Annualised hours

[steve1873]

Doesn't breaking a loop into three, four or five add time to a duty?

Yes, and it is considered inefficient because time spent at the van is dead time. Especially if you have to move van etc and if both of you are at van there tends to be wee bit of chatter etc, which also is inefficient.

[norris9]

Doesn't breaking a loop into three, four or five add time to a duty?

Yes, and it is considered inefficient because time spent at the van is dead time. Especially if you have to move van etc and if both of you are at van there tends to be wee bit of chatter etc, which also is inefficient.

I see carrying a heavy bag as inefficient - it weighs you down and therefore slows your walking pace. It's also more awkward to get parcels/post out of the bag. On top of that you're more prone to getting a shoulder or back injury.

Breaking a loop into 2 makes sense sometimes. Not sure about splitting a loop more than that - must be a very long loop if it is.

[fb1969]

People complain that the company treat them like sh1t, then more than half of them refuse to use the correct equipment for the job!

[SpacePhoenix]

Doesn't breaking a loop into three, four or five add time to a duty?

Yes, and it is considered inefficient because time spent at the van is dead time. Especially if you have to move van etc and if both of you are at van there tends to be wee bit of chatter etc, which also is inefficient.

I see carrying a heavy bag as inefficient - it weighs you down and therefore slows your walking pace. It's also more awkward to get parcels/post out of the bag. On top of that you're more prone to getting a shoulder or back injury.

Breaking a loop into 2 makes sense sometimes. Not sure about splitting a loop more than that - must be a very long loop if it is.

If someone gets an injury as a result of carrying a heavy bag when they should have been using a LWT, then that'll always be an instant blameworthy

[ted_e_bear]

People complain that the company treat them like sh1t, then more than half of them refuse to use the correct equipment for the job!

Exactly, the way this thread has descended into a discussion on using a lwt trolley highlights that, they're the tools for the job,they take the weight off your shoulders.

[SMS1969]

Doesn't breaking a loop into three, four or five add time to a duty?

Yes, and it is considered inefficient because time spent at the van is dead time. Especially if you have to move van etc and if both of you are at van there tends to be wee bit of chatter etc, which also is inefficient.

I see carrying a heavy bag as inefficient - it weighs you down and therefore slows your walking pace. It's also more awkward to get parcels/post out of the bag. On top of that you're more prone to getting a shoulder or back injury.

Breaking a loop into 2 makes sense sometimes. Not sure about splitting a loop more than that - must be a very long loop if it is.

If someone gets an injury as a result of carrying a heavy bag when they should have been using a LWT, then that'll always be an instant blameworthy

Some clowns will carry two bags on their shoulders, quite unbelievable. Just because they don’t want to be seen as weak by using a lwt.

[postslippete]

In a dispute like this certain things are put on the table, knowing they'll be negotiated away. How would this pragmatically work? There'se guy in our office that without fail finishes about two hours early each day, how would it work with him? Has to work entire weeks for free when they clock it up at the end of the year? Equally there's people that go over each day, do they get weeks off when all their hours are totaled come the end of the year? They can make days shorter and longer I guess, but actually banking hours as has been suggesting previously would be virtually impossible to implement. Commit to deliver is a nonsense that'll be negotiated away, too. That's even if those things are actual proposals anyway. Some of this stuff comes from the union hoping to rile people up to generate support, and from trolls on the Internet looking to get a reaction.

Absolutely

Cannot see any Union accepting commit to deliver as it basically means that posties will be doing unpaid overtime. And how often do the Union tell us that we should work all the hours that we are paid for?

And if we have later starts and finishes perhaps with even bigger outdoor duties then where on earth does annualised hours fit in? We all know that its unworkable to everyone but Simon Thompson's and his board of clowns.

Honestly, its a distraction to what Royal Mail really, really want.


And what Royal Mail particularly want are low paid posties to start and finish later. Thats the game changer. Why else would they spend nearly a billion quid on a parcel hub? Its designed to save hours of indoor sorting and that is why they have been pushing un-agreed revisions in our depot. Less indoor hours and bigger outdoor spans. At least thats the theory - in practice theres been many issues regarding the super-hubs and if you asked most posties what they really don't want, I'm guessing that later finishes would be one of them.....

So what the Union really should be doing is saying "fair enough, posties may be starting later but they won't be finishing that much later" and that fits in nicely with the shorter working week that the Union and the Labour Party were campaigning for a few years ago. A 35 hour or even shorter working week with no loss in pay and for part-timers to also increase their hours. Win-win for everyone concerned.

But we all know that Royal Mail will not accept that. They just want to get rid of more duties and tack on extra loops onto existing duties and force us all to work outdoors for longer and finish even later - because it suits them and their greedy shareholders. But there has to be a limit to how much outdoor work we should be doing and what Royal Mail should be doing instead is to recruit more staff. This is a company with a £1.7 billion war-chest of available liquidity, they still have a very strong balance sheet and they have made a profit year on year since 2017/18 - apart from this year because they tried to force through too much change instead of negotiating.

[SpacePhoenix]

And what Royal Mail particularly want are low paid posties to start and finish later. Thats the game changer. Why else would they spend nearly a billion quid on a parcel hub? Its designed to save hours of indoor sorting and that is why they have been pushing un-agreed revisions in our depot. Less indoor hours and bigger outdoor spans. At least thats the theory - in practice theres been many issues regarding the super-hubs and if you asked most posties what they really don't want, I'm guessing that later finishes would be one of them.....

It'll only save the sorting in MCs, it's not going to save any sorting in DOs/Hubs as it's only ever going to arrive at the DOs/Hubs sorted to office level as it'd take up way too much room on the lorries doing the MC>DO runs

[postslippete]

And what Royal Mail particularly want are low paid posties to start and finish later. Thats the game changer. Why else would they spend nearly a billion quid on a parcel hub? Its designed to save hours of indoor sorting and that is why they have been pushing un-agreed revisions in our depot. Less indoor hours and bigger outdoor spans. At least thats the theory - in practice theres been many issues regarding the super-hubs and if you asked most posties what they really don't want, I'm guessing that later finishes would be one of them.....

It'll only save the sorting in MCs, it's not going to save any sorting in DOs/Hubs as it's only ever going to arrive at the DOs/Hubs sorted to office level as it'd take up way too much room on the lorries doing the MC>DO runs

Fair enough, so if they arrive sorted to office level like they are now that means that our times don't need to change at all

According to our COM they have been loads of issues in the super-hubs with irregular parcels, heavy and smaller parcels. All because they said that the machines that the hub was built is too small and if you've seen it's f***kg huge, its apparently the size of half a dozen football pitches!!

[SpacePhoenix]

And what Royal Mail particularly want are low paid posties to start and finish later. Thats the game changer. Why else would they spend nearly a billion quid on a parcel hub? Its designed to save hours of indoor sorting and that is why they have been pushing un-agreed revisions in our depot. Less indoor hours and bigger outdoor spans. At least thats the theory - in practice theres been many issues regarding the super-hubs and if you asked most posties what they really don't want, I'm guessing that later finishes would be one of them.....

It'll only save the sorting in MCs, it's not going to save any sorting in DOs/Hubs as it's only ever going to arrive at the DOs/Hubs sorted to office level as it'd take up way too much room on the lorries doing the MC>DO runs

Fair enough, so if they arrive sorted to office level like they are now that means that our times don't need to change at all

According to our COM they have been loads of issues in the super-hubs with irregular parcels, heavy and smaller parcels. All because they said that the machines that the hub was built is too small and if you've seen it's f***kg huge, its apparently the size of half a dozen football pitches!!

Think it depends on how they're routed, whether they still have to go via RDCs between the Outward MC and the "Super-hub" and then between the "Super-hub" and the Inward MC (where in theory they're meant to just be cross-docked)

[Marshamp11]

Doesn't breaking a loop into three, four or five add time to a duty?

Yes, and it is considered inefficient because time spent at the van is dead time. Especially if you have to move van etc and if both of you are at van there tends to be wee bit of chatter etc, which also is inefficient.

I see carrying a heavy bag as inefficient - it weighs you down and therefore slows your walking pace. It's also more awkward to get parcels/post out of the bag. On top of that you're more prone to getting a shoulder or back injury.

Breaking a loop into 2 makes sense sometimes. Not sure about splitting a loop more than that - must be a very long loop if it is.

If someone gets an injury as a result of carrying a heavy bag when they should have been using a LWT, then that'll always be an instant blameworthy

And that is a conversation that would be had. We had a guy many years ago who twisted his ankle on delivery and on his return to the office wanted to enter the incident into the accident book. Guvnor took one look at his non RM issue Adidas trainers and told him to turn round and shut the door behind himself.

[twoloops]

Our manager took us in a huddle today to inform us how the banking of annualised will work, you will be told daily depending on mail traffic what time you will be expected back to the office it should be up & running towards the end of April

[mjd24]

Our manager took us in a huddle today to inform us how the banking of annualised will work, you will be told daily depending on mail traffic what time you will be expected back to the office it should be up & running towards the end of April

Seriously?! I really didnt think this would actually go ahead!

[Barnacle]

Our manager took us in a huddle today to inform us how the banking of annualised will work, you will be told daily depending on mail traffic what time you will be expected back to the office it should be up & running towards the end of April

They are going to tell us what time they expect us back? This isn’t how I thought it was going to work.

[pieoftheday]

Our manager took us in a huddle today to inform us how the banking of annualised will work, you will be told daily depending on mail traffic what time you will be expected back to the office it should be up & running towards the end of April

Make a daily diary of the hours you work if this comes in, because its nailed on that RMs figures wont add up In our favour when it comes to getting our hours back