RMCtv : Vacancies update : 190 leave each week because...?

[POSTMAN]

At great expense I can now extract the text so you can now read what is said, you lucky people!
Excuse the grammer.


Simon, so peter foxhall is saying delivery offices are never gonna hit the quality of service targets.
whilst for carrying this number of frontline vacancies at the moment and they're being told HR doesn't have the capacity to deal with the amount of recruitment requests that have been locked since the management review.

um, so I think again, you've talked about this before, and there's been action that hr have been taking to bring in extra external resource to try and help with that as well.

so um, he's essentially saying, you know what are we what is it that we're doing to make sure that actually we can get those frontline people in as quickly as possible where we need them to.

yeah, so it's a look peter it's really straightforward if you don't have the resources to do the job. you're not going to win are you.

because I think i think we should just be really honest about that peter has having a big review of this one this morning, and he's some stuff to share with you and our recruitment request this year is around by eleven thousand people I think last year it was three thousand.

it's you know, we've had just under six thousand people that joined us this year, but our current vacancy rate is around about five.

and it's worth noting that around about sixty percent of that. so i'm reading here with my piece of paper, sixty percent of that offer contracts of less than ten hours. it looks as though they're sunday roles, so.

I'm not sure that we've really perfected how it is recovering all of the week by the way, one of the reasons that we're doing so well.
in terms of our parcel businesses that you know now we've got a sunday service. we get monday to saturday, and of course. sundays are growing quite nicely, so we do need to figure that.

Peter back to your specific point our current run rate of job offices around about four hundred a week team have really ramped up from sort of one fifty one sixty when I was at two hundred. but one of the ones that really worries me is in our current attrition which is it a hundred and ninety a week. you know, and you know it's it's like a leaky bucket. isn't that, and we without doing exit interviews uh for those people that have decided that you know, we're not for them.

and there's some interesting trends in there. you know if you're under thirty and or your female and or you've been working for us for less than twelve months, it looks like.
maybe here is not for you.

and when we have a look at the reasons why it is that, that particular you know, cohort is saying it's not for us. they're telling us that you know relationship with the managers, certainty, which is I want the full time contracts, but it's not time contract. I wanna be part time. not full time work or whatever else for the combination may be, work life balance has come up as a question and the other one, which I think is definitely in our hands, is it would appear that some of the team that join us and probably because we're under pressure to try and get, you know the work out of the door and not necessarily getting the right training, so therefore you know, they just get swamped really quickly.

so I think i think the truth on this one picture. i think it's definitely a problem to solve. and to put it really into perspective, i've been working with.
one, two, three, five areas specifically else me, a port and catering and hole, and lester and banbury, the team will know because we know we speak every week.
and when I have a look at some of the recruitment graphs gaps and banbury is one of them. you know, the gaps are actually be quite large, so we know we have to solve this problem.

I think that. you know, the hr team are ramping up and working extremely well on it, and we also, I think. need to really start looking at how we devolve some of the recruitment decisions and what needs to happen to the front line, so we can really scale ourselves.

what's the big positive? the big positive is we're growing and you know we need more team, more of the team. we delivered great quality for our customers. i think that's a real positive, but you know. peter, I think we just all have to be very honest here and face into this one and understanding we need to solve this problem. i really i totally understand if you if you people short, it's tough delivering quality, I get it. so we know we're working on it and everyone out there. let's just keep the honest, uh, honest conversation on this one. let's solve this problem together.

[ssdd]

You did a better job than whoever done the subtitles! Our current rate of nutrition?

[JKSmudge]

You did a better job than whoever done the subtitles! Our current rate of nutrition?

2 coffees,3 biscuits and 1 doughnut per hour

[Dorset Plodder]

I love the way they can put a positive spin on anything .... "So what's the Positive? ... The positive is we're growing"!

Yeah great but if you haven't got the staff you're just going to look stupid and lose customer confidence when you can't fulfil your commitments.

IMO the HR department want to get a grip and get all these applicants signed up BEFORE Christmas .... or it's gonna be a Clusterfuck! As for the argument, "We'll never get them trained up in time" Well I'd rather have an "Untrained" Royal Mail Postie (who will stay with the Company) than an "Untrained" Agency worker, whose Boss is being Overpaid for providing staff that take twice as long to do anything (perhaps that's his intention ... he gets more cash that way)?

[tomtallis]

.

[ssdd]

Don't hold back tom... I take it you don't think our new CPO Zareena (I feel like saying Warrior Princess after her name) is going to make any difference?

[mjd24]

The way ive seen new starters treated in my office this year . . . Its shocked me how many of them have stuck it out.

[tomtallis]

.

[WASD]

It's evident from watching this that Simon is having the wool pulled over his eyes again.

Need we say any more?

[rambo1]

Maybe because they are told at interview that they'll get one in whatever Saturdays off and then when they start they don't get any and are constantly asked to work their day off anyway.....and they only wanted the 30 hrs a week like it said in the advert.

[30+YEARMAN]

Mabel it's because they have part time terms and conditions but are expected to work full time hours.

[Cucumber]

The hassle and workload isn't worth the £12 an hour.

[rubberbond]

I’m sure I read somewhere , that someone had been told there were 400 people wanting to have each one of our jobs , is that the case , or did I imagine it , a bit vague I know but I’m a little surprised given the current level of vacancies that they can’t fill the gap.

[hawkeye622]

The hassle and workload isn't worth the £12 an hour.

Couldn't agree more

[HTPostman]

Just lost another new starter here, she’s been with us for 5 months so I thought she was going to stay. Her reasons for leaving: she’s going back to retail as it’s less stressful (!!!), she’s fed up of finding her day off on the Thursday/Friday before, she’s fed up being moved every single day, sometimes moved 3 times in a day. She’s confused about holiday pay (the union really need to start releasing bite size press releases, not endless pages), she’s tired of every single bank holiday being given as her day off. In her words ‘it’s not worth it for just an extra £50 a week.’

If Simon wants genuine answers and really does want to know what’s going on, on the shop floor, he’s going to have to be tough, he’s going to need to talk to those leaving (not their managers, but the actual employee), he’s going to need to start turning up unannounced. Or he can continue to be fed lies from managers.