Overtime ban

[Barnacle]

If you have a part timer on 30 hours over 4 days would they get preference on working a day off over a full timer on 37 hours. There is some unrest about it in our office. It’s to cover sick leave so is still allowed apparently. I think the agreement is the person with less hours would take preference. Anyone confirm.

Why should a full timer miss out just because someone is part time? No one knows the personal circumstances - The full timer could be the main earner in a household where as a part timer might have a husband/wife earning mega money elsewhere. If you happily take on a part time job I’d assume you don’t NEED full time work.

If they want the hours then most newcomers at RM work FT even on a PT contract.

For several years you could only join RM on a pt contract. You had to wait to be made up to ft if at all, that’s why some work so much overtime.

[Acca Dacca]

Now we have an issue where long serving part timers are being left on a part time contract because they haven’t been on a variation contract and the new starters brought in on full time hours are being promised their terms will be “equalised” in time by the CWU

Which if it ever did happen you would have the scenario where those brought in last few years on the newer contract have it better than those in long before them

Their terms will be on par with the legacy contracts but crucially they will have the increased hour contract compared to many other legacy part timers

[Minischoles]

It's a pretty simple cost benefit analysis to banning overtime - overtime is a huge cost to the business, while failing the quality of service simply isn't - any fine incurred as a result will have been factored into costs, and is less than they'd pay in overtime, once they eventually get around to paying it (it was damn near 10 years of appeals before they paid the last big fine).

Add in that they're lobbying hard for USO reform, failing now makes sense; they get to save a ton of money, and provide justifications for making even more money when the USO gets changed as a result. It's a massive win/win for those at the top, as the only losers are the plebs who won't be getting their mail and they don't give a single s**t about them.

[LouBarlow]

It must be a local issue as we have more people working their days off than ever.

[ted_e_bear]

It must be a local issue as we have more people working their days off than ever.

Same, well similar, we've got loads of early ips that simply isn't required, for example today they finished sorting everything that arrived early before official starting time which meant the entire office being fully prepped and waiting for the 2nd wave well before it turned up.

[menditsa]

It must be a local issue as we have more people working their days off than ever.

We have been stopped 100% from working our days off.

You have to put your name on a list for overtime (Working day off) but that entails working from 11am until 8.40pm scanning parcels then taking a route out.

[Mr Rush]

It's a pretty simple cost benefit analysis to banning overtime - overtime is a huge cost to the business

Employing the correct number of people would be a huge cost. The whole operation being reliant on OT is a huge saving.

[Londonsburning]

It's a pretty simple cost benefit analysis to banning overtime - overtime is a huge cost to the business

Employing the correct number of people would be a huge cost. The whole operation being reliant on OT is a huge saving.

Relying on overtime over the last 10 years is a huge saving to the budget unfortunately. How many minutes pay is avoided by letting OPGs work 10 or 15 minutes extra every day/week here and there spread over 50 or even 25 or 10 thousand individuals?

Imagine buying Royal Mail for a loss

[GRS]

We have a situation in our office where (for example) 4 people are needed to work their days off to cover all walks but only 2 are allowed in. So win win if you’re 1 of the 2 as you get O/T plus you’re walk goes out. If you’re 1 of the 2 who can’t come in as “the business can’t afford it” then not only do you miss out on O/T but you come back from your day off to double mail!!!

[Perseus]

We have a situation in our office where (for example) 4 people are needed to work their days off to cover all walks but only 2 are allowed in. So win win if you’re 1 of the 2 as you get O/T plus you’re walk goes out. If you’re 1 of the 2 who can’t come in as “the business can’t afford it” then not only do you miss out on O/T but you come back from your day off to double mail!!!

It's not just a doubly bad, it's threefold, as when people are coming back to 2 (or more) days mail and are willing to stay out to finish it as they need the overtime, they are being told no.