Contradiction within the Agreement re: work time flexibility

[opgpat]

There is a glaring contradiction in the proposed agreement:

The fifth bullet-point under NEW WAYS OF WORKING/FLEXIBILITY, regarding start and finish time flexibility, states:

'This is on the basis that individuals ‘may be asked and is not in any shape or form compulsory’. '


While the 2nd paragraph under 'Enablers' in relation to proposals including 'Variation of hours' states:

'This is not about employees not knowing what job they are on, or when they start and finish from one day to the next. Nor is it about anyone refusing reasonable requests.'


So the agreement initially states that we can be requested to work later or earlier but don't have to oblige. The text of the agreement then states that we are not to refuse a reasonable request to work earlier or later. Two completely opposite positions.

The reality of this could be a manager saying ' OK I know you have to pick up your kids in the afternoon but I am issuing you with a resonable request to work 1/2 hour longer on Thursday and Friday. Say 'no' and you are in breach of the national agreement and going against your contract obligations.'

Refuse twice and you could be out the door on that point.

[meweavy]

There is a glaring contradiction in the proposed agreement:

The fifth bullet-point under NEW WAYS OF WORKING/FLEXIBILITY, regarding start and finish time flexibility, states:

'This is on the basis that individuals ‘may be asked and is not in any shape or form compulsory’. '


While the 2nd paragraph under 'Enablers' in relation to proposals including 'Variation of hours' states:

'This is not about employees not knowing what job they are on, or when they start and finish from one day to the next. Nor is it about anyone refusing reasonable requests.'


So the agreement initially states that we can be requested to work later or earlier but don't have to oblige. The text of the agreement then states that we are not to refuse a reasonable request to work earlier or later. Two completely opposite positions.

The reality of this could be a manager saying ' OK I know you have to pick up your kids in the afternoon but I am issuing you with a resonable request to work 1/2 hour longer on Thursday and Friday. Say 'no' and you are in breach of the national agreement and going against your contract obligations.'

Refuse twice and you could be out the door on that point.

another way to get rid of the 40,000 they want to go already...

[nelson]

It is all about interpretation, like the way forward it can be what any manager would like it to be us SHAFTED

[leelatic]

Thank god the union took their time to clarify everything

[banner]

It wouldn't be reasonable for a manager to expect you to do half an hour over your time, if you have got to pick your kids up.

[buzzard]

opgpat after reading your comments above i agree 100% i read the agreement last night so much open to interpretation and being shafted by a dom. the part u quoted is a total contradiction. the whole deal makes it look like a waste of time and money after all these strikes and thats the best they come out with. most if not all the major talking points still lingering about there i.e d2d, pensions,flexibility. also this part of the agreement fills me with no joy-
• Efficient Summer staffing – each unit will utilise the opportunity offered by reduced traffic volumes to re-arrange responsibilities during the summer period.
This will offer employees additional opportunities for leave during the same period. can see me having arguments with dom about this allready, there interpretation guaranteed to be less volume so lets make the walks in an area 5 over 6 or 6 0ver 7.
as soon as myself or any other rep argues the point that theres not enough hours to do this, can just see the smug smile when they direct us to the agreement our union agreed to. i just hope the majority of union members read this agreement in full and give it a big fat no vote.

[eian687]

as i was told by a manager when the way forward came in WE HAVE YOU BY THE BALLS
with this agreement they can now start twisting

[POSTMAN]

It's 30mins at the moment,what will it be later on.
Add the long and short bollox,you're talking possibility of 2hr-30mins!
Nice!

[pinstripe]

• Efficient Summer staffing – each unit will utilise the opportunity offered by reduced traffic volumes to re-arrange responsibilities during the summer period.

Can anyone tell me what this 'reduced summer traffic' is. I've done 7 summers and every one gets heavier than the last. Do they mean instead of 100kg of mail a day we're only going to have 120kg a day, instead of 90% call rate, we'll have 100%. It's bo*****s. There is no difference on my walk if it's a Tuesday in July or a Friday in November. It takes me the same amount of time to prep and deliver. It's just a way to put more work on us, reduced traffic, falling mail volumes, increase in competition, fairies, pixies, elves, the tooth fairy and Santa Clause. None of them exist. (except maybe Santa!)

[k979aaa]

It's 30mins at the moment,what will it be later on.
Add the long and short bollox,you're talking possibility of 2hr-30mins!
Nice!

I would royalmail go bust than enslave my self to this agreement and all it entail's it is just 24 hour since it has became known to us we have now all had time to digest conjuegate and regurgitate this "AGREEMENT" for i for one find it hard to swallow, I feel sick to the very pit of my stomach.

[saru]

• Efficient Summer staffing – each unit will utilise the opportunity offered by reduced traffic volumes to re-arrange responsibilities during the summer period.

Can anyone tell me what this 'reduced summer traffic' is. I've done 7 summers and every one gets heavier than the last. Do they mean instead of 100kg of mail a day we're only going to have 120kg a day, instead of 90% call rate, we'll have 100%. It's bo*****s. There is no difference on my walk if it's a Tuesday in July or a Friday in November. It takes me the same amount of time to prep and deliver. It's just a way to put more work on us, reduced traffic, falling mail volumes, increase in competition, fairies, pixies, elves, the tooth fairy and Santa Clause. None of them exist. (except maybe Santa!)

Unfortunately RM are using the amount of mail that they get directly paid for as their measuring stick.......the mail that we deliver via DSA for other companies doesn't seem to figure in their calculations.

So while we know that our bags get heavier & heavier & the volumes of mail that we deliver get more & more, RM choose to ignore this & use it as another stick to beat us with.

The more I look at this deal the more it stinks!!!!

[zaphod]

There is a glaring contradiction in the proposed agreement:

The fifth bullet-point under NEW WAYS OF WORKING/FLEXIBILITY, regarding start and finish time flexibility, states:

'This is on the basis that individuals ‘may be asked and is not in any shape or form compulsory’. '


While the 2nd paragraph under 'Enablers' in relation to proposals including 'Variation of hours' states:

'This is not about employees not knowing what job they are on, or when they start and finish from one day to the next. Nor is it about anyone refusing reasonable requests.'


So the agreement initially states that we can be requested to work later or earlier but don't have to oblige. The text of the agreement then states that we are not to refuse a reasonable request to work earlier or later. Two completely opposite positions.

The reality of this could be a manager saying ' OK I know you have to pick up your kids in the afternoon but I am issuing you with a resonable request to work 1/2 hour longer on Thursday and Friday. Say 'no' and you are in breach of the national agreement and going against your contract obligations.'

Refuse twice and you could be out the door on that point.

another way to get rid of the 40,000 they want to go already...

Yes, I noticed that. However, if an individual refused, and was then under suspension, the feeling here is that we would all walk out.

We nearly had a walk out here yesterday morning. It got quite heated, an operatives had their coats on, ready to leave.