He didnt. He just stepped in as no one else wanted it. He basically only wanted it himself for the work releases for his meetings with the DOM. Meetings that none of us are informed about. The guy does anything to get out of doing his duty!!! This table top in our place is going to be very very interesting!
I would suggest you contact your Area CWU Office and tell them what's happening. There should be the opportunity to vote for a new unit rep annually. Of course that means someone else has to be willing to take over the job. Would you be interested?
These Usesless Dickheads get the job, and often hang onto it for years simply because no one else in the Office can be bothered with it. They're not Big Enough to be doing the job .... They make the Union look Bad ...... and are only interested in what they can screw out of the system.
I would suggest anyone in your Office is going to do a better job than this self serving asshole.
Like all Wage Slaves, he had two crosses to bear: The people he worked for and the people he worked with! (Stephen Vizinczey.)
Yubin we using weeks 27-30 2019 as a reference point as we can not rely on the work hours for 2020 as this includes uso failures , Covid duties such a pre starts /nights to ensure social distancing, lots of offices failing quality of service and having extra transportation costs due to one in a van policy.
However we update the weeks 27-30 2019 with the traffic growth in 27-30 2020 and than by the commercial forecast for April 2021/22 which is 0.2% up
So this generates the additional traffic we need to calculate the hours an office needs to achieve their WIPWH productivity.
Yubin we using weeks 27-30 2019 as a reference point as we can not rely on the work hours for 2020 as this includes uso failures , Covid duties such a pre starts /nights to ensure social distancing, lots of offices failing quality of service and having extra transportation costs due to one in a van policy.
However we update the weeks 27-30 2019 with the traffic growth in 27-30 2020 and than by the commercial forecast for April 2021/22 which is 0.2% up
So this generates the additional traffic we need to calculate the hours an office needs to achieve their WIPWH productivity.
OK thanks, there's a little more to my post than meets the eye.
It really annoys me that people are working overtime/days off (pre-covid), but already there's talk (from the rep) of duties/hours being taken out of the office. When it should be the opposite in my opinion. Nobody should be working overtime the office should function 'properly'.
Absolutely nothing has been said to us about the finer details OK it's early days but....
I just don't trust the REP to make a good fist of it.
If it is 33 hours than the majority of that will come from the introduction of the shorter working week. If you have more than 33 full timers then your home in a boat.
Yes - all you have to do is do exactly the same amount of work with 33 hours less each week.
That means they are taking about 1700 hours out of your office every year. (Probably more when you have the structured revision)
Home in a boat as the man says.
The societies of consumption and squandering of material resources are incompatible with the idea of economic growth and a clean planet.
Clash a structural revision is going to optimised your outdoor via a geo route revision and your indoor via IWT. You will then have this phased over 3 years. The first structural revision is based on your office achieving 50% of its productivity towards its local standard performance rate.
Whereas if your in a table top revision you will achieve dependent on what category you were in at the reference point 2019 between 1% to 12%.
When you do your table top revision. You will plan your office on the basis of full timers work 37 hours so will plan for this. Clearly if some duties cannot be done in 37 hours this will need to be addressed.
However remember you are using all your work hours not just for TM1/SA but for unplanned over time.
Productivity improvements can be made through a range of issues including how your office handles delivery point growth. Most offices have not had a revision for 3 years or more and if you have seen delivery point growth you may be covering that by overtime or extended delivery. By rebalancing this back to walks where they have spare capacity especially where you are introducing dedicated parcel duties who will take the larger parcels of the walking duties. This in itself will improve productivity.
PDA OA can also be used where walks may not be achievable.
Clash a structural revision is going to optimised your outdoor via a geo route revision and your indoor via IWT.
Exactly as it was done in 2010 when hundreds of revisions went wrong?
What’s changed about Georoute and the IWT now Martin that you've suddenly fallen in love with those two deeply flawed tools? I seem to remember you were not a fan of either of them in the past.
How can the members place their faith in two pieces of software which if we're honest are not even properly understood by the majority of reps and can produce any output you want depending on what you put into them?
Woody I have never been a fan of a structural revision done by a computer. However Royal Mail have spent a fair deal of money on FMO which is part of their Project Enterprise link up.
This means PSP , AHDC ,PDOA , Resource scheduler, Route manager and Final Mile Optimisation are all linked to the same system.
The CWU recognised that we were not going to force the company to abandon their plan to have a structural revision in every delivery over the next 3 years so we have tried to shape the process and build in protections and safeguards at every stage.
Your right the history of CADR , Pegasus and as you mentioned geo route in 2009 have not been roaring successes to the contrary there were some huge car crashes as revisions deployed.
We have built in the following safeguards
1. Everything has to be planned together from the start.
2. There is a joint sign off at every stage of the revision and it can’t proceed to the next stage unless the DOM and Rep has signed off.
3. The indoor improvement which is built on IWT has to phased in over 3 years
4. The outdoor which will be optimised to the number of walks will have a built in number of hours as a learning curve.
5. That the structural revision will have a maximum of 50% improvement in WIPWH to your local standard of performance which potentially will be lower than 196. So give you an example an office which is at 170 WIPWH and their local standard performance is 190 then the structural revision can only be planned on 180 improvement which is 50% to the standard performance.
6. The first 100 structural offices have already had an initial bit of training but there will be another session this Thursday and more over the next couple of weeks.
We believe these safeguards will stop what have seen in the past. Most of the 2009 revisions expected offices overnight go from working at 75BSi to 100% overnight and they crashed.
So what happens if after everything is jointly signed off the only things that happens after the introduction of the SWW is an increase in pressure overtime spend or an increase in cut offs?
The office can only be more efficient if the individuals involved are more efficient. What if they don't want to be?
What's in it for them?
The societies of consumption and squandering of material resources are incompatible with the idea of economic growth and a clean planet.
It's a good question.
What is the motivation for members to vote in a revision that will mean later starts, longer deliveries, Sunday working and assuming an increase in efficiency and productivity less overall earning opportunities?
It's a good question.
What is the motivation for members to vote in a revision that will mean later starts, longer deliveries, Sunday working and assuming an increase in efficiency and productivity less overall earning opportunities?
Surely not the SWW?
That's why I voted NO.
Do you really expect RM to give us a pay rise/SWW and potentially add more duties/hours into DO's.
It's a good question.
What is the motivation for members to vote in a revision that will mean later starts, longer deliveries, Sunday working and assuming an increase in efficiency and productivity less overall earning opportunities?
Surely not the SWW?
Hasn't it already been voted in by the people that wanted back pay so desperately? Strange that still to this day everyone you ask says they voted "no".
Cucumber the reason why it will be based on local standard and not a national standard is it is fairer to the office.
Each office floor distances are different, some have lifts , some have css operations , some are outside their post code , some have secondary sorting , some have SPDOs, some have remote caller offices , a local standard performance is based on an individual office own footprint and local planning values not on a national average which is unfair.
There are however some common factors like sorting a thousand letters or prepping a thousand letters on the same equipment in the right environment with trained individuals with the right amount of work would be the same for the whole of the UK.
The local standard comes in on things like floor distances or unique to that local office variations for example there is an office which has no yard or platform and the council stopped them loading in the street causing rush hour traffic jams. The HSE ordered that they have 2 individuals in on nights to unload workload throughout the night. They will always be inefficient by those two night duties hence why their standard of performance may be lower than another office.
This is why local standard performance is better for an office or otherwise you would be asked to achieve a performance which you may not be able simply because others offices can.
@Martin, are you saying the figures from 2019 plus the forecast for 2020 plus another 0.2% increase? what's the % increase forecast for 2020? because our parcels are up at least 130% on normal volumes before Covid hit.
