Improper use of the IWT.

[fishtank]

Stories are starting to appear about the use of IWT as an individual performance measurement tool.

It Isn't and shouldn't be used as one.
If we are not careful this will become the biggest harassment tool that Royal Mail have.
What we need is a nice clear statement from the union and Royal Mail that this practice will cease.
It is therefore vital that we flag this up to HQ every time it happens through the usual disagreement
channels but also directly..to bgibson@cwu.org

[ronpetetrevchris]

Sorry but how is this supposed to be used then?

We are coming to a revision in the next few months and IWT will be used to plan the indoor element based on 100% bsi. This is slashing the time most have to prep and ect.

Not only will this come down to an individuals performance, but he has already started targeting some who take twice as long as IWT says they should.

Dont get me wrong, if you are telling me this is wrong practice i will get on it, but was this ever gonna be used in another way???

[fishtank]

IWT is an OFFICE RESOURCING TOOL not an INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE TOOL.

The figures produced by it are being used to individually assess members performance and harrass them into completing unachievable deliveries on the basis that they are not prepping fast enough and the blame lies with them.

There has NEVER been an agreement that the IWT could be used to test individual members.

GEOROUTE is being abused in much the same way outdoors....these are resourcing tools and produce "should take" times in much the same way as your car "should do" 40mpg...in some cases it will and in some cases it won't.

Every members performance and ability is different and there is no agreement between the CWU and Royal Mail that a member can be judged too slow either indoors or out as long as they are working to the best of THEIR ability.

[ronpetetrevchris]

Interesting, so let me get this right, there is absolutely no way that a member can be criticiseed or put under undue pressure becasue they arent as fast as such and such?

[fishtank]

Interesting, so let me get this right, there is absolutely no way that a member can be criticiseed or put under undue pressure becasue they arent as fast as such and such?

As long as they doing the job and not screwing around.....no.
Your 6 month trial period is when you are judged capable of doing the job.. it is not a continuous assessment.
Once you completed your trial period unless you have been moved to a different job or have been sick for a long period there is absolutely no reason to test an individual and the testing of individuals should only be for retraining purposes and should NEVER be used in disciplinary cases.

[smileski]

Totally agree with what your saying Fishtank, but is this documented anywhere?

[london sub]

Interesting, so let me get this right, there is absolutely no way that a member can be criticiseed or put under undue pressure becasue they arent as fast as such and such?

As long as they doing the job and not screwing around.....no.
Your 6 month trial period is when you are judged capable of doing the job.. it is not a continuous assessment.
Once you completed your trial period unless you have been moved to a different job or have been sick for a long period there is absolutely no reason to test an individual and the testing of individuals should only be for retraining purposes and should NEVER be used in disciplinary cases.

But what if you are doing the job properly and not wasting time i can still see members still getting criticised for doing all the rights with in the job.

Lets face it the revision is unachievable in every office and will only result in more harrassement from manangement by saying it is achievable because geo route says it is. This is one of my fears when trying to win an arguement over management in the near future by telling them that a duty is just to big, so you have to rectify the problem. The problem is management will take a blind eye and just blame one persons performance, by using geo route as a performance tool.

So fishtank, geo route is not a performance tool but a working tool to calculate duties in a office and management could and probably will abuse the tool to suit themselves.

[clashcityrocker]

As long as they doing the job and not screwing around.....no.

Why would someone who can pass the one minute test, not be able to meet the "standard" set by the IWT?

[Tamsky]

Fishtank is right the IWT is an office resourcing tool and should not be used to measure performance against throughputs - a major cause of the industrial action last year.
The IWT estimates the Indoor hours required, based on an algorithmic calculation - the values in the IWT have been agreed in the interim - The CWU are yet to conclude tests in a live environment - There is no agreement on throughputs. The one minute test remains the only agreed method of testing performance.

If any manager questions your performance on the basis of the IWT submit an individual grievance and tell your Unit and Area rep that you want it heard within the 7 days. The CWU won an Industrial Tribunal case in Glasgow last year on this very point.

As the revisions have failed managers will be anxious to shift the blame onto OPG performance when any fool knows the systems being used are funfamentally flawed.

[POSTMAN]

the values in the IWT have been agreed in the interim - The CWU are yet to conclude tests in a live environment - There is no agreement on throughputs.

I don't get this,why is it being used in revisions then?

[Tamsky]

An LTB was circulated in the summer which explained that all the values in IWT and Georoute were being discussed with RM and that interim values had been agreed, subject to testing in a live environment. The LTB concluded that this should not delay the revision process.

I questioned the outdoor Secy on this at the Scottish ADR briefing in October-I explained that units in KA/DG were being asked to bring in revisions base on IWT/Geo route that were yet to be agreed. I asked for an assurance that any amendments in favour of the OPG would be implemented and he said yes.

In fact self starter units have agreed revisions on IWT v6.2.5 and IWT v6.3 came out in the last two weeks, RM have yet to adjust the Indoor hours to OPG advantage. I'm raising this tomorrow.

Likewise with Geo route - Any agreed amendments should be credited to outdoor.

Will it happen - let's say I'm not holding my breath. Mixed messages or what.?

[dvbuk55]

the values in the IWT have been agreed in the interim - The CWU are yet to conclude tests in a live environment - There is no agreement on throughputs.

I don't get this,why is it being used in revisions then?

Need to grow some perchance

[fishtank]

As long as they doing the job and not screwing around.....no.

Why would someone who can pass the one minute test, not be able to meet the "standard" set by the IWT?

At the moment i don't believe that the throughputs thrown up by the IWT are achievable.
That aside i have reservations concerning whether managers could be trusted not to fiddle the figures a little on such a complex test..and some members do not cope well under test conditions so all in all it is in my opinion a recipe for disaster.
If a member has been with the company for 10 years and in all that time Royal Mail have not had a problem with his performance is it right that he should now be harassed because the company has decided to move the goalposts.
I don't think so.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

As long as they doing the job and not screwing around.....no.

Why would someone who can pass the one minute test, not be able to meet the "standard" set by the IWT?

Because the IWT does not set a standard to be adhered to, its sets a parameter so that the correct resources can be applied in an efficient manner. Problem is as with most computer aided tools is that if the data is corrupt then the results are skewed and the system will crash. SISO

[Tamsky]

If a member has been with the company for 10 years and in all that time Royal Mail have not had a problem with his performance is it right that he should now be harassed because the company has decided to move the goalposts.
I don't think so. [/quote]

That was the issue at the Industrial Tribunal and the CWU won the case.