Understand the external threat

Woody Guthrie · Post by **Woody Guthrie** » 26 Oct 2020, 17:26

Is the 6 day USO rather than protecting jobs actually putting all our jobs at risk?

How sustainable are things like Scheduled Attendance, people working 70+ hrs a week and all the various historic allowances that no longer relate to job specifications if we can't even afford a pay rise that keeps pace with inflation or find enough hours to give our part-timers enough to live on?

Are some areas of the country subsidising the inefficiencies of others?

Can we justify the level of full-time staff in the business if it means that the job becomes too physically demanding for anyone over 45?

These are difficult questions the union should be having an open debate with the membership about but HQ would rather bury their heads in the sand and make decisions based on the short term sustainability of their own positions rather than our long term job security.

theotherone · Post by **theotherone** » 26 Oct 2020, 18:00

Grumpyoldmailman wrote:The size of the loss will be because of the upfront cost of building these parcel hubs. You can always spin numbers to suit your agenda.

Yeah I think I read £137 mill was transformation costs so far.

clashcityrocker · Post by **clashcityrocker** » 26 Oct 2020, 18:19

Grumpyoldmailman wrote: You can always spin numbers to suit your agenda.

The threat of a plummeting share price, the break up of the company and a hostile take over - whose agenda is that?

Post by **SpacePhoenix** » 26 Oct 2020, 19:27

Woody Guthrie wrote:They won't target non drivers for redundancy but you may find some non drivers might have to move units depending on local circumstances.

It's going to depend partly on what RM's strategy ends up being for the location of DOs and if they go for creating any "Super-DOs" which would probably require all staff to be able to drive

Grumpyoldmailman · Post by **Grumpyoldmailman** » 26 Oct 2020, 19:53

clashcityrocker wrote:The threat of a plummeting share price, the break up of the company and a hostile take over - whose agenda is that?

That’s the cost of being a publicly listed company, it can happen to any listed firm. The unique thing about RM was always its land assets in prime locations, once they had stripped them it was only a matter of time until they moved onto the next stage.

spen · Post by **spen** » 26 Oct 2020, 19:56

I love the way they keep quoting the mail was down between april- May,,, we all know that,,, how about we get some mail figures August onwards, cause in my office its way busier on the letters than pre covid, and were already at December levels with the packets,, somebody making some money

Edward Hunter · Post by **Edward Hunter** » 26 Oct 2020, 20:08

Loads on delivery would like to work mon - fri. Loads on delivery would take decent VR. That would save money for the company.

Woody Guthrie · Post by **Woody Guthrie** » 26 Oct 2020, 20:11

SpacePhoenix wrote:
Woody Guthrie wrote:They won't target non drivers for redundancy but you may find some non drivers might have to move units depending on local circumstances.
It's going to depend partly on what RM's strategy ends up being for the location of DOs and if they go for creating any "Super-DOs" which would probably require all staff to be able to drive

No it depends entirely on whether we are looking at compulsory redundancies which as far as I'm aware the business has ruled out at least for the moment.

Even if it were the case that there were compulsory redundancies the number of non drivers in each DO is relatively small and getting smaller, trying to justify that there was absolutely no role for a non driver in a DO would be next to impossible especially as for the foreseeable future we're still going to need to deliver letters.

Even if there are compulsory redundancies in order to make sure the process was fair the business would have to offer relocation as a first option and use driving as only one of a range of criteria ensuring that it doesn't impact on one particular protected group more than another.

As I said the business is not going to target non drivers for redundancy, it's pointless and over complicated but the options for non drivers as far as deciding what kind of work they do may be limited in the future.

Jpro747 · Post by **Jpro747** » 26 Oct 2020, 20:39

Can someone pls tell me why deliveries always get shat on for making cuts to the business, yet RM are quite happy to keep handsomely paid managers who can’t manage and go home early? Not to mention the various other bulls##t titles in the business that are clearly of no use because we never see any decent changes to help us become more efficient. Get rid of the deadwood. Our office has never been so inefficient, vans that constantly break down, PDAs that are slow with a poor user interface, Frames that now have double slots so you can’t fit packets in... all because managers only care about figures trying to hit unrealistic targets and they’re not paying attention to what’s actually causing inefficiency and how to improve it. How can we possibly operate at 100bsi when we haven’t been given the tools/support to do the job efficiently?

We’re at breaking point in deliveries now. People are going sick with mental and physical problems due to the job. We’re exhausted pounding the streets for 5-6hrs a day 5 days a week. And if you do the job properly you’re seen as not good enough and bullied by managers to go faster. Morale is on the floor.

Acca Dacca · Post by **Acca Dacca** » 26 Oct 2020, 21:36

I too would like to know why we are being told we can’t reballot the members and if a majority call strike action because of Corona and the courts when the same CWU is actively holding an indicative ballot of Openreach members in their dispute.

Either we postal members are being fooled or the openreach members are.

Who is it?

Martin Walsh · Post by **Martin Walsh** » 26 Oct 2020, 22:42

Acca Dacca wrote:I too would like to know why we are being told we can’t reballot the members and if a majority call strike action because of Corona and the courts when the same CWU is actively holding an indicative ballot of Openreach members in their dispute.

Either we postal members are being fooled or the openreach members are.

Who is it?

You do realise the BT ballot is a consultative ballot not a legal ballot for industrial action ? There is a massive difference.

RTP · Post by **RTP** » 26 Oct 2020, 22:58

Well i guess the 35hr week has been taken off the table with this latest update.

Not that is was ever realistically on the table with all the strings attached, but at least we can finally put that one to bed now.

Acca Dacca · Post by **Acca Dacca** » 26 Oct 2020, 23:08

Martin Walsh wrote:
Acca Dacca wrote:I too would like to know why we are being told we can’t reballot the members and if a majority call strike action because of Corona and the courts when the same CWU is actively holding an indicative ballot of Openreach members in their dispute.

Either we postal members are being fooled or the openreach members are.

Who is it?

You do realise the BT ballot is a consultative ballot not a legal ballot for industrial action ? There is a massive difference.

Consultative to what, if yer not going to do a real ballot on the back of it? I did say indicative for the very reason that I know its not a legal ballot but they are used to gauge support for one no?

Or do you get a huge yes vote in the consultative ballot, take it to BT and say ''our members are prepared to vote for strike action........but we arent going to strike because of Coronavirus and the courts'' like we are being told? In which case whats the point?

A threat of industrial action is only a threat if it is prepared or allowed to be- as the case may or may not be - carried out.

Have the Openreach members been told that a strike is not on the table?

Im very supportive of the CWU in general so this isnt from an anti-union angle but it seems to me that either the Opeanreach guys or us are being led up the garden path. The stuff coming from both branches of the CWU are contradicting each other from what I can see. They are being prepared for the potential of taking action meanwhile we, who have already voted twice for action, are being told its not possible.

grchpo · Post by **grchpo** » 27 Oct 2020, 07:50

Edward Hunter wrote:Loads on delivery would like to work mon - fri. Loads on delivery would take decent VR. That would save money for the company.

Don't assume we all want to work mon-Fri. I work 5 weeks on, 1 week off, much better than a different day off each week & how will it be mon-Fri, they want a 7 day week. Have you not seen the post about Sunday collections.

Ren Hoëk · Post by **Ren Hoëk** » 27 Oct 2020, 08:02

I think going by the comments on this forum and the sense of feeling in my DO is that the union need to provide something and something soon. This deal better be good. Iv been consistently let down my the Local union. Iv had numerous problems lately and some seriously egregious and iv been left to sort them out (successfully) by myself. If national are this feckless I may as well save my money.

It's clear RM are taking the piss out of us. Ballot us and put the pressure on. Threatening them with the break up of the company just isn't going to work. What if this new CEO has been instructed to do just that? What have we got?