CMA Newsletter

[Mad Max]

"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS NEWSLETTER ISSUE- 2 MARCH 2011

Branch Restructure

We are currently in the process of restructuring the Unite/CMA branches within Post Office Limited. The new branches will be:
Scotland & Northern Ireland
North of England
Midlands Wales & South West
South & South East
As part of this restructure we would like to recruit more Workplace Reps. Ideally we would like 1 rep in each work area i.e. CAM area, Admin function, field based team. If you are interested contact your regional rep

Training

We will be training some local reps in April to ensure that you receive the best quality of representation should you need it. This is an ongoing program.

Negotiations

Single manager offices:
We are currently waiting for the outcome of Shaun Swinburn’s review on single manger branches.
Broadbanding:
We have now had 2 meetings with POL, and have another scheduled, to review the agreement as a result of the commitment contained this year’s pay review. Amongst other things, activity as part of the review could involve either focus groups or meetings with individual managers to understand the



issues. We hope to be able to report back by the end of March. Your Reps will keep you updated on progress.
Supply Chain:
Nick is the Unite/CMA Rep responsible for liaison with Supply Chain and has regular meetings with the Supply Chain Lead Team. Recent areas discussed include Cash Centre Finance Manager Review, IDSR, Duty Structure/Attendance Patterns and the effect of OR.

Member Representation

Your Reps have a good success rate in representing members and some examples of the work they do include the successful completion of grievance cases, representation at IPP stages and return to work mediation.

Membership

We would like your views on the content and frequency of future newsletters – forward any ideas via the link Ideas
If you have a colleague who would like to join, an application form is attached.

More information about Unite can be obtained via the link. Unite"

[fishtank]

We are currently in the process of restructuring the Unite/CMA branches within Post Office Limited. The new branches will be:....

A. Pointless.
B. More silent than a Buddhist Library.
C. A phonebox in East Suffolk.
D. A desperate attempt to stay aboard the Unite/cma gravy train.
E. All of the above

[baldrick]

One of our Shift Managers (we have several), has been telling staff that 1 in 4 managers will be losing their jobs.
I can't say that many, well any, OPGs are upset about that. What did they expect?

[Mad Max]

One of our Shift Managers (we have several), has been telling staff that 1 in 4 managers will be losing their jobs.
I can't say that many, well any, OPGs are upset about that. What did they expect?

And you think the compulsory job losses will stop at that level and only affect managers do you?

[baldrick]

One of our Shift Managers (we have several), has been telling staff that 1 in 4 managers will be losing their jobs.
I can't say that many, well any, OPGs are upset about that. What did they expect?

And you think the compulsory job losses will stop at that level and only affect managers do you?

No I don't. But if OPG numbers have been reduced, it is obvious that RM are not going to need so many managers.
We used to have over 3,000 uniformed staff at my MC, now there are about 1,200, and that is after staff from 3 other London MCs which were closed have transferred in.
And they want to cut OPG staffing even more. Not sure yet of the numbers, but rumour has it that they may want less than 400 OPGs after the new machinery is brought in, and Inward Foreign mail is transferred to HWDC.
There are more than 150 managers at my MC. A number of them are Admin and Divisional, but there are a lot of front line managers who will not be needed if OPG numbers are drastically reduced.

[andy2007]

Baldrick. I suspect that the highlighted bit, is what Mad Max was referring to.

One of our Shift Managers (we have several), has been telling staff that 1 in 4 managers will be losing their jobs.
I can't say that many, well any, OPGs are upset about that. What did they expect?

Now, while you're right about there being too many Managers, for the amount of OPGs left (it's the same where I am). Surely you can understand why the Managers already facing CR, find your comment objectionable, can't you?

I'm not saying that you're wrong. The Front Line Managers, are the ones that so many of us have had problems with, for a number of years. So it's not surprising that some will be glad to see the back of them. But have you considered how they will choose who to get rid of?
From RM's point of view, they want the ones who best tow the line. So any good Front Line Managers (fair and approachable), are likley to be the first to go. Just leaving the unreasonable, aggressive, and often extremely nasty ones. I doubt that our lot will improve, once that happens.

And as Mad Max has pointed out: Now they've set a precident. Expect CR for us, when they next get rid of people. You've said it yourself: They want to get rid of a lot of you, at your MC. Don't be surprised if they give some of the unfortunate ones CR instead of offering EVR.

[Mad Max]

Baldrick. I suspect that the highlighted bit, is what Mad Max was referring to.

From RM's point of view, they want the ones who best tow the line. So any good Front Line Managers (fair and approachable), are likley to be the first to go. Just leaving the unreasonable, aggressive, and often extremely nasty ones. I doubt that our lot will improve, once that happens.

That is exactly how things are being done, anyone who doesn't buy into the ruthless approach evidenced from Moya is out.

Firstly they lose their jobs in re structuring, which happen so often its easy to catch someone.
The next step is go through the motions of a preference exercise and not appoint anyone( as mentioned elsewhere POL had 160 managers go through this and 7 were given jobs despite there being 140 vacancies)
having no position VR is offered to the individual and if refused they are called to a meeting where compulsory redundancy is imposed.

So you are left with fewer but far more aggresive mangers who are all ruthlessly on message. Even if they don't want to be that way, they have no choice as they will follow the moderate ones out the door if they object. In my experience the managers left are suffocated by daily micro management from their bosses and told exactly how to apply their daily duties. Any non conformance on their part is exposed very quickly and they are out if it continues.

So next time you think its great that managers are being shafted be careful what you wish for. It'll be the "unreasonable, agressive and extremely nasty" managers left to look after you.

[DGP1]

Baldrick. I suspect that the highlighted bit, is what Mad Max was referring to.

From RM's point of view, they want the ones who best tow the line. So any good Front Line Managers (fair and approachable), are likley to be the first to go. Just leaving the unreasonable, aggressive, and often extremely nasty ones. I doubt that our lot will improve, once that happens.

That is exactly how things are being done, anyone who doesn't buy into the ruthless approach evidenced from Moya is out.

Firstly they lose their jobs in re structuring, which happen so often its easy to catch someone.
The next step is go through the motions of a preference exercise and not appoint anyone( as mentioned elsewhere POL had 160 managers go through this and 7 were given jobs despite there being 140 vacancies)
having no position VR is offered to the individual and if refused they are called to a meeting where compulsory redundancy is imposed.

So you are left with fewer but far more aggresive mangers who are all ruthlessly on message. Even if they don't want to be that way, they have no choice as they will follow the moderate ones out the door if they object. In my experience the managers left are suffocated by daily micro management from their bosses and told exactly how to apply their daily duties. Any non conformance on their part is exposed very quickly and they are out if it continues.

So next time you think its great that managers are being shafted be careful what you wish for. It'll be the "unreasonable, agressive and extremely nasty" managers left to look after you.

I'm sorry but all those CMA staff that came into my office laughing when we were on strike are going to lose their jobs then I don't care about them. As for "unreasonable, agressive and extremely nasty" managers, well I (as long as most smaller DOs) have been dealing with them for a few years now so we don't have anything to fear from them.

[baldrick]

So you are left with fewer but far more aggresive mangers who are all ruthlessly on message. Even if they don't want to be that way, they have no choice as they will follow the moderate ones out the door if they object. In my experience the managers left are suffocated by daily micro management from their bosses and told exactly how to apply their daily duties. Any non conformance on their part is exposed very quickly and they are out if it continues.

That's already happening Max. And a lot of the decent managers will grab EVR if it is offered.

[Budfrog]

The more fair minded and honest managers have been leaving the business either on VR or simply by resigning for some time now.

The marking system for managers is rarely administered in an open and honest manner and the mechanism for appeal (taking out a grievance) is simply not appropriate and ineffective. In practical terms this means that there is a section of managers who simply cannot apply for promotion, or any other job for that matter, because they have been unfairly marked. I know of a CMA Rep, who actively supports his members (a bit of a contradiction in terms), who has regularly received poor markings (instigated by a particularly despotic MCM) simply for taking his CMA duties seriously.

So there are a large number of decent managers (frontline and support) who cannot wait for a VR offer !!!

[Mad Max]

[quote="Budfrog"]The more fair minded and honest managers have been leaving the business either on VR or simply by resigning for some time now.

The marking system for managers is rarely administered in an open and honest manner and the mechanism for appeal (taking out a grievance) is simply not appropriate and ineffective. In practical terms this means that there is a section of managers who simply cannot apply for promotion, or any other job for that matter, because they have been unfairly marked. I know of a CMA Rep, who actively supports his members (a bit of a contradiction in terms), who has regularly received poor markings (instigated by a particularly despotic MCM) simply for taking his CMA duties seriously.