owner/driver

2yearpostie · Post by **2yearpostie** » 11 Jun 2020, 18:00

Is there anything in the current agreement(s) that stops us buying our own van, getting goods in carriage insurance and doing a walk that way?

glenfiddich · Post by **glenfiddich** » 11 Jun 2020, 18:04

why would you want to do that after all the costs involved you would be working for less than minimum wage

2yearpostie · Post by **2yearpostie** » 11 Jun 2020, 18:10

glenfiddich wrote:why would you want to do that after all the costs involved you would be working for less than minimum wage

just prepping for the possibility.

Cucumber · Post by **Cucumber** » 11 Jun 2020, 18:54

With the company looking to accelerate the 2024 plan, you might not be far wrong.

Rumple · Post by **Rumple** » 12 Jun 2020, 13:53

2yearpostie wrote:Is there anything in the current agreement(s) that stops us buying our own van, getting goods in carriage insurance and doing a walk that way?

There is nothing in the current agreement that stops RM buying vans for us to do our jobs either.
Why would you want to pay RM's bills to do your job?
If you ask RM nicely they might let you pay for your own uniform and fuel too.

krussel · Post by **krussel** » 12 Jun 2020, 14:21

2yearpostie wrote:Is there anything in the current agreement(s) that stops us buying our own van, getting goods in carriage insurance and doing a walk that way?

Under Covid 19 arrangements you can use your own car / van to travel to your walk but not carry mail. I cannot see any insurance company issuing insurance for mail. Phone up and try

Anyway why would you want to run your own van for the "good" or Royal Mail. It would just mean another van they do not have to fund.

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 12 Jun 2020, 14:37

2yearpostie wrote:Is there anything in the current agreement(s) that stops us buying our own van, getting goods in carriage insurance and doing a walk that way?

The agreement - No.

Financial awareness - Not sure Royal Mail would pay you enough to cover all the costs. You will also need Limited Liability Insurance.

Private Cars on delivery during Covid19. You might get it that way but as a Van is a commercial vehicle I don't think it would be covered by Royal Mails bond.

Legally - Not sure as in essence as an owner-driver you aren't Royal Mail, and RM is the USO provider - The implications would need to be looked into.

But if you want to drive your own Van for Royal Mail - Parcel Force already do that.

Post by **SpacePhoenix** » 12 Jun 2020, 16:28

Why wouldn't it surprise me to eventually see owner/drivers being the norm for RM as well as PF?

Post by **Munchboii** » 12 Jun 2020, 17:17

krussel wrote:
2yearpostie wrote:Is there anything in the current agreement(s) that stops us buying our own van, getting goods in carriage insurance and doing a walk that way?
Under Covid 19 arrangements you can use your own car / van to travel to your walk but not carry mail. I cannot see any insurance company issuing insurance for mail. Phone up and try

I know for a fact that there are insurers who allow this. I believe our colleagues at Jersey Post have walks where their own car is used to the start point and can carry walk bags with mail in. But the car is only allowed to be moved twice per walk. And also they only do the walk bags, there are no parcels as they are done by separate parcel duties

Cucumber · Post by **Cucumber** » 12 Jun 2020, 17:47

SpacePhoenix wrote:Why wouldn't it surprise me to eventually see owner/drivers being the norm for RM as well as PF?

Plenty of staff that don't drive, maybe?

Post by **SpacePhoenix** » 12 Jun 2020, 18:19

Cucumber wrote:
SpacePhoenix wrote:Why wouldn't it surprise me to eventually see owner/drivers being the norm for RM as well as PF?
Plenty of staff that don't drive, maybe?

The requirement has been there for new staff to be able to drive so over time RM will eventually have most if not all DO staff able to drive

Cucumber · Post by **Cucumber** » 12 Jun 2020, 18:35

SpacePhoenix wrote:
Cucumber wrote:
SpacePhoenix wrote:Why wouldn't it surprise me to eventually see owner/drivers being the norm for RM as well as PF?
Plenty of staff that don't drive, maybe?
The requirement has been there for new staff to be able to drive so over time RM will eventually have most if not all DO staff able to drive

Yeah, from about 10-12 years ago if I remember correctly.
There are a large number of staff with 15 years plus service who don't drive.

qwerty2 · Post by **qwerty2** » 13 Jun 2020, 07:18

Also people who have been there for years and years cant get full time now if they cant drive. Someone whos been there a couple of years gets full time!!! not fair if youve been there 10 15 20+ years and the union agreed with this!!!

xPandabear1992x · Post by **xPandabear1992x** » 14 Jun 2020, 23:08

qwerty2 wrote:Also people who have been there for years and years cant get full time now if they cant drive. Someone whos been there a couple of years gets full time!!! not fair if youve been there 10 15 20+ years and the union agreed with this!!!

Makes sense especially in these times. Can't imagine a non driver doing local duties on foot with a megaton of parcels and oversized even with a HCP. There would be an outcry.

More flexibility. What the Union rather deal with? Seniority and Contracts during COVID or reducing the workload of non drivers and mitigating health and safety hazards?

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 15 Jun 2020, 13:04

qwerty2 wrote:Also people who have been there for years and years cant get full time now if they cant drive. Someone whos been there a couple of years gets full time!!! not fair if youve been there 10 15 20+ years and the union agreed with this!!!

Look at it logically, a non-driver is limited in the duties they can do, after all with P&L 2 non-drivers together are as useless as a chocolate fireguard. But a driver can do, within reason, any duty in the office.

That means that when a full-time position becomes available, those that can drive have a chance to apply for EVERY vacant duty, whereas a non-driver can only apply for about half of them. By process of elimination, if your skills give you more chance to apply, you are going to get a FT position quicker.

It's neither fair nor unfair, it's a natural conclusion of the style of delivery we now perform.

The Union don't have a veto on changes, and ultimately we, as Union members, voted to accept those changes, so yes the Union agreed with this.