MPU CSS OPERATIONS URGENT INFORMATION REQUIRED

[fishtank]

LTB 271/12 MPU CSS OPERATIONS URGENT INFORMATION REQUIRED


No. 271/12

Ref. 535.04

Date: 12th April 2012

To: All Branches with Postal Members

Dear Colleagues,

MPU - CSS Operations - Urgent Information required

The Outdoor Department at CWU HQ are in receipt of a number of reports regarding CSS Operations in MPUs which more than indicate that pressure is being brought to bear on our members in those units to perform above and beyond the realms of what could be considered as fair and manageable, safe and acceptable.

We have strong indicators that the following is taking place in some units and need to establish as a matter of urgency just how widespread these occurrences are. In particular, Area Delivery Representatives with MPUs in their areas of responsibility/representation should provide the Outdoor Department with an evidenced report on the following:

Ø Pressure to perform at certain levels of OEE
Ø Threats of removal from CSS duties if standards are not met
Ø Health & Safety Standards being compromised
Ø Ignorance of Safe Systems of work
Ø Not taking breaks correctly in order to enhance throughputs
Ø The formulation of ' League Tables' both regionally and nationally
Ø Additional work being added to operators schedules (beyond normal TPM)
Ø Plus any other relevant information
Reports should be provided to the Postal Outdoor Department by no later than Noon on Friday 20th April 2012. Please send either a hard copy in the post or email it to hnutley@cwu.org

Any enquiries to Bob Gibson's Office, quoting reference 535.04

Email address: hnutley@cwu.org

Yours sincerely

Bob Gibson

Assistant Secretary

[haob]

I'm pleased that this has appeared and is being looked into.

I have been wary of my MC's CSS area for a while and shall bring this bulletin to the attention of the CSS people when I'm next in. Disclaimer: I am not a CSS operator, only ILSM

Specific points I have expressed dissatisfaction with to them:

-OEE pressure: they seem to regularly receive a "telling off" regulalry for combinations of rejects, breakdowns and OEE
-H&S standards: The 2 hour on 2 hour off limit has never been used, instead an extra person floats between machines and they are rotated: they all look pretty knackered after 8 or 9 hours of this so I don't think it's working
-Breaks: heavily controlled and staggered breaks with the floating operator taking over while someone has a break so no machine ever stops
-League tables: this I think relates to the OEE pressure, and I have definitely seen incidents them being told their "rankings" compared to one another

The other points in the bulletin I have no information on.

My opinion now: I decided a while ago to refuse CSS training if offered, for the reasons above mainly, as it creates a bad atmosphere and poor moral, and with an increased risk of injury/accidents/mistakes due to fatigue.

[blue1873]

Interesting that you decided "to refuse CSS training if offered" i was led to believe
you cant refuse to be trained unless you have physical/medical problem that would
prevent you from operating any RM mech kit,anyone out there know if you have the
right to refuse mech training if you wish.

[Talell]

You can refuse any training.

If your duty does not require you to know it, then you can turn it down.

e.g. someone who has signed for a packet sorting duty can refuse any and all mech training, but cannot refuse manual handling (bad example but I can't think of a better one)

also with regard breaks, that's what is supposed to happen (machine running 100% of the time)

And OEE league tables, I know they exist for iLSM and CFC, haven't heard anything like that for CSS (actually, the only machine where OEE isn't monitored really is CSS in my MC), but this is all beside the point because it's for MPU's, plus apparently according to my rep 2 on 2 off is only for MC's, MPU's are allowed to run the machines all night

[Budfrog]

Ø Pressure to perform at certain levels of OEE

Post training all operators should be 'verified' - preferably by a member of the Sortation Automation Team. This verification ensures that operators are following SSOW, SOPs, are aware of the office's contingency and work plans, are performing TPM to the required standard, recording this on a log and are already or are capable of an OEE of 66 within 6 weeks from 'go live'. A record should be held by the MPU manager of this verification.

Ø Threats of removal from CSS duties if standards are not met

Firstly the operator should not have been 'verified' however if an operator is subsequently not capable of reaching the required OEE and throughput and the office workplan is being compromised then the MPU Manager should firstly seek additional support from the sortation automation team. Ultimately (assuming the targets/workplans are achievable) it may be in the unit's interest (and the operator's) for a move onto work that he/she is better suited


Ø Health & Safety Standards being compromised

There have been instances where operators have not followed the SSOW particularly when double batching and clearing selections by reaching over mail that is still on the moving belt. There have also been instances where operators have undertaken tasks proper to engineers (re-booting PC) - they should not be instructed or advised to do anything that compromises H&S and follow the SSOW at all times. There have also been safety related 'What Good Looks Like' posters issued from sortation automation nationally that need to be briefed and displayed on the Health and Safety noticeboard that every unit must have.

Ø Ignorance of Safe Systems of work

The SSOW are in black and white and must be followed at all times.

Ø Not taking breaks correctly in order to enhance throughputs

The only time that I have seen breaks not being taken is when a unit 1st goes live and is staffed by new operators who are not experienced or when the mail arrives late or is unduly heavy - there is a contingency plan in every unit that should be followed allowing staff to take their full entitlement of breaks however a lack of uniformity of duty sets does not help.

Ø The formulation of ' League Tables' both regionally and nationally

These definitely exist and are circulated on a weekly basis. Many units have OEE displays for each machine although it should be pointed out that these are machine and not operator based (though it doesn't take much to link one with the other). Towards the end of the last financial year there was a lot of pressure brought to bear to reach DP% targets with units being asked to sequence every batch no matter how small and there are tables for this as well as OEE.

Ø Additional work being added to operators schedules (beyond normal TPM)

It has always been the intention to fill the schedule of a CSS operator with 'other indoor work' as the 2 hours on/off (or 20mins away in a MPU) allows periods when the operators have no CSS related tasks to perform.

Ø Plus any other relevant information

I have said this before but there was not enough standardisation of approach for duty sets, work plans, contingency plans and the like. Consequently there are stark differences between regions and within them. MPU managers were only brought on board very late in the day and are only now developing the skills required to manage a mech operation, the fact it is on a different attendance to them does not help.

The role of the 'Team Leader' is somewhat unclear in some units with some acting like mini-managers others merely taking on the additional reporting and comms and only really advising staff when the contingency plan needs to be implemented.

[blue1873]

"Talell" you say you can refuse any training
would this apply if you dont currently hold a
duty and are spare.

[Badwolf]

We still don't know what the SOPs are in our MC. At the moment we make them up. What are SOPs and have they been agreed?

[Budfrog]

Any feedback from conference on CSS as some units clearly are not being managed correctly (or safely) ?

[Talell]

Just PEC telling branches and to actually respond to them on the matter

also blue: in that situation, no you can't refuse training

[Red Robbo]

The reserves in our office are being trained on CSS machines.

[Budfrog]

The reserves in our office are being trained on CSS machines.

The selection procedure for CSS Reserves is the same as for normal operators ie Seniority unless there is a local agreement to the contrary.

There are countless delivery OPGs around the country who would like the opportunity to be trained and these staff should not be overlooked in favour of Reserves.

[Tman]

Originally it wasn't going to be only on seniority due to the inevitability of "Old Bert" getting the duties over someone of greater ability lower down the order. Did it all end up in the same old "jobs for the old boys" routine after all?

[fishtank]

Originally it wasn't going to be only on seniority due to the inevitability of "Old Bert" getting the duties over someone of greater ability lower down the order. Did it all end up in the same old "jobs for the old boys" routine after all?

As far as i'm led to believe CSS Operator is a very physical,highly stressful job...i've never done it so like you...i wouldn't know.
If it did end up that way,"Old Bert" would probably be regretting the move.

[Budfrog]

As far as i'm led to believe CSS Operator is a very physical,highly stressful job...i've never done it so like you...i wouldn't know.
If it did end up that way,"Old Bert" would probably be regretting the move.

The correct process is firstly to put the vacancies on IRIS with all applicants applying through IRIS.

Once there are a group of applicants there should be a 30min induction workshop - which is a Powerpoint demo undertaken by the MPU Manager (or a member of sortation automation team if available) followed by Q&A.

Then there is a 1-2-1 again with the MPU Manager (or a member of sortation automation team if available) which is NOT an interview but an opportunity for the applicant to find out more about the job and the MPU manager to find out more about the applicant (if he wishes to be a Team Leader etc.) In EXTREME circumstances if an applicant demonstrates in his answers to the standard questions used that he is totally unsuited to the position then the Manager has to tell him at this time and give reasons. The 1-2-1 should be fully documented and records kept. If there are issues around physical capability then ATOS must be contacted to ensure the applicant is capable of doing the job - this is ATOS's decision and NOT the MPU Manager.

Finally if there are still more applicants than positions it is simply seniority. Note applicants should 1st be considered from the MPU itself followed by interested OPGs from the satellite units that the unit serves.

It is a straightforward 'agreed' process >>> however it is often not followed with 'favoured' applicants being unfairly fast-tracked and 'unfavoured' ones persuaded to drop out when they have as much right as the next person to continue.

[mattymullings]

there are tables on automis benchmark reports on all css aspects. oee performance etc. i would imagine all high performing offices work 2 to a machine when batching and clearing down we do this at my office and reach an oee of 80% plus each day. oee in all other businesses is bonus related but not with us shame really