voluntary redundancies

clement · Post by **clement** » 14 Nov 2007, 14:27

during the recent strikes we all recd letters from the management and one of the topics they mentioned was that they needed the deal they were proposing to enable amongst other things to finance "generous VR terms". Its all gone quite on this front, my union rep has no clue to any VR terms so can anyone help with any knowledge on this subject?

Malatesta1954 · Post by **Malatesta1954** » 14 Nov 2007, 15:32

RM were threatening to withdraw the MTSF terms and introduce worse redundancy terms if we didn't agree. It doesn't mean there will be any VR's in your office unless there is a surplus.

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 14 Nov 2007, 15:56

Welcome clement

not me · Post by **not me** » 14 Nov 2007, 17:00

RM will be hoping to 'break' those who are eligible for VR with the new flexibility terms and the like.
much cheaper and easier for people just to leave

genesis · Post by **genesis** » 14 Nov 2007, 19:05

That conference call in wales , the head manager stated that MTSF is ending as its to expensive.

norbet colon · Post by **norbet colon** » 14 Nov 2007, 19:44

custard wrote:RM will be hoping to 'break' those who are eligible for VR with the new flexibility terms and the like.
much cheaper and easier for people just to leave

If they don't break people and get them out through the backdoor , RM will go for the bare state minimum notice terms . Never mind the New Deal , RM have always wanted people out as cheaply as possible.

RM's Personnel Director in Ulster came from Bombardier /Shorts , he wanted 273 Redundancies by fair and as usual foul means . Somebody injured himself carrying a sheet of steel the size of a snooker table , he actually filmed that guy picking up his baby from a van , had him in the office WITH the Rep and accused him of malingering .

Crawford had 473 Tribunual Cases outstanding against him , problem was if Bombardier lost they'd appeal and the AEUU couldn't afford the litigation so people had to take it to their MP's .

Just the sort of guy Royal Failure wants .

Royal Fail never fail to make me laugh , they'd a unheard of in business :15 layers of "Management " , it cost a fortune to get rid of the jobs for the boys people from the 90's . Seen it all before in another now privatised industry . A management structure for the benefit of the "managers " in it .

To quote :cfo " Two thirds of our managers are average /below average " -"Our Managers tend to operate on Command & Ignore & lack the people /motivational skills to take our teams forward , we'll have to retrain them , if that fails pay them up .

What a joke !

clement · Post by **clement** » 14 Nov 2007, 19:59

there are too many "in house" terms and abbrevations in RM, hence Royal Mail speak. staff just use these terms without questioning their meaning leading to confusion. what does the lettters MTSF & ESOS stand for. No one even old hands I speak to has any idea. [/b]

norbet colon · Post by **norbet colon** » 14 Nov 2007, 20:03

clement wrote:there are too many "in house" terms and abbrevations in RM, hence Royal Mail speak. staff just use these terms without questioning their meaning leading to confusion. what does the lettters MTSF & ESOS stand for. No one even old hands I speak to has any idea. [/b]

Managing the Surplus Framework , it's from the "We've got you by the short and curlies", Way Backward Agreement .

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 14 Nov 2007, 20:05

ESOS - Employees Share of Savings

or in football terms a really small bung.

DGP1 · Post by **DGP1** » 14 Nov 2007, 20:15

TrueBlueTerrier wrote:ESOS - Employees Share of Savings

or in football terms a really small bung.

I think my manager has one of those

ROYALMAILCHAT

voluntary redundancies

voluntary redundancies

WELCOME TO ROYAL MAIL CHAT THE BEST POSTAL FORUM

Royal Fail Double Standards

royal mail speak

Re: royal mail speak