You gotta get your sites trust survey score under 90% to deny the managers the bonus.
So even if there was 100% turnout, if the score if crap - they don't get the bonus?
Surely it should be more about getting a good score than getting a good turnout.
Their bonus is calculated on participation, results do not matter.
I am not disagreeing that this years big "trust" survey may well have the managers bonus calculated on the participation rate but this is an extract from the recent LTB which indicates the bonus from the previous Big Trust Survey was supposed to be based on the trust score.
https://www.cwu.org/ltb/ltb-235-23-roya ... rvey-2023/
"This previous joint activity effectively came to an end when the survey produced a trust score of 68%, resulting in the previous CEO reneging on his promise not to make management bonus payments unless the ‘trust score’ hit 70 or above. The national disputes then commenced meaning joint activity was inappropriate in any event."
The Trust survey appears to have an obvious flaw in the fact that it can be completed multiple times by the same employee or even agency workers!.
You gotta get your sites trust survey score under 90% to deny the managers the bonus.
So even if there was 100% turnout, if the score if crap - they don't get the bonus?
Surely it should be more about getting a good score than getting a good turnout.
Managers shouldn't be getting any incentives for staff completing a work survey. What other company does this? If RM cannot find a way to allow staff to complete a simple survey without having to bribe managers then something is seriously wrong.
RM would also be better off having an open survey that allows staff to give as much negative feedback as possible. If everything is positive and based on trying to improve scores from last years results then the company are less likely to change, and ironically, this is the thing that they want to do. As it stands I won't be completing this years survey.
On the face of it, shareholder value is the dumbest idea in the world.
You gotta get your sites trust survey score under 90% to deny the managers the bonus.
So even if there was 100% turnout, if the score if crap - they don't get the bonus?
Surely it should be more about getting a good score than getting a good turnout.
Managers shouldn't be getting any incentives for staff completing a work survey. What other company does this? If RM cannot find a way to allow staff to complete a simple survey without having to bribe managers then something is seriously wrong.
RM would also be better off having an open survey that allows staff to give as much negative feedback as possible. If everything is positive and based on trying to improve scores from last years results then the company are less likely to change, and ironically, this is the thing that they want to do. As it stands I won't be completing this years survey.
It’s nothing to do with the irony of positivity and everything to do with finding the right kind of psychopath to run each office/MC/sector.
These few at the top are all climbing the slippery pole and they don't give a flying f**k who you are. Because they're getting paid BANK plus bonuses/promotions.
Successful people ask better questions, and as a result, get better answers
Maybe a couple of questions in the survey should be (and I've not done it so I don't know):
In the last 6 months have you interviewed for another job? If you did, explain why OR if you were to leave Royal Mail tomorrow, what would the reason be?
Now that would be real feedback. Otherwise this survey is just corporate b*llocks like Hyrrokkin said
On the face of it, shareholder value is the dumbest idea in the world.
We have been offered a bribe of a lottery draw for 1 days annual leave for those who complete the trust survey. This is supposed to be a confidential survey, yet manager was marking off people's names for staff completing survey with the excuse they would be entered into the draw for an extra days leave !
Sounds scandalous that we are being bribed and harassed to complete a survey that is supposed to be voluntary. I agree with previous posts that this is for the benefit of management and not workers, as ties in with the managers bonuses.
If other sites are getting 2 days as a bribe, then why are we only getting 1 day !!!
Also beggars the question that we struggle to book normal annual leave, also being told daily Royal Mails financial woes, that the business can now give away annual leave for free !!!
Our manager slithered his way round with the 1 day off raffle routine this morning. The silence was deafening, and tumbleweed blew along the aisles. I was trying to get out, and he could see I was a bit stressed, so he`ll ask me again tomorrow. Entering the details on a PDA, how can it be anonymous?. Lot`s of lads said they wouldn`t be partaking, and I won`t be. I didn`t stand on a freezing picket line for weeks, so he can pocket another bonus.
RM would also be better off having an open survey that allows staff to give as much negative feedback as possible. If everything is positive and based on trying to improve scores from last years results then the company are less likely to change, and ironically, this is the thing that they want to do. As it stands I won't be completing this years survey.
It's a thought but in reality RM are more than comfortable literally (using staff number log-in details) marking their own homework, hence the false results that are always vastly inflated to give a positive spin when the shopfloor experience is anything but. Management routinely lie, ignore and obfuscate on a level that would shame even the front bench of the current government (maybe a slight exaggeration I'll admit ). I would rather have a platform where we, the footsoldiers, can expose this massive fraud being undertaken on a daily basis against the public that pay our wages. It's about time that RM were held to account for this obvious nonsense that RM 'doesn't prioritise parcels'; that first class, second class and all other lesser non-tracked mailings are not being fulfilled under the obligation of the USO. I assume the CWU's silence has been bought by the threat of RM not collecting subs from members and OFCOM are just a ineffectual waste of space.
Only today yet another example was posted on this forum: https://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/news/ ... ford-area/
It's a disgrace and it needs to be exposed.
You do the work, they get the loot. The men with the smiles and the 3 piece suits.
). I would rather have a platform where we, the footsoldiers, can expose this massive fraud being undertaken on a daily basis against the public that pay our wages. It's about time that RM were held to account for this obvious nonsense that RM 'doesn't prioritise parcels'; that first class, second class and all other lesser non-tracked mailings are not being fulfilled under the obligation of the USO. I assume the CWU's silence has been bought by the threat of RM not collecting subs from members and OFCOM are just a ineffectual waste of space.