optimisation?

[Postie45]

Allowing a full time to go on VR and recuit in a 24 hour contract has been around for some time. It is legal but it is a very expensive way for Royal Mail to go for as the average cost of a VR is 50 k and if you are backfilling 24 hours and really only making 15 hours of full time duty reduandant then it will take more than 3 years before Royal Mail make a real profit on that saving.

yes but years 4+ theyre laughing

[Martin Walsh]

It's what the project of moving to one wave sequencing which will move traffic later , starts times and probably move the 3 pm letter time later !

[the mad woman]

Have job shares been stopped if not how do you get one

[fishtank]

Now let's be clear the union and the members are facing a tidal wave of change which is unprecedented

And our DGS(P) wants to bail out and play politics with the other children.
Perfect timing.

[Martin Walsh]

Remember Billy choose to call his election a year early and therefore has bought the election out and of course Dave was always going to stand.

[chrisj]

It's what the project of moving to one wave sequencing which will move traffic later , starts times and probably move the 3 pm letter time later !

I am sorry to say; why is this a problem or even dangerous?

The term itself sounds like a very sensible idea - walk optimisation is exactly what we should all be wishing for to make us more efficient and competitive.

I think CWU should stop thinking like the workers that think this is a job that should remain one that finishes around 1pm. If we all want to have a job and stay ahead of the pack, we should be more concerned about what is best for the business and the shareholders *(and we are shareholders too).

Enough about niceties of permanent walkholders, easier walks, scivers and people abusing the attendance system and other malpractices - including ghost overtimes, taking vans home, and so on and so on.

We ordinary workers cannot face the changes and negotiations on our own but like fishtank said, why cant we get straightforward answers; at least from our Union. At the end of the day, the Union might try on our behalf but honestly we know their powers are now limited and they should admit that fact.

What can the Union do about bench-merging and walk-optimisation - absolutely nothing because it will be hard to argue against - IMO.

[A2B]

It's what the project of moving to one wave sequencing which will move traffic later , starts times and probably move the 3 pm letter time later !

I am sorry to say; why is this a problem or even dangerous?

The term itself sounds like a very sensible idea - walk optimisation is exactly what we should all be wishing for to make us more efficient and competitive.

I think CWU should stop thinking like the workers that think this is a job that should remain one that finishes around 1pm. If we all want to have a job and stay ahead of the pack, we should be more concerned about what is best for the business and the shareholders *(and we are shareholders too).

Enough about niceties of permanent walkholders, easier walks, scivers and people abusing the attendance system and other malpractices - including ghost overtimes, taking vans home, and so on and so on.

We ordinary workers cannot face the changes and negotiations on our own but like fishtank said, why cant we get straightforward answers; at least from our Union. At the end of the day, the Union might try on our behalf but honestly we know their powers are now limited and they should admit that fact.

What can the Union do about bench-merging and walk-optimisation - absolutely nothing because it will be hard to argue against - IMO.

I might be wrong here but one wave/walk optimisation will mean less work for mail centres, distribution drivers and delivery workers! Later start/finish times are the least of the problem