Seniority

qwerty2 · Post by **qwerty2** » 07 Feb 2020, 08:25

cant get full time now if you cant drive - even if you've been there longer than anyone else!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bahia Feliz · Post by **Bahia Feliz** » 07 Feb 2020, 08:31

DGH wrote:

I can see why so many people joining regard it as baffling and antiquated.

As an aside, using seniority to determine annual leave should upset people - doing that is illegal.

Huh all new starters think seniority is unfair!
Annual is not done on seniority anymore (shouldn't be anyway)

postieblueshirt · Post by **postieblueshirt** » 07 Feb 2020, 10:43

It's done in rotating groups if you're doing it different you're doing it wrong

Postie45 · Post by **Postie45** » 07 Feb 2020, 13:42

Bahia Feliz wrote:

I can see why so many people joining regard it as baffling and antiquated.

Huh all new starters think seniority is unfair!

Seniority is COMPLETELY fair, it doesnt discriminate on gender, age, disability, race or religion, its available to EVERYONE employed by RM, if you put in the time YOU will earn it the same as everyone else has and will.

Post by **clockworkjerk** » 07 Feb 2020, 13:45

DGH wrote:
Celgar wrote:
ssdd wrote:[quote="Celgar”]As an aside, using seniority to determine annual leave should upset people - doing that is illegal.

[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]

Can you back this up with anything proving its “illegal” status? Just curious as you’d essentially end the seniority complex in a lot of businesses.

bunji · Post by **bunji** » 07 Feb 2020, 17:19

I'm amazed at the seniority rule as it should be one on performance managed through monthly or yearly reviews. Yes I am new to Royal Mail, I think the staff are brilliant but some need to move with the times. As for everything having to be "run past the Union"

col456xyz · Post by **col456xyz** » 07 Feb 2020, 17:34

Full time job
Gives it away a but
The partimer would not be able to apply has it would increase in hours

citypostie · Post by **citypostie** » 07 Feb 2020, 19:09

bunji wrote:I'm amazed at the seniority rule as it should be one on performance managed through monthly or yearly reviews. Yes I am new to Royal Mail, I think the staff are brilliant but some need to move with the times. As for everything having to be "run past the Union"

You haven't been at royal mail long so don't know what most managers are like who work here, if anything was decided on reviews all that would happen is managers favourites would get all the cushy jobs all the time. Seniority is fair because it doesn't matter if your face doesn't fit you still get the duty if you've got the time in. The only people who moan about seniority are people with none which funnily enough the people at the top of the list didn't have when they started and probably felt the same then

leolion855 · Post by **leolion855** » 07 Feb 2020, 19:29

No other company ive worked for uses this system. In fact when i got made redundant i stated to those making the decisions on who goes that id been with the company for over 10 years when everyone else was around 3 and got told it couldnt be taken into consideration as it was illegal.

steelgers · Post by **steelgers** » 07 Feb 2020, 20:00

Realistically, it's whatever a manager wants and if you are going to get help from the union if you question that choice. I have been passed over 2 times before because I couldn't drive in the past and twice in the past year managers have told me that shouldn't have been the case.

steelgers · Post by **steelgers** » 07 Feb 2020, 20:02

Holy s**t man. I need to remember my punctuation when I have been drinking.

Post by **wacko74** » 08 Feb 2020, 06:15

Fred has been with RM for 30 years, he only knows 'his' duty and can't do any others in the office, he has a reputation for being rather lazy, unreliable and awkward, he has a poor sick record and has received numerous customer complaints and had to have coaching/conducting on several occasions.

Sally has been with RM for 10 years, she knows 10 different duties (including the vacant one) is regarded as being helpful and cooperative, has a good sick record and has never had any serious complaints against her requiring coaching/conducting.

In a properly 'fair' system who deserves to have the pick of a vacant duty in this case?

smartecosse · Post by **smartecosse** » 08 Feb 2020, 08:33

wacko74 wrote:Fred has been with RM for 30 years, he only knows 'his' duty and can't do any others in the office, he has a reputation for being rather lazy, unreliable and awkward, he has a poor sick record and has received numerous customer complaints and had to have coaching/conducting on several occasions.

Sally has been with RM for 10 years, she knows 10 different duties (including the vacant one) is regarded as being helpful and cooperative, has a good sick record and has never had any serious complaints against her requiring coaching/conducting.

In a properly 'fair' system who deserves to have the pick of a vacant duty in this case?

Exactly..... seniority to assign duties would be fair......but only if the duties were even and some of the long timers weren't such lazy twats that can't be bothered to do the job correctly anymore.

Hitcher · Post by **Hitcher** » 08 Feb 2020, 08:42

wacko74 wrote:Fred has been with RM for 30 years, he only knows 'his' duty and can't do any others in the office, he has a reputation for being rather lazy, unreliable and awkward, he has a poor sick record and has received numerous customer complaints and had to have coaching/conducting on several occasions.

Sally has been with RM for 10 years, she knows 10 different duties (including the vacant one) is regarded as being helpful and cooperative, has a good sick record and has never had any serious complaints against her requiring coaching/conducting.

In a properly 'fair' system who deserves to have the pick of a vacant duty in this case?

Sally could be Fred in another 20 years and suffer numerous work related health problems!

clashcityrocker · Post by **clashcityrocker** » 08 Feb 2020, 08:44

wacko74 wrote:Fred has been with RM for 30 years, he only knows 'his' duty and can't do any others in the office, he has a reputation for being rather lazy, unreliable and awkward, he has a poor sick record and has received numerous customer complaints and had to have coaching/conducting on several occasions.

Sally has been with RM for 10 years, she knows 10 different duties (including the vacant one) is regarded as being helpful and cooperative, has a good sick record and has never had any serious complaints against her requiring coaching/conducting.

In a properly 'fair' system who deserves to have the pick of a vacant duty in this case?

In this scenario it seems highly unlikely that Fred would want to pick the vacant duty.