Wallington weeks

Dindin · Post by **Dindin** » 29 Jan 2020, 19:25

Has anybody else's rep told them RM want rid complete of Wallington weeks?

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 29 Jan 2020, 19:31

Dindin wrote:Has anybody else's rep told them RM want rid complete of Wallington weeks?

we were told that 5 years ago when they stole ours off of us. the union got the branch involved and we were told if we didn't accept we were going to lose them then we would have 9 redundancies in the office. ….. we lost them. theres still staff that won't forgive the union for not fighting to keep them. it seemed as if they were siding with RM.

ted_e_bear · Post by **ted_e_bear** » 29 Jan 2020, 20:24

daveyeff wrote:
Dindin wrote:Has anybody else's rep told them RM want rid complete of Wallington weeks?
we were told that 5 years ago when they stole ours off of us. the union got the branch involved and we were told if we didn't accept we were going to lose them then we would have 9 redundancies in the office. ….. we lost them. theres still staff that won't forgive the union for not fighting to keep them. it seemed as if they were siding with RM.

Why 9 redundancies ? Surely Wallington's require exactly the same amount of staff as regular 1 in 6 ie.5 duty holders plus a cover, or was it a petty threat of a revision or something to make you comply.

olilew · Post by **olilew** » 29 Jan 2020, 20:42

We've been told they're going at ours as well.

Jack_Walsh · Post by **Jack_Walsh** » 29 Jan 2020, 21:30

Any clue when? April?

grchpo · Post by **grchpo** » 29 Jan 2020, 21:57

I've booked holidays for my weeks off next year, will they honour them or just say tough

Acca Dacca · Post by **Acca Dacca** » 30 Jan 2020, 07:40

grchpo wrote:I've booked holidays for my weeks off next year, will they honour them or just say tough

If by next year you mean 2021 I think your onto plums

grchpo · Post by **grchpo** » 30 Jan 2020, 16:59

No I meant April 2020 onwards

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 31 Jan 2020, 20:30

ted_e_bear wrote:
daveyeff wrote:
Dindin wrote:Has anybody else's rep told them RM want rid complete of Wallington weeks?
we were told that 5 years ago when they stole ours off of us. the union got the branch involved and we were told if we didn't accept we were going to lose them then we would have 9 redundancies in the office. ….. we lost them. theres still staff that won't forgive the union for not fighting to keep them. it seemed as if they were siding with RM.
Why 9 redundancies ? Surely Wallington's require exactly the same amount of staff as regular 1 in 6 ie.5 duty holders plus a cover, or was it a petty threat of a revision or something to make you comply.

it was a smokescreen. they couldn't have run the office with 9 people down. they came out with a right pile of shite to get us to comply.

DGH · Post by **DGH** » 31 Jan 2020, 20:37

A few years ago they were telling people on Wallington weeks that they couldn't work more than four days overtime in a rest week because of the 72 hour cap. About a dozen blokes in our office fell for that one. And the union stood by idly because 'they don't agree with 6-day working'.

So I expect absolutely zero support from the CWU if RM do seriously attempt to get everyone onto 5 days rotating.

Dindin · Post by **Dindin** » 01 Feb 2020, 17:00

DGH wrote:A few years ago they were telling people on Wallington weeks that they couldn't work more than four days overtime in a rest week because of the 72 hour cap. About a dozen blokes in our office fell for that one. And the union stood by idly because 'they don't agree with 6-day working'.

So I expect absolutely zero support from the CWU if RM do seriously attempt to get everyone onto 5 days rotating.

our union is backing 6 day working.

Woody Guthrie · Post by **Woody Guthrie** » 01 Feb 2020, 17:11

Dindin wrote:
DGH wrote:A few years ago they were telling people on Wallington weeks that they couldn't work more than four days overtime in a rest week because of the 72 hour cap. About a dozen blokes in our office fell for that one. And the union stood by idly because 'they don't agree with 6-day working'.

So I expect absolutely zero support from the CWU if RM do seriously attempt to get everyone onto 5 days rotating.
our union is backing 6 day working.

Our union is backing a six day service, different thing altogether.

It does not in principle agree with individual members working six day weeks, as a union it took us a great deal of fighting to move away from six day working.

Dindin · Post by **Dindin** » 01 Feb 2020, 18:00

Woody Guthrie wrote:
Dindin wrote:
DGH wrote:A few years ago they were telling people on Wallington weeks that they couldn't work more than four days overtime in a rest week because of the 72 hour cap. About a dozen blokes in our office fell for that one. And the union stood by idly because 'they don't agree with 6-day working'.

So I expect absolutely zero support from the CWU if RM do seriously attempt to get everyone onto 5 days rotating.
our union is backing 6 day working.
Our union is backing a six day service, different thing altogether.

It does not in principle agree with individual members working six day weeks, as a union it took us a great deal of fighting to move away from six day working.

I said their backing 6 day working with a Wallington week off . Not a five day week and a cover postie for the six day.

Celgar · Post by **Celgar** » 01 Feb 2020, 19:52

I think Martin Walsh mentioned a while back that one of changes on RMs list was to get rid of the alternate day off systems such as the Wallington Week etc.
In recent times I wonder if we might have been better off sticking with the six day week. We could have held onto the main plus point of the job - finishing earlier in the day/afternoon. It would have also provided some addition protection to prevent dropping to a five day operation with the resultant loss of thousands of jobs.