Non drivers contract issue

Creditshampoo · Post by **Creditshampoo** » 02 Dec 2017, 23:10

Hi there’s a couple of full time vacancies up on our board, next in line is a part timer who can’t drive.
The duties are shared duties and the person she would be with would also be a driver....any help guys?

short bloke · Post by **short bloke** » 03 Dec 2017, 08:11

Hi Creditshampoo
The way-forward agreement. is what you should be referring too, I cannot quote verbatim but basically its the next most senior part-timer on the seniority list that would be made up to permeant full-time. the duty is self is not or should not be part of the equation.
That duty if now vacant should either be held open for six months to use as a training walk, or maybe because of local issues an agreement between the DOM and the REP
to be used for something else. but after six months it should be advertised on the board for someone to sign for. and the most senior person who applies for it, would get it.
hope this helps

Xr4 · Post by **Xr4** » 03 Dec 2017, 08:36

There was a full time walk that was going in our office and only a part timer went for it, their solution was to make it into part time with the other colleague and night staff prepping it

Creditshampoo · Post by **Creditshampoo** » 03 Dec 2017, 09:29

short bloke wrote:Hi Creditshampoo
The way-forward agreement. is what you should be referring too, I cannot quote verbatim but basically its the next most senior part-timer on the seniority list that would be made up to permeant full-time. the duty is self is not or should not be part of the equation.
That duty if now vacant should either be held open for six months to use as a training walk, or maybe because of local issues an agreement between the DOM and the REP
to be used for something else. but after six months it should be advertised on the board for someone to sign for. and the most senior person who applies for it, would get it.
hope this helps

Hey thanks for that. It looks like you’re correct! It says seniority is always used for internal vacancies if it’s not a specialist duty, and there’s nothing in the list of specialist duties about having to drive

fishtank · Post by **fishtank** » 03 Dec 2017, 09:46

All duties during the revision phase should be designated driving or non driving. Although driving is not a specialised skill it has to be a considered factor in duty allocation because obviously a shared delivery needs at least one driver, a rural needs to be a driver and a hybrid delivery/collection duty needs to be allocated to a driver.

Seniority does not override business requirements or indeed common sense.

ted_e_bear · Post by **ted_e_bear** » 03 Dec 2017, 16:32

So she can have one duty, what help do you need with the second one ?

Creditshampoo · Post by **Creditshampoo** » 03 Dec 2017, 17:03

So if say there’s a duty up full time and the only part timer who wants it can’t drive, but the partner duty (park and loop) is a driver the business have no excuse not to make them up?

Celgar · Post by **Celgar** » 03 Dec 2017, 20:55

I was under the impression RM only employed people with full driving licences nowadays ?

Xr4 · Post by **Xr4** » 03 Dec 2017, 22:25

Celgar wrote:I was under the impression RM only employed people with full driving licences nowadays ?

If she's first on seniority of the part timers, she's probably been there before it was a requirement. Saying that there's been a few people at our office quitting driving, which they've been allowed to do

Post by **Pathfinder** » 04 Dec 2017, 06:57

Xr4 wrote:There was a full time walk that was going in our office and only a part timer went for it, their solution was to make it into part time with the other colleague and night staff prepping it

I still don’t understand the difference between full and part time walks?!

short bloke · Post by **short bloke** » 04 Dec 2017, 09:43

fishtank wrote:All duties during the revision phase should be designated driving or non driving. Although driving is not a specialised skill it has to be a considered factor in duty allocation because obviously a shared delivery needs at least one driver, a rural needs to be a driver and a hybrid delivery/collection duty needs to be allocated to a driver.

Seniority does not override business requirements or indeed common sense.

I am not saying seniority overrides business requirements or common sense.
The filling of a full-time post and the signing of a duty are and should be 2 different things, by filling a full-time post with the next most senior part-timer, you're trying to keep your TM1 up to date. by putting a vacant duty up on the board to sign for, is just that filling a vacant duty. if the next most senior part-timer cannot drive it should be irrelevant to he/her filling that full-time post. but I agree that it would be common sense that if the most senior person to apply for that vacant duty is a non driver, and there is already a non driver on the shared van duty or its a singleton driving duty then they couldn't sign for that duty.

clashcityrocker · Post by **clashcityrocker** » 04 Dec 2017, 14:15

Creditshampoo wrote:So if say there’s a duty up full time and the only part timer who wants it can’t drive, but the partner duty (park and loop) is a driver the business have no excuse not to make them up?

The partner needs to be able to drive.
The Rest Day Cover needs to be able to drive.
Reserves need to be able to drive - sick and holiday cover.
Anyone who works with her will need to be able to drive.

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 04 Dec 2017, 15:05

clashcityrocker wrote:
Creditshampoo wrote:So if say there’s a duty up full time and the only part timer who wants it can’t drive, but the partner duty (park and loop) is a driver the business have no excuse not to make them up?
The partner needs to be able to drive.
The Rest Day Cover needs to be able to drive.
Reserves need to be able to drive - sick and holiday cover.
Anyone who works with her will need to be able to drive.

Also as I understand it the driver has smaller loops or less walking delivery time so individual duties within pairs are drivers and non-drivers.

If you have a driver in a non-driver duty, that can work. But not the other way round unless you swap the non-driving partner to the driving side.

However, that itself presents various issues.

1. Does the non-driving driver want to swap and would it be right to force them.
2. If the non-driving driver is willing to swap, their duty then should by a strict interpretation of the rules, be advertised so anyone can apply for it. They also wouldn't be guaranteed to get the other duty on the pair if someone more senior to them applies for it.
3. The 3rd option of leaving the driver on the non-driving side to get around the above, would in itself cause problems as the work plan balance would be all wrong and would be considered as inefficient.

Perhaps repicks could be based on pairs who select each other (1 driver and 1 non) and then they select duties based on combined seniority, but even then that wouldn't provide a solution to this particular issue.