Strike Update 3rd week of mediation

[postslippete]

Royal Mail will have to offer something to keep the talks going ? We can all speculate and most are predicting pay will be offered to keep the talks going with the promise of back pay being paid before christmas. However there is a lot which can happen in the next couple of weeks and the one issues which remains the elephant in the room is Pensions.

If within next couple of weeks Royal Mail don’t make a move than the Postal Executive have a choice. Do we announce a strike the week leading up to Christmas , when everyone has been paid their Christmas bonus which is due on 15th December or do we announce it between the eves or wait until January.

The stakes are high for both sides and some believe that a deal is in the bag , this is not like your normal dispute as pensions is huge for both sides and the timelines are different for all the issues. For example Royal Mail have moved from 17:00 to 15:30 and they claim it has cost them over 75 million by making that moves as if it was 17:00 every single flight which carried mail over land not sea would be cancelled and that delivers massive savings and now their plan for savings is less and so they will want recovers hence why they are proposing to saving 75 million on national insurance contributions from their expenditure on pensions from 400 million to 375 million. They still don’t want deliveries to leave the office until after 10:30 thou.[/quote]


Whilst I agree with the shorter working week in principle what the hell are we going to sacrifice for it?? Later finishes?….Multi bundle…you need a frame to put your flyers in, do your re-directions and organise your obscene amount of small parkets into some sort of order for delivery…. Walk ownership…working for free when someone is on annual leave…. Automated hours data capture with big brother watching your every move every time you happen to scan a 2D….


Reducing the number of Area Reps?? Well, why not get rid of the CWU while we are at. More power to Royal Mail's elbow.

[jetblack]

Whilst I agree with the shorter working week in principle what the hell are we going to sacrifice for it??

No sacrifice should be needed. Increases in productivity over time, through technological advances/automation, mean that the business will be able to do the same job for less money. The question is, is how is that surplus value to be shared out - a 35 hour week for us, or another 0.5/1/2 billion £ per annum for the shareholders via job cuts and savings in wages ???

This isn't just a question for Royal Mail - this, to my mind at least, seems to be the big question across the economy and society going forward from here on in.

[fishtank]

The only way the business will go for a shorter working week is if it is tied to an uplifting in items per work hour. The danger for us is how that is measured, National, regional or local? How efficient is your office? If it's already in the top 10% where is the scope for improvement? Targets have to be fair and achievable across the board. We've had bonus schemes in the past that have rewarded poor performing offices and screwed efficient offices because a 5% improvement in performance is a piece of piss when you're starting at rock bottom, not so easy when you're already very productive.

[worktotime]

The shorter working week obviously primarily affects delivery staff, If there is a reduction in workload in processing or distribution it can be managed through a reduction in headcount. In delivery a reduction in workload does not mean fewer delivery points so the only way to reduce headcount would be to increase the number of delivery points each member covers. At some point ( and I would suggest we're already there ) this becomes physically unsustainable.

At that point we are faced with two options, either increase the part-time ratio or reduce the working week. The main problem with that is the vast difference in workload resourcing and items/wh from area to area in this business. I would respectfully suggest that in some areas delivery staff are barely working a 35hr week right now whereas others are probably averaging over 40hrs.

well said , I know in our orifice its at breaking point , we have lost 3 - 4 staff due to ihr retirement knee replacements etc and not been replaced they just expect everybody else to mop that work up , and I know me and my mate do a regular 45+ hour a week and walk on the street btw 6 - 7 hours a day , so how can they expect to do anymore in less time , unless they adjust the dutys for the loss of hours but I cant see that . so to be honest the 35 hr doesn't interest me

[postslippete]

The stakes are high for both sides and some believe that a deal is in the bag , this is not like your normal dispute as pensions is huge for both sides and the timelines are different for all the issues. For example Royal Mail have moved from 17:00 to 15:30 and they claim it has cost them over 75 million by making that moves as if it was 17:00 every single flight which carried mail over land not sea would be cancelled and that delivers massive savings and now their plan for savings is less and so they will want recovers hence why they are proposing to saving 75 million on national insurance contributions from their expenditure on pensions from 400 million to 375 million. They still don’t want deliveries to leave the office until after 10:30 thou.

How can Royal Mail possibly claim that it will cost them over 75 million just by moving from 17:00 to 15:30 - when the changes haven't even happened?? Our competitors are our on the roads delivering parcels from 7am, so have the Royal Mail ever thought about the business that they would potentially lose if they did move to later starts? Business like Special Deliveries. Going out an hour or so later means driving round for an hour or so delivering the Specials before we even start delivering from the postbag. That sounds very inefficient in terms of delivery time and fuel used.

[k979aaa]

The stakes are high for both sides and some believe that a deal is in the bag , this is not like your normal dispute as pensions is huge for both sides and the timelines are different for all the issues. For example Royal Mail have moved from 17:00 to 15:30 and they claim it has cost them over 75 million by making that moves as if it was 17:00 every single flight which carried mail over land not sea would be cancelled and that delivers massive savings and now their plan for savings is less and so they will want recovers hence why they are proposing to saving 75 million on national insurance contributions from their expenditure on pensions from 400 million to 375 million. They still don’t want deliveries to leave the office until after 10:30 thou.

How can Royal Mail possibly claim that it will cost them over 75 million just by moving from 17:00 to 15:30 - when the changes haven't even happened?? Our competitors are our on the roads delivering parcels from 7am, so have the Royal Mail ever thought about the business that they would potentially lose if they did move to later starts? Business like Special Deliveries. Going out an hour or so later means driving round for an hour or so delivering the Specials before we even start delivering from the postbag. That sounds very inefficient in terms of delivery time and fuel used.

Probably costed getting rid of collections duty's vans and overtime by moving the whole operation forwards not too mention mail centre shifts and less distribution slots/job's and possibly less managers!

[woofwoof]

The stakes are high for both sides and some believe that a deal is in the bag , this is not like your normal dispute as pensions is huge for both sides and the timelines are different for all the issues. For example Royal Mail have moved from 17:00 to 15:30 and they claim it has cost them over 75 million by making that moves as if it was 17:00 every single flight which carried mail over land not sea would be cancelled and that delivers massive savings and now their plan for savings is less and so they will want recovers hence why they are proposing to saving 75 million on national insurance contributions from their expenditure on pensions from 400 million to 375 million. They still don’t want deliveries to leave the office until after 10:30 thou.

How can Royal Mail possibly claim that it will cost them over 75 million just by moving from 17:00 to 15:30 - when the changes haven't even happened?? Our competitors are our on the roads delivering parcels from 7am, so have the Royal Mail ever thought about the business that they would potentially lose if they did move to later starts? Business like Special Deliveries. Going out an hour or so later means driving round for an hour or so delivering the Specials before we even start delivering from the postbag. That sounds very inefficient in terms of delivery time and fuel used.

Probably costed getting rid of collections duty's vans and overtime by moving the whole operation forwards not too mention mail centre shifts and less distribution slots/job's and possibly less managers!

So you really think it's cost effective to get rid of bikes and bag boxes and put me In a van.
Surely putting less vans in doing parcels was

[SpacePhoenix]

Shorter working week hasn't got a hope in hell of happening/working. All shifts go down to the wire as it is, so you take out 4 hours per week and chances are that most shifts will start to fail a lot. The only way it will work is if meal reliefs are made unpaid

Back in the 80's used to do 41 hours 18 minutes.
2017 we do 36 hours 15 minutes with 5 hours unpaid meal reliefs.
Wow 30 years later we are 3 minutes better off.
Was it worth the effort

You are both missing the point.

The vast majority of members are in delivery, and its the most physical job in the business. Its simply not possible to keep increasing the delivery span as automation increases. Some posties are walking half marathons every day now, and with the average age only increasing, there has to be a sensible limit to how far and for how long people are expected to work in all weathers. That means a defacto SWW for deliveries at least.

Whether its going to work in Mail Centres, or if its worked for drivers is frankly a secondary issue.

You just need to look at the CSS batches to see the growth in delivery points with batches having to be split when they get too close to the limit for delivery points per batch and the number of boxes that many batches get

[chrisj]

Without a change in culture in delivery, a shorter working week will be a poison chalice. People will still be coming in early and then managers will not pay overtime if they finish before contractual time.

Moreover, why would it be a good idea to have unpaid breaks? We are in a way giving away our breaks because of runners and the culture of finish and go.

I despair for the delivery section.

* Imagine, on rare occasions when a manager says to a delivery staff, you can start later tomorrow but then nothing is done for the staff when he arrives the next day? So what is the point?

We shall end up doing what we currently do in 39 hours in 35 hours... Yes, it will work for those on easier rounds and those not even doing 32 hours and being paid 39 (I know a few). What about the part timers?

Stupid idea!

Cloherty, in other sections apart from delivery, it hard for managers to make workers work over their time without paying overtime. Also, they can use temporary staff when really short...

[cloherty1976]

Cloherty, in other sections apart from delivery, it hard for managers to make workers work over their time without paying overtime. Also, they can use temporary staff when really short...

They do have in the mail centre flexibility of 30 minutes if its heavy. Time repaid when its quite.
On the hgv side it's hard for them to not pay as all your time is recorded on your digi cards

[Chitchat]

Without a change in culture in delivery, a shorter working week will be a poison chalice. People will still be coming in early and then managers will not pay overtime if they finish before contractual time.

Moreover, why would it be a good idea to have unpaid breaks? We are in a way giving away our breaks because of runners and the culture of finish and go.

I despair for the delivery section.

* Imagine, on rare occasions when a manager says to a delivery staff, you can start later tomorrow but then nothing is done for the staff when he arrives the next day? So what is the point?

We shall end up doing what we currently do in 39 hours in 35 hours... Yes, it will work for those on easier rounds and those not even doing 32 hours and being paid 39 (I know a few). What about the part timers?

Stupid idea!

Cloherty, in other sections apart from delivery, it hard for managers to make workers work over their time without paying overtime. Also, they can use temporary staff when really short...

I believe the idea of bringing the working week down to 35 hours is the CWU preempting the loss of indoor hours to new automation, ways of working and collation of d2ds etc. Which would mean royalmail wanting to bring in longer and longer deliveries. This is the cwu fight againts longer deliveries.

[telithowitis]

So a record £68 million paid to shareholders in the last 6months by RM!! No wonder they can't afford our pension!!!!