Welcome to verylittlehelps. Please login or sign up.

28-03-24, 11:59PM

Login with username, password and session length
Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 38,127
  • Total Topics: 630
  • Online today: 325
  • Online ever: 1,436
  • (24-01-24, 01:01AM)
Users Online
Users: 2
Guests: 291
Total: 293

Management Restructure?

Started by Tsportyhead, 13-09-16, 09:36AM

Previous topic - Next topic

snowyowl

Alli bloody looya, somebody gets it. This is what I've been saying for months, it's the Union that should be forcing the issue with Tosco with regards to these enquiries not the members. If they are not doing what they are paid to do get rid of them.  >:( >:( >:(

Duracell

#451
Quote from: Arizonarugby on 19-02-17, 10:31PM


Duracell, without wanting to be critical of the unions part in this whole process , is that (challenging) what the company are proposing to implement.....all we get back from the "consultation "  meeting is a endless stream of frequently asked questions (which are always balanced in the favour of the company) i.e. Question  Will there be workshops to write CV's / interview skills  Answer  no job centre plus provide this service .... Question, will voluntary redundancy be offered Answer no we want to retain the best managers and the challenge from the union to these derogatory response were in the words of Uriah Heep were
"keep yourself down." I am very umble ...., Master Tesco" ....!!!!
Chapter XXXIX


So if a Manager wants to go, but has scored well and has no Redundancy option, but doesn't want to stay with the added responsibilities, why can't a Grievance be put in, I realise that AO or Sata rep support may be scarce, but some are adamant that the Union are useless anyway get rid of them, union support is not a grievance criteria. You have a a Grievance. It is a credible one in my opinion.

Obviously though those affected have to follow that process. You would have to if you pull out of or get rid of the Union.

My Opinion is exactly that, Mine.  Based on my view of what I know , see and what I would do.
"Being a rep doesn't make a person right anymore than not being a rep makes a person wrong " 

Duracell.

Alwaysthevictim

If I am deemed "at risk" after my 1-1 will i be allowed to go immediately if I'm offered another job elsewhere or would I be expected to stay and train the new podium monkeys up which could be quite long winded ?

Any info much appreciated.

keokrusader

Alwaysthevictim....you would be expected to work your full notice. They will probably give you a minimum number of weeks that they expect, however if you want to leave after the minimum or sooner you will be expected to put it in writing as a 'counter offer'.

Obvious danger here is loosing out on PILON. Although if that were to be the case nothing to stop you going sick as this would count as your notice...

Shiiiitinit

You can't lose out on PILON as PILON isn't being paid.
In fact as you have already said, you would be expected to work your full notice.

keokrusader

PILON was paid at Lich and Hinkley...

My point was if you were to request early release after 4 weeks for example and request the remainder as PILON, you may lose out depending on what sort of mood the powers that be are on that particular day.


Jonthebarsteward

Apparebtly there is an expectation that if the depot is safe after 4 weeks then they will look at pilon.
One ground for grievance could be that the company have failed to follow their own 'guidelines for redundancies'. In this document it states that voluntary redundancies should be offered to affected staff and the criteria must include absence. This can be found on the internal company website
If you really didn't like the new.role and chose to resign I'd say you'd have a good chance at a constructive dismissal case.

Duracell

#457
What is written with the Heading of the Partnership Agreement does not apply to distribution unless it says so and it doesn't it applies to Stores and Fulfilment Centers.

There is grounds as you say though as the Gov and ACAS guidelines say so.

I wouldn't recommend people don't challenge and resign to then claim Unfair Dismissal, I would challenge during the consultation and get the response in writing.

Any Alternative Employment should not be Conditional, it would be interesting to see a tribunals understanding and scope of conditional,
In my view Giving up service related elements that will be continued to be paid to others is a condition.

Just in case some of those at risk are considering a Podium role.

I think they will trip up by not gauging the voluntary option, it could quite possibly have the desired effect.
They can still vet and choose the candidates also.

No consideration to voluntary may prove problematic for the company, most guidelines expect it to be thoroughly explored, if they haven't engaged the possibility with individuals concerned then it's a guess at best. It could prove more beneficial all round.
My Opinion is exactly that, Mine.  Based on my view of what I know , see and what I would do.
"Being a rep doesn't make a person right anymore than not being a rep makes a person wrong " 

Duracell.

Jonthebarsteward

Quote from: Duracell on 21-02-17, 04:39PM
What is written with the Heading of the Partnership Agreement does not apply to distribution unless it says so and it doesn't it applies to Stores and Fulfilment Centers.

There is grounds as you say though as the Gov and ACAS guidelines say so.

I wouldn't recommend people don't challenge and resign to then claim Unfair Dismissal, I would challenge during the consultation and get the response in writing.

Any Alternative Employment should not be Conditional, it would be interesting to see a tribunals understanding and scope of conditional,
In my view Giving up service related elements that will be continued to be paid to others is a condition.

Just in case some of those at risk are considering a Podium role.

I think they will trip up by not gauging the voluntary option, it could quite possibly have the desired effect.
They can still vet and choose the candidates also.

No consideration to voluntary may prove problematic for the company, most guidelines expect it to be thoroughly explored, if they haven't engaged the possibility with individuals concerned then it's a guess at best. It could prove more beneficial all round.

It doesn't have any heading relating to the partnership agreement. This is a company document available through the my dc page. It applies to distribution.
It was last updated April 2015 (just after the last reshuffle)and is the latest available guideline.
I agree people should challenge as much as possible and my suggestion was made more of a last resort example.
The role should have been made redundant and those wanting the new one should have to apply. That way they can vet who they want for the new role and then people actually want to be there.

Duracell

Ah ok I see yes I agree.
My Opinion is exactly that, Mine.  Based on my view of what I know , see and what I would do.
"Being a rep doesn't make a person right anymore than not being a rep makes a person wrong " 

Duracell.

VladPutin

After having to deal with all my DC's screw-ups on a daily basis- deliveries hours late or early, cages so poorly stacked they fall apart as the come off the ramp, missing stock etc etc - it's hard for me to have much sympathy for any DC managers who get made redundent.

And by, "much" I really mean, "any".

snowyowl

I'm pleased that was directed at the Depot Managers and not the level 1's, although I'm not sure it's they who are getting made redundant that are responsible. I think the real blame belongs to the pr*cks above them who crave their K.P.I. fix. With no regards to Health and Safety or Duty of Care they bully their way from one shift to the next.
I wish there was a rule that they had to make one Shift Manager redundant for every five Team Managers made redundant, that would make ours the happiest Depot in Britain.  >:( >:( >:( b*st*rds  >:( >:( >:(

Shiiiitinit

If you think it will get better after they have gone Mr Putin you are sadly mistaken

keokrusader

Quote from: VladPutin on 24-02-17, 07:40PM
After having to deal with all my DC's screw-ups on a daily basis- deliveries hours late or early, cages so poorly stacked they fall apart as the come off the ramp, missing stock etc etc - it's hard for me to have much sympathy for any DC managers who get made redundent.

And by, "much" I really mean, "any".

So they should spend more time disciplining staff for poor standards? Interesting viewpoint...

It's not TMs who stack cages and load trailers...and if you think it's going to get better after the cut, think again.

snowyowl

The only reason you get poor standards (didn't think I'd have to spell it out) is because of the pressure and constant threats of disciplinary action put on pickers and loaders to complete their work in unrealistic times is unacceptable. Couple this with an unfathomable layout and p*ss poor Management this all leads to an unhappy workforce,but who gives a sh*te as long as the figures are right eh! Perhaps a bit more thought next time Vlad.  :-*

keokrusader

I call B/S. With performance combined people cheat the numbers easily on loading/marshalling and FLT  to hide p##s poor performance/standards elsewhere. Loaders who achieve 160% by double scanning and abusing AMC functions then pick at 50% for example. Got to ask what they do with all this extra time cos it doesn't improve loading or stacking standards does it?
No the problems you describe are caused by bone idleness of people who think they are owed a living and should get 100% wages for 80% or less of a days work...

When was the last time anyone was disciplined over poor performance in your DC? Must be 2 years or more in mine. We have women of 50+ years of age who do the job with no issues....why is it so hard for a 20 year old man? Every DC covers poor Tesco performance with additional agency staff. Tell me another company that accepts that?

Agree that some TMs are poor....however you are living in a dream land. (But thanks for spelling it out....very enlightening)

snowyowl

keokrusader you do sound like a disgruntled Team Manager from your post, if so and you are made redundant don't spend your enforced early retirement blaming pickers and loaders, think about who is really responsible. Before that happens can you post the details of your DC so I can apply for a transfer, sounds like the level of work would fit right in with the dream land I frequent.  ;)

keokrusader

Nice guess but not correct.

I did come perilously close to caring for a second I must admit.

Give it a few years and Tesco will have been run into the ground. You can blame management as much as you like (from TM level right up to Dave Lewis himself) but not to accept that a portion of the blame lies with WL1s (Not all) is very short sighted. Tesco doesn't owe anyone a living...

Carry on living in dream land and you'll be scratching your head when it rolls down.

At the end of the day it's business and that means profit. Can't make profit without performance targets can you. If you can find a successful business that does I'll be impressed.

Just think it's a very sad state of affairs to see people on here revel in others misfortune. God forbid you find yourself in the same position one day.

JL

DL is not doing anything other CEOs have not done in other organisations. Tossco just seem to get more coverage due to it being a main employer. Staff in least profit departments and middle management will always be first to be attacked as well as those where mergers are taking place ie Tossco DC with Booker. The CEO knows alot of GAs would do anything for a extra £/hour. The express SM could be based in his house spending an hour in any shops in his/her charge only when need be. The Runners should be looking after the GAs the rest of the time on there extra £. If he/she cannot manage half a dozen GAs it should be a disciplinary issue. Large stores should be run on an SM and 3/4 managers to cover a 24/7 operation. Night fill should be scrapped in every store and staff should be put on the floor when customers are about. GAs might have to slow down but more could be employed with all the SMs LMs and premiums which have been scrapped. Low hours should be put in place to p**s people off so that no one stays too long suing the company for manual labour ailments. If you don't like it go to private businesses they may care more about colleagues but you wont get away with standing doing nothing for the last hour of your shift and queuing to clock out 2 minutes early. There I have said it.  >:(

snowyowl

Quote from keokrusader;

QuoteI call B/S. With performance combined people cheat the numbers easily on loading/marshalling and FLT  to hide p##s poor performance/standards elsewhere. Loaders who achieve 160% by double scanning and abusing AMC functions then pick at 50% for example. Got to ask what they do with all this extra time cos it doesn't improve loading or stacking standards does it?
No the problems you describe are caused by bone idleness of people who think they are owed a living and should get 100% wages for 80% or less of a days work...

Silly me,see I saw that as a direct attack on all level 1's, particularly on flt's and loaders,quite a nasty one at that. Reading this it seems they are entirely to blame. Why I say "silly me" I didn't realise that in your next post you would express you only meant they should take "a portion" of the blame and "not all" of them anyway.

Quote from keokrusader;
QuoteYou can blame management as much as you like (from TM level right up to Dave Lewis himself) but not to accept that a portion of the blame lies with WL1s (Not all) is very short sighted.

Lastly the reasons I thought you must be a Team Manager was (a) because of the bleating in your tone and (2) Because of that 80% work 100% wages b*llsh*t you came out with. I came across a Senior Manager who used to come out with that sh*te when dealing with DISCIPLINARY cases, your seemingly not familiar with them. Again what DC where you at?

keokrusader

At no point In  either post did I blame WL1s as a collective. How you choose to (mis)interpret my post however is none of my concern.

As for what I do and where, that is irrelevant. Keep on fishing tho....makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

babymetal

With regards to picking and loading standards, I think having managers on the floor in our DC(READING DC) will make all staff, both agency and Tesco work as they should be. Inorder to hit % and cph without cheating on any skill is not hard, if people put the effort in. The problem is that lots of people just do not work very hard, I both load/marshal & pick & have no problem hitting % and loading 40/50/60 cph. The stacking  of some pickers at READING DC is frankly unbelievable. I think the operational changes are a good idea, but the management cull maybe not.

VladPutin

Quote from: keokrusader on 24-02-17, 11:11PM
Quote from: VladPutin on 24-02-17, 07:40PM
After having to deal with all my DC's screw-ups on a daily basis- deliveries hours late or early, cages so poorly stacked they fall apart as the come off the ramp, missing stock etc etc - it's hard for me to have much sympathy for any DC managers who get made redundent.

And by, "much" I really mean, "any".

So they should spend more time disciplining staff for poor standards? Interesting viewpoint...

It's not TMs who stack cages and load trailers...and if you think it's going to get better after the cut, think again.

So what are they good for? Might as well get rid of them if they have no effect on the deliveries we get in store.

The days of getting a nice wage for a worthless non-job even a woman could do are coming to an end. If you're willing or able to do some real work - don't let the door hit your arse on the way out. 8-)


keokrusader

Top bit of sexism there. Very modern...

Don't worry about me. I am definitely not afraid of work....and my future is very rosy indeed Thank you. More to life than Tesco.

They way people moan about it makes me wonder why anyone works there at all?

Arizonarugby

Quote from: Jonthebarsteward on 21-02-17, 03:10PM
Apparebtly there is an expectation that if the depot is safe after 4 weeks then they will look at pilon.
One ground for grievance could be that the company have failed to follow their own 'guidelines for redundancies'. In this document it states that voluntary redundancies should be offered to affected staff and the criteria must include absence. This can be found on the internal company website
If you really didn't like the new.role and chose to resign I'd say you'd have a good chance at a constructive dismissal case.
All the briefs that we've had are all very clear, all those being made redundant, will be expected to work their full notice period. Leaving before will put the redundancy payment at risk i.e. leave with nothing

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk