21 new vans in our office

[dvbuk55]

All of you bring up valid points and it truly is a suck it and see system. Some personalities had to be changed, small changes made to the walks and I do mean small. Basically two duties were bolted together, the frames were put together, all the packets, specials and tracked items are carried out by the one van - however it doesn't stop there, because not all areas can be van share because there may be an odd duty, so the large packets for those areas are divided between the park and loop vans, also the bulk firms which fall within the area they deliver.

As you can see there is considerably more work involved than doing a straight town duty - which haven't been touched yet. The idea is plainly to make each town duty a part time duty as the IPS drops and the walk sequenced mail increases.

I raised the driving element when it was first mooted because not everyone, myself included, will drive for RM - there hadn't been a plan to assess the workload on drivers compared to non-drivers, and as there is no increase in pay, I can't for the life of me think why anyone would drive when they didn't have to, just to facilitate an unpopular system. Many of the people involved in van share were moved from full time town duties to park and loop with the promise of a repick after 10 weeks - six months on they are still waiting.

[k979aaa]

Thanks for the reply dvbuk55 so out of say four or five full time drivers their is now one too do the firms/collections and the odd large packet or two!. But did those drivers that lost their duty gain redundancy or get moved on by choice or by not. In any case thanks for your input.

[Darren Bent]

I am wondering how it will affects reserves post delivery person. I don't want to work with different people and system every week.

[k979aaa]

I am wondering how it will affects reserves post delivery person. I don't want to work with different people and system every week.

You could be moved too another office or if everyone refused too drive be made too drive if you have a licence if not moved too another office as i see it. But can anyone enlighten us on this as i see it.

[Geordie1]

I thought you have to have Change over training to drive a Royal Mail Van and also what happens if you can not drive and two people are next to each other on delivery . Who would drive then? And what happens when you have finished Do you Both have to bring the Van back to work and is that time included in your delivery span.

[dvbuk55]

Thanks for the reply dvbuk55 so out of say four or five full time drivers their is now one too do the firms/collections and the odd large packet or two!. But did those drivers that lost their duty gain redundancy or get moved on by choice or by not. In any case thanks for your input.

We lost 4 bulk duties and had a further 9 vehicles delivered to the depot BEFORE any agreement to start the system, so you can see there was EA taken as far back as October last year. We didn't lose any staff as a direct result of van share BUT two people have been sacked, there have been no redundancies or buy down, some other duties have been changed as a result not to the benefit of the staff though. There are still two areas to be converted to park and loop and that is still ongoing but in abeyance at present.

The firms and bulk packets are tied to the area so each park and loop covers what the previous bulk duty did within their area, so three vehicles cover what one vehicle previously did but that is in addition to two full time duties and all the ancilliary elements.

[jockstrapp]

Refuse - Resist - get your local Union to involve National headquarters. No agreement - no deal

The union was advising us to vote yes when it came to our office. And guess what................IT'S A TOTAL F@CK UP............. but three months on and management think it's going well.

[k979aaa]

I thought you have to have Change over training to drive a Royal Mail Van and also what happens if you can not drive and two people are next to each other on delivery . Who would drive then? And what happens when you have finished Do you Both have to bring the Van back to work and is that time included in your delivery span.

No change over for a CDV (car derived van) a 50/80 van as some know them by. As for the rest who know's.

[k979aaa]

Refuse - Resist - get your local Union to involve National headquarters. No agreement - no deal

The union was advising us to vote yes when it came to our office. And guess what................IT'S A TOTAL F@CK UP............. but three months on and management think it's going well.

Well they are all on CRACK so it makes sense to them all. :lfo & :cfo

[Puppetmaster]

In A way quite looking forward to them trying to bring it in ,for our office.
We have the planning team in our office already ,from what I can see to be part of the planning team for deleiveries the No 1 REQUIREMENT THAT IS ESSENTIAL,you must have little or no knowledge of delevieries.

We Had Pegusus 1 wich was a joke ,800 houses in 3.5 hours including being conveyed their and back,needless to say this duty was carved up into smaller duties when Managers accepted it was a bit too big.
I bet the employment agencies and van hire Co cant wait,sure someone in RM must have shares in them the amout of work we gave them last year.

[POSTMAN]

To: Branches with POSTAL Members:1/5/09
LTB:No. 386/09


Dear Colleague

Royal Mail Delivery Methods - CDV / Shared Vans

We have previously put advice out to the field but in view of the number of enquiries being received in the outdoor department it was felt pertinent to restate our position on shared / car derived vans.

In terms of our overall position - We have no in principle objection to the concept, in fact we view it as a method which has the potential to resolve a number of long standing problems, particularly those associated with weight on delivery.

However, we are absolutely clear that deployment must be by way of an agreement.

We were engaged in discussions with Royal Mail on this subject last year. We did in fact reach a point where we had a negotiators agreement on a set of planning guidelines. This would have enabled deployment in a safe, pragmatic and sensible manner. Unfortunately, when the document went to the decision makers within Royal Mail the progress we had made came to a grinding halt.

It would seem that this issue, along with many others, has fallen victim to the Royal Mail dogma which views agreements as a bad thing.

Since then, despite our repeated requests, it would seem that management have attempted to push ahead without the CWU.

The advice therefore is to handle the issue through the IR Framework using the disagreement process when necessary. Additionally, neither H&S reps nor IR reps should work on this issue in isolation. There is clearly an overlap and in view of that delivery reps and ASR’s should work together on this issue.

Further to that, some of the reports we are receiving indicate an approach which is at complete odds to the position taken by Royal Mail during our negotiations.

We have had reports of existing walks bolted together and a van supplied. In some cases the loops are pretty much the whole walk and the van effectively becomes a pouch box on wheels. This is clearly unacceptable. To use this method properly requires an element of detailed planning especially on the loops to be employed. The whole purpose of shared vans is to reduce weight over the shoulder and loops should be as short as reasonably possible.

We have had other reports of all manner of vehicles being used. During our negotiations it was agreed that vehicles with a sliding side door was by far the safest and most preferred vehicle design. In addition all vehicles should have panelled or “blacked out” rear windows and a partitioning bulkhead between the load and passenger carrying areas is an absolute must.

In some areas managers are attempting to use the change in delivery method to bring in longer delivery spans. We would remind branches that the nationally agreed span is 3.5 hours and there is no current agreement to change that.

Finally, whilst we had concluded a planning document we did not have time to cover other areas such guidance for resigns, what to do when an individual no longer wishes / is no longer able to drive etc. We did however agree across the table that holding a driving licence would not be a mandatory requirement when recruiting.

In summary – there is no national agreement in place on this issue but we wish to conclude one.

I hope this information is of use to branches.

Any enquiries to Bob Gibson’s Office, quoting reference 540.
Email address: hnutley@cwu.org

[dvbuk55]

I have seen this document recently but as we have been running this system for 8 months and it was being planned 10 months ago then I thought the information was pretty outdated for us - hopefully it will be of some use to others in the planning stages.

[tbi1959]

They proposed this in our office earlier in the year, then it got quietly dropped, the reason? they didn't have the money for all the new vans!!

[Lounge Lizard]

They proposed this in our office earlier in the year, then it got quietly dropped, the reason? they didn't have the money for all the new vans!!

Not only the money for all the new vans, but how would they get all the extra drivers given that they don't pay a penny extra for taking on the extra responsibility ?

[docket]

We have CDVs at LS8.
You can not be forced to drive the vans just because you have a driving license.
You have to pass an RM driving proficiency test,about 45 mins, before they let you drive a CDV.Just reverse into a kerb and you fail,therfore you can't drive a CDV.