MTSF

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 11 Oct 2017, 17:07

with all their plans, it makes perfect sense. Mark Baulch reckoned 1 in 3 jobs was their target. 25000 in deliveries alone. they wouldn't be able to afford the pay off's at the current rate.

Post by **SpacePhoenix** » 11 Oct 2017, 20:11

fishtank wrote:MTSF is the War and Peace of agreements ( perhaps Crime and Punishment fits better ), I think if it were being rewritten we would know about it. If it isn't being reviewed is it being torn up? You would probably need one of those moustachioed strongmen in a striped leotard to do the tearing.

We know some facts, we are an aging demographic us posties, I think the average age would be 45-55, when I started if you got to that age and the bones started aching you started looking at what was available in the mailcentre, a nice cushy half dozen years propping up the canteen earning all kinds of allowances and trying not to break anything.

That was then and this is now, even if you could get a job in a mailcentre you wouldn't want one, apparently they make you work now... so where do broken posties go, early retirement? ...with the pension changes announced, in 10 years time you won't be able to afford it. IHR?...34 weeks pay sounds like a lot but it's not and is IHR under attack?

What I'm getting at is basically like Clash says the business has a huge problem looming, an outdoor job that's only going to get harder, an indoor job that's disappearing, a pension that isn't enough to retire on and an aging workforce that they can't financially afford to move on. If they don't make a move soon the problem will just get worse, half the delivery staff will be on adjusted duties.

Of course the real elephant in the room isn't actually MTSF, it's compulsory redundancy. If the VR terms are shite you can't move anyone on...unless you don't give them the choice.

Once the CLLS machines start getting rolled out across MCs, there'll probably be few if any jobs where you can sit down

matt_1983 · Post by **matt_1983** » 11 Oct 2017, 20:29

Am i the only one wondering what MTSF stands for??

Binsey · Post by **Binsey** » 11 Oct 2017, 20:40

matt_1983 wrote:Am i the only one wondering what MTSF stands for??

Managing the surplus framework.

LaggyBand · Post by **LaggyBand** » 11 Oct 2017, 20:57

And here I was still believing what I was told when I first started;

Keep your nose clean and its a job for life...

Post by **Brandy** » 11 Oct 2017, 22:49

Binsey wrote:
matt_1983 wrote:Am i the only one wondering what MTSF stands for??

Managing the surplus framework.

I wonder who thought this up? I suppose it was one of those in their ivory towers who you never see,gets paid a fortune,doesnt know a thing about the job but think they do!

Post by **RobertT** » 12 Oct 2017, 04:36

daveyeff wrote:they want to change the MTSF according to our div/rep. no more 2 years pay or big wedge for those getting out. they are looking at the legal minimum. about 14 grand I think Robert T mentioned.

If only Statutory Redundancy Pay is offered, then the current maximum payout is only £14,670. But most would get less.

You can find out more info and work out what your SRP might be here: https://www.gov.uk/redundant-your-rights" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Binsey · Post by **Binsey** » 12 Oct 2017, 10:01

LaggyBand wrote:And here I was still believing what I was told when I first started;

Keep your nose clean and its a job for life...

I was told that also 30+ years ago.....

fishtank · Post by **fishtank** » 03 Feb 2018, 20:40

fishtank wrote:It's just that I've heard some nasty rumours that I won't repeat because I'm hoping they aren't true.

I think MTSF is in real trouble.

Post by **Nick b** » 03 Feb 2018, 21:24

Times have changed. When I joined nearly 30yrs ago Seniority was king, senior postie's would opt for inside work, easier rounds, night shift (if available) till retirement at 60. Today: Stress, medical, family and other employment laws means these Jobs are still there but no longer goes on Seniority also when can you officially retire? So yes there is a growing problem. It was probably best to leave well alone, animosity is sadly now a byword in offices.

Post by **General Mannerheim** » 03 Feb 2018, 22:17

fishtank wrote:
fishtank wrote:It's just that I've heard some nasty rumours that I won't repeat because I'm hoping they aren't true.
I think MTSF is in real trouble.

Yep judging off page 12.

stroller · Post by **stroller** » 04 Feb 2018, 10:47

I was talking to one of the top men in London about MTSF and VR, and I told him they only way you can reduce the workforce is to still offer the currant MTSF deal up to 104 weeks, otherwise nobody would leave and you would be stuck, he simply answered the he can see RM making compulsory redundancies not voluntary, make of that what you like

Binsey · Post by **Binsey** » 06 Feb 2018, 15:53

General Mannerheim wrote:
fishtank wrote:
fishtank wrote:It's just that I've heard some nasty rumours that I won't repeat because I'm hoping they aren't true.
I think MTSF is in real trouble.
Yep judging off page 12.

Huge job losses coming?

dav1524 · Post by **dav1524** » 13 Feb 2018, 20:02

So am i right in thinking the Mtsf agreement is safe until 2019, if so are the enhanced VR terms safe until then or do they go when the current pension ends next month.

Post by **General Mannerheim** » 13 Feb 2018, 20:15

dav1524 wrote:So am i right in thinking the Mtsf agreement is safe until 2019, if so are the enhanced VR terms safe until then or do they go when the current pension ends next month.

It's about as safe as jumping into a shark tank wearing a meat swim suit.