All managers received an Ops Flash/Comm/email thingy about it last week.
Your manager is already aware of it and the decision to release you is not his/hers to make.
You tell them you're going is all.
Any problems contact your branch.
Dave was good..."We have faced change,management haven't".
Terry was excellent..."Get in their faces".
Bob was fashionably late and hilarious...."Deliver director=spoon".
I was actually fairly impressed which for me is about as impressed as you get.
fishtank wrote:Dave was good..."We have faced change,management haven't".
Terry was excellent..."Get in their faces".
Bob was fashionably late and hilarious...."Deliver director=spoon".
I was actually fairly impressed which for me is about as impressed as you get.
I wouldn't have thought management would see it that way tbh. Any suggestions of solutions to the problems though - certainly the same gang show as last time. Any clue as to what the letter to members will contain?
fishtank wrote:Dave was good..."We have faced change,management haven't".
Terry was excellent..."Get in their faces".
Bob was fashionably late and hilarious...."Deliver director=spoon".
I was actually fairly impressed which for me is about as impressed as you get.
Well some people are easily pleased.
Royal Mail managers.....about as popular as a t.urd in a swimming pool!
The DDA/Equality Act demands action,NOT words......adjustments NOT Occupational Health referrals.Case No:2505901/09
Royal Mail is an Equal Opportunities Employer..It discriminates against everybody.
fishtank wrote:Dave was good..."We have faced change,management haven't".
Terry was excellent..."Get in their faces".
Bob was fashionably late and hilarious...."Deliver director=spoon".
I was actually fairly impressed which for me is about as impressed as you get.
Well some people are easily pleased.
I didn't say i was pleased,i said i was fairly impressed...with the general tone and position coming from the national officers.
It could have been bullshit to appease the Local Reps and send them scurrying back to their units to drum up support but my gut feeling was it wasn't.
I also liked the idea of local reps getting up and telling national officers how it really is rather than the full release love in that is conference.
There were some things i didn't like.
There was no ginger beer.
I agree with Fishtank........... in that the officers were genuine about taking on RM. Deputy GS P outlined a feasible strategy on Privatisation that will get member support and have public support.
Outdoor secretary described how BT2010 had been hijacked by the RM automatons and what HQ are doing about it, even if late. I know from experience that he is genuinely supportive of local reps.
Seeking evidence of bullying over performance and where RM manipulate lapsing.
In Scotland CWU are pushing for rep training to tackle manipulation of the tools by RM managers.....we must fight them on their terrain.
No revision is complete without a Post Implementation Review, this should be used to ensure full benefits of BT2010 are implemented...IWT not a measure of individual performance........lapsing only if traffic below model week........Meal Relief not an option......early starters and runners will impact on unit EP's as will managers doing OPG work.
Revisions failing in part due to heavy parcel/packet growth.
Hopefully this will be the first of a run of meetings between the Leadership and local Reps. Reps in my area felt positively about the meeting.
Tamsky if the officers were serious about taking on RM they would have done it long ago, perhaps when colleague share wasn't paid out. As for the sincerity? - these blokes are political animals, sincerity will drip from their mouths when performing on stage and saying exactly what people want to hear. Now the members consultation? - I seem to remember that was on the cards before, then of course the pension vote - never happened - for me it's a question of trust...............much like the trust the CWU placed in RM - what price that now?
mandelsons_toenail wrote:
What do you wear to these meets?
Fancy dress.
Didn't you get the LTB?
Tamsky and i went as The Blues Brothers.
95% were wearing civvies,5% uniform,5% naked.
Did you take any photos you could share - exactly how would people know you were the Blues Brothers when you had no clothes on?............unless it was freezing up there of course
Big chuffing thrill
The trouble with all these roadshow bolloxs is it all a bit Billy Graham,reps who think they are being put in the loop and blinded by big talk, only to be let down when it matters,if you think that having some turds from HQ banging the imaginary `up for a fight` drum is going to please and get the ordinary postie up for a fight then you are all seriously deluded,most of us are pissed off with the back slapping,gravy training activity of HQ, if they are so into engaging the members why don't they actually come down to offices instead of hiding behind the reps?
I'm sorry but they won't get any takers at our office as we have been left to fight our own battles.
Royal Mail managers.....about as popular as a t.urd in a swimming pool!
The DDA/Equality Act demands action,NOT words......adjustments NOT Occupational Health referrals.Case No:2505901/09
Royal Mail is an Equal Opportunities Employer..It discriminates against everybody.
Tamsky wrote:
No revision is complete without a Post Implementation Review, this should be used to ensure full benefits of BT2010 are implemented...IWT not a measure of individual performance........lapsing only if traffic below model week........Meal Relief not an option......early starters and runners will impact on unit EP's as will managers doing OPG work.
Revisions failing in part due to heavy parcel/packet growth.
The PIR's are supposed to happen 6 weeks after implementation of revisions. Disagreements go in - planners are not available - and so it goes on....
Now pkts. Any word on extra time for deliver to neighbours - oh let me see, Moya said "the trails showed no extra time was needed". So are HQ going to fight the fact that that is nonsense?
