h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hi Kelli,

I do agree with what you said in one respect. This strike is damaging to our indsutry and we do not undertake it lightly. However there is never a "good time" to take IA it is *always* damaging. Sometimes though you have to draw a line in the sand and stand up for your rights.

Royal Mail knew that by introducing the new working practice by "Executive Action" in a situaiton where passions were inflamed would likely cause unofficial walk outs. But they did it anyway.

Recently the Union and management agreed a five week period of negotiations in which no IA owuld take place, we upheld our side of the bargain and on the saturday of the last week Royal Mail through all the negotiated stuff out and *resubmitted their orgional offer* in five weeks they had refused to bufge on anything.

Royal Mail despite what they are pretending in the press have been deliberately provocative throughout.

Novo this is what I posted in the "other" thread yesterday when you raised this.

""job and stop" has been the operational way of doing deliveries for *ages*, I imagine it was bieng done like that back when SWL used to be a postman.

Up until recently the management encouraged it on the gounds that posties would come in before their shift was due to start and get the masil out earlier.

I agree that this is a wokring practice that will need to change going forward, but once again I feel that this change in the way we work has to be negotiated and not just imposed form on high at a whim.
"

So to re-iterate I agree that "Job and Stop" is something that will have to cease. But lets not pretend it was some "union" concoted whezze that management have always been against. Like I said the ocmpany used to encourage it as a way of getting the post out earlier. Now they want to change it they should negotiate with us about the change.

One big question now is what is the incentive for any postie to bust a gut to get the post out earlier? I am serious about this all successful business and organisations incentivise their employees to work more productively. This is what "Job and Stop" used to be about. If it stops then Royal Mail need to come up with an alternative.

I would ask why shouldn't a postie just get on a do their job to the best of their ability in exchange for getting paid their wages? Why do they need extra incentives like the free car draw for not chucking sickies, just to do what they are paid for? And just because you have been getting away with something that isn't in your T&Cs, why should you have to be paid to stop doing it? If the workers want extra money for every change to their T&Cs I don't see how they can complain about being asked to do only what *is* in their contracts.

Thank you FK

I was just about to 'post' a similar reply.

I have no doubt that bad management and Spanish Practices have been going on for years. Now is the time to wipe the slate clean, stop referring in true British Leyland fashion , to " We have always worked like this", and get on with sorting out a fair days work for a fair days pay.

Hence yesterdays reference to the stoneage not coming to an end for lack of stone.

Novo

Errr.... The late starts *is* part of our terms and conditions and effects people pay directly as the later starts effect Postal Workers NDA. So absolutly if Royal Mail are oging to enforce a change that reulsts in people getting a pay cut and reducing the value of a postal workers job then hell yes I understand why they are walking out, even though I disagree with unofficial IA.

The truth is one of the things postmen are out on strike about is the proposed "laters starts" what did Royal Mail expect if they enforced the change?

"Why do they need extra incentives like the free car draw for not chucking sickies, just to do what they are paid for?"

Well for one thing I reject the allegation that most sick is sickies. Lots of large organisations try to incentivise good attendance I dont see why that is an issue. It isn't part of our T&Cs and Royal Mail could stop it tomorrow and I wouldn't care and the union would not object.

Anyhow incentivisation is common place in all walks of employment. Truth is whether you like it or not human nature is a lot of people will not automatically just go the extra mile, partiulalrly if in a low paid job with little prospects. Virtually everyone I know in such jobs have some osrt of productivity related bonus scheme to try and get them to work harder. It is normal business practice surely?

"Now is the time to wipe the slate clean, stop referring in true British Leyland fashion , to " We have always worked like this", and get on with sorting out a fair days work for a fair days pay."

Yada yada yada yada.....

So what would you say was a fair days pay for getting up in the middle of the night and carrying a heavy bag around rain and shine hainvg to work saturdays more often than not?

I have to say I would not do that job on my money, and I am paid more than an average postman. If the business need to be more efficient and difficult changes are necessary fine, but negotiate this change and incentivise postmen to be aboard. If changes are going to make the comapny more profitable then surely postmen should be able to expect better terms?

I think Novo you and I have fundamentally disparate views about what the purpose of labour is. I work for myself, to pay my bills and fund the kind of lifestyle I want.

I do not see efficiency or increased profit as an end in itself. If the business being more porfitable and efficient means I will do better than I am all for it.

For example in my side of the business we signed up to a productivity related pay progression scheme replacing the yearly increments. It took some persuading of our members but the result, my wages went up by about 5 grand a year and the productivity of our business unit rocketed. Everybody is happy.

Royal Mail are not interested in anything like this though, they want all the cahnges but are unprepared to incentivise the workforce to want it to. They see us the same as the machines in the office, merely profit genrating tools who have no stake in the business.

We have different politics Novo so I dount we will ever understand one another on this issue.

Knocking off as soon as you have finished your round (rather than because you have done your hours) isn't in the T&Cs is it?

I agree that a change to T&Cs needs to be negotiated, but you said that a change to a 'working practice' should also need to be incentivised. It is this dichotomy I don't understand.

The private sector also sucks to work in; my company's 'incentive scheme' was to tell us to accept the fifth year in a row with no inflationary pay rise, or leave, as they think they could get cheaper labour now. They did eventually give us around 2%, but only after we did 12 hour days for 6 months, and told us that now we have set a level of expectation that we would continue to work that hard or risk poor evaluations and eventual redundancy.

Working in this kind of environment, it is hard to understand why everyone in the nation should be punished because the postal workers are asked to actually do their contracted hours.

BTW, I know the strike is about numerous issues and not just this, and am feeling particularly bitter today due to the extra few hundred pounds we're going to have to find this month because of the strike...

Hi FB

Yes we have different politics though perhaps not as diferent as you think. My approach is to earn as much as I can honestly, to put in a fair days work , and to work for the company's interests. (Like you.) The only seeming difference is that I give in order to get, not get in order to give.

Novo

Interestingly put!

I've been following this thread on and off with interest, and it seems to me that there are a couple of key points.

The first point is that change should always be negotiated, not imposed. Things have always been x is not a reason for things to continue to be x, but the way to change x to y is for management to engage with the workforce, explain the reasons, consult widely, and then try to get agreement with the unions. It's not on for management to impose changes to working practices without negotiation first.

The second point is that you can never rely on the media to report the facts of any industrial action fairly. That's partly because unions are generally (IMO) notoriously bad at PR and putting their point across, and partly because of, well, media bias. Bosses are given a sympathetic hearing, while union reps are always interviewed in a confrontational style, usually along the lines of "how dare you make the public suffer". And partly because industrial disputes are complicated. The last one I was involved in was a very technical dispute about moves to a new wage structure, but the headline news - what the employers said was a pay increase was in fact a pay cut over five years.

On a more specific front, isn't "job and shop" just another form of flexi-time?

"On a more specific front, isn't "job and shop" just another form of flexi-time?"

Slightly different isnt it? In flexi time you are astill expected to work a set number of hours no matter what whereas in "job and shop" you work for as long as it takes you to do the work.

Yes "Spaniah Practices" have been around for a long time, but we didn't call them that 20 years ago. It was called "When you're finished, you're finished" back then.

Back in the olden days of 1988, the routine for a postie at a delivery office was thus:

5:30am start - sort mail for delivery
6.45am - dropped off on route
9.45am - picked up, back to the office to dry out/thaw out, have a cup of tea.
10.30am - sort mail for 2nd delivery
11.00am - dropped off on route, make your own way home at end of delivery. Usually finished by 1pm, sometimes 2pm, occasionally 3pm.

You didn't get paid more if you took longer.

Today, whilst dining a la McDonalds (ooh, the life of a sales manager ), I picked up a Daily Mail. It had an article about the strike, together with a list of the things posties "do".

WHAT A LOT OF SHITE

Honestly, it was a list of about ten things that either don't happen or if they did, the postie would be dismissed. Cr@p about being paid double time to clear the backlog after a strike. More cr@p about posties going home early at Xmas & Easter 'cos they can't be bothered delivering mail. Who are they kidding? Posties love Xmas - all that overtime and the tips.

I might disagree with FB about a few things, but his colleagues and the Union are being utterly slandered in the press today.

That is one of the interesting things about the arguments about "Job and Shop" Is that RM want posties to come back if they finish early but are getting a bit funny about the prospect of posties bringing back post if they don't finish in time.

I thought job and shop was a management introduction, it was an incentive to get the post out quicker. Then when they automated processes in the sorting offices they no longer had staff available to cover for sickness or extra large deliveries, so they started paying overtime for people to come back to the sorting office when they finished work. (A mate of mine used to be a postie)

As regards coming out on strike because they've been asked to start at a different time - well, what about child care issues ? and where do we draw the line ? Start at 9:00 ? Start at 10:00 ? Start at 16:00 ?

And the story about working 12 hour shifts to earn a 2% rise in 5 years shows exactly why more people should be in a union - it's no good moaning other people are getting something you can't, I complain about the superior T&Cs of people who work next to me, but it's because they came from strong unionised positions - however it's also fair to point out that half of them lost their jobs, because it was cheaper to outsource.