Management Restructure?

[Duracell]

Vlad this used to be a great forum, all the founding members have gone though,=,

There was only every one founder to this site. Who is still here.

The moderators and Admin have changed a little, but some still remain.

Since the site was created before the Company's formal implantation of a Social Media Policy has happened , VLH being the first we saw, some initial members who may have been less than secretive about their participation with this site, since the introduction of the Company's SMP you may find that some of the early members have simply changed their identity to a less obvious one.

I personally think Overall VLH is currently at its best to date. 

[Arizonarugby]

To cut to the chase

The at risk manager at the pilot sites have been asked to asked to work their notice period (to help protect xmas no doubt) , so effectively the scheme will prove absolutely nothing , for the cheek of it the company has offered them a loyalty bonus if they stay !!!!!


And as I understand it the "replacements " have been / will be offered a one-off lump sum payment and a salary which (in many cases) will mean they will in the long term end up earning less than a GA

[Duracell]

Are you talking about Pilot DC's or Stores.

There seems to be some confusion going on in this thread.

The pilot and Business needs will be different for both, even though management restructures may be happening in both.

[nolotil]

Are you talking about Pilot DC's or Stores.

There seems to be some confusion going on in this thread.

The pilot and Business needs will be different for both, even though management restructures may be happening in both.

The pilot hasnt even started but the the two pilot depots have failed, no one cares mr from the northen area but we all have a box at liverpool.

[Duracell]

Are you for real.

You are contradicting yourself.

"The pilot hasn't even started"

After posting.

"The at risk managers have been asked to work their notice"


So which is correct.

Are they in consultation aware of the notice period, consulting over a loyalty bonus.

Or has the pilot not started.



After my motives and intergrity were questioned

[Nomad]

Will all those who contribute to this thread remember it is in the 'Distribution Warehouse' section of VLH.

[Arizonarugby]

Are you for real.

You are contradicting yourself.

"The pilot hasn't even started"

After posting.

"The at risk managers have been asked to work their notice"


So which is correct.

Are they in consultation aware of the notice period, consulting over a loyalty bonus.

Or has the pilot not started.



After my motives and intergrity were questioned

Ok Duracell , you are now splitting hairs, it was a typo, you know the pilot has started and you know that the at risk managers have been asked to stay for the duration of their notice period , the "partnership" sanctioned it and once again sold there members down the river ... Long live the King  , long live the partnership !!!!!!!!

[Duracell]

I have learnt from experience of saying similar as you have and being corrected that the concept of  "the partnership " or "The Partnership Agreement" as practiced in retail does not Exist in distribution.

Because of the fragmentation and different negotiating groups within distribution the a singular concept such as a partnership agreement can't be applied.
This is supported by people policies on the our site wherever they mention distribution which is very limited, they advise you to seek the context information from local consultative agreements.

In reaction to their grand plans this may be something worthy of further investigation.

[Duracell]

I don't get how there can be such confliction in approach.

When consulting with staff for reasons such as pay it is fragmented and can't be across all it has to be negotiated individual with the fragmented groups even though the proposal maybe the same

Yet when an operational changes are discussed which could still impact pay and conditions one size fits all is allowed.

[nolotil]

To cut to the chase

The at risk manager at the pilot sites have been asked to asked to work their notice period (to help protect xmas no doubt) , so effectively the scheme will prove absolutely nothing , for the cheek of it the company has offered them a loyalty bonus if they stay !!!!!


And as I understand it the "replacements " have been / will be offered a one-off lump sum payment and a salary which (in many cases) will mean they will in the long term end up earning less than a GA

No loyalty bonus offered

[nolotil]

Lets get this right please, 30 day consultation period has started.  At risk of no job managers have been told Pilot project means all managers working "lieu" till January.

No changes at the moment

[Arizonarugby]

So in short the "pilot project" at Hinckley and Lichfield running from now until January , aimed at proving reducing management numbers from 30 managers to 18, will not have an impact on the operation, is actually going to continue to run with 30 managers for the duration of the project !!!!!!!

Now the lunatics are really taking over the asylum !!!!

[Duracell]

So with consideration to how things are happening.
Taking into account the principle of a pilot having a limited initial effect to the locations involved.
Also considering the approach to roll out to all other locations once the pilot is complete.

If we try to understand
http://m.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4256

Are the company failing in their obligations under the consultation guidelines?
Are they looking to fail their obligations to consultation, once they roll the process to all other locations?

In particular the lack of information which ACAS suggests must be disclosed during consultation.

Is any other location in consultation, have other location had notice of consultation period with a lack of this information.

[Duracell]

If there is a true lack of detail and reasoning during any consultation period, regardless of its length, 30, 45 or 90 days, could it be deemed as insufficient to have such uncertainty and lack of information to a process that ultimately will affect over 100 employees. No they are not at a singular premises, but the ultimate roll out will be an approach which will be applied with a Collective group vision and objective.

The time frames and consultation we are seeing is in respect to a limited group, 30 days being 20 or less, yet the principle in approach is to realise an effect to several hundred staff on the basis of achieving a multi location objective.

So should it be 90 days for all, with clear information and reasoning for all?

[optout]

Anybody who would like to complain about the union Try here.


https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/complain-to-the-certification-officer-about-a-trade-union-or-employers-association

[candilicious72]

If there is a true lack of detail and reasoning during any consultation period, regardless of its length, 30, 45 or 90 days, could it be deemed as insufficient to have such uncertainty and lack of information to a process that ultimately will affect over 100 employees. No they are not at a singular premises, but the ultimate roll out will be an approach which will be applied with a Collective group vision and objective.

The time frames and consultation we are seeing is in respect to a limited group, 30 days being 20 or less, yet the principle in approach is to realise an effect to several hundred staff on the basis of achieving a multi location objective.

So should it be 90 days for all, with clear information and reasoning for all?

Sorry for posting a store related comment here but thought this might be relevant also to stores. With over 2000 jobs at risk in stores surely it should be 90 days consultation? Is the consultation period just a guideline or is this what they should be doing.

[snowyowl]

I understood that prior to having a conservative government the consultation period was always 90 days but during Cameron's reign it was lessened to 45 days!!!

[fargone]

It's also an opportunity to disinfect the culture of the organisation.

[Arizonarugby]

It's also an opportunity to disinfect the culture of the organisation.

By this you mean exactly what ?

To change the culture of the organisation you would need to start at the very top i.e Dave Lewis , Matt Davies etc.

We are told (by our senior leadership) that the company has an open , honest transparent policy, but all I see is wall of lies and veils of secrecy.

Apparently Tesco's core purpose is serving Britons shopper a little better every day, can they really do this by reducing the number of staff, and replenish stock during normal trading hours.

Can they really do this when morale , in both stores and distribution is at an all time low

We are told we have a people first and safety first policy, really 2000+ staff face redundancy or reduced hours / pay cuts , all employees (apart from the privileged few) have had their pension benefits.

Does paying our agency colleague (in distribution ) actually create a safe and healthy environment, of course not people chasing bonuses will take risks and cut corners .

Does the Tesco USDAW partnership work cooperatively to benefit both parties , blatantly not , it (at the moment ) works only to satisfy the needs and desires of the company .

The fact that we have some Union reps more interested in taking selfies (at the exclusive national event) rather than protect the rights of their members speaks volumes for the culture with in the organisation.

[Equalizer87]

@Arizonarugby

I totally agree with you, the company is build on lies and secrecy.  If they told the truth about what was actually happening in the company, the shareholders would sell everything and run to the hills (as they should)and the share price would crash so hard the company would be unviable. It's all to sound happy and cheerful to appease the major shareholders, if the right words are being said then they are happy.  Cuts are rebranded as efficency savings, range reductions as painted as focused lines for customers. Even down to the new 'Exceeding customer expectations everyday' which basically spits in the face of the operational side of the business. It's all lies, all talk, all a facade.

Let's wait and see what this rumoured 'Phase 3' brings in February.

[nolotil]

If there is a true lack of detail and reasoning during any consultation period, regardless of its length, 30, 45 or 90 days, could it be deemed as insufficient to have such uncertainty and lack of information to a process that ultimately will affect over 100 employees. No they are not at a singular premises, but the ultimate roll out will be an approach which will be applied with a Collective group vision and objective.

The time frames and consultation we are seeing is in respect to a limited group, 30 days being 20 or less, yet the principle in approach is to realise an effect to several hundred staff on the basis of achieving a multi location objective.

So should it be 90 days for all, with clear information and reasoning for all?

I think the company is using the fact that its a pilot and will be rolled out to other DC's at a point. So at the moment only its only about 30 staff member's who will be made redundant but when they pick off all the DC's its going to roll into 100's made redundant.

[Duracell]

So on that basis, outside of a "Pilot", when the company apply a structure change which on principle encompasses hundreds of staff over many locations. Are all those sites able to insist because of the nature and objective that the company actions, time frames and information meet their obligations laid down for the greater number affected by the change and objective overall rather than meeting the requirement for site specific numbers.

As I understand it the affected group outside of the pilot have been given notice of 90 day consultation, yet it would appear that the likelyhood is they will not know the actual detail relative to them very late in the 90 days probably even likely to be less that 30 days away before the effect happens, choices and detail are clear.

Would those concerned have a case to claim they haven't been fully consulted.

Surely the consultation period for other sites should not start until the realism of the pilot is known. So that during the consultation for the other sites the company can then meet their obligations in supplying the actual matter of fact detail that is required in the timely manner specified.
A consultation that specifies ifs and maybes doesn't meet the requirements and guidelines for the detail in a consultation period.

[mexicopete]

Totally agree with your post Equalizer87, whatever the top table are going to do now or in the future is never in a million years for the benefit of Tesco customers, this is the biggest shambles I have ever witnessed in all of my working life. Which may I add is in excess of 45 years.

[Duracell]

Even though I have been with the company for over 20 years, the misguided management style is not the worse I have seen.

The company decision makers are seriously losing touch with the wealth of knowledge at their fingertips, they are simply not looking to or listening to experience they have, they are refusing that knowledge's reasoning of cause and effect.
We know the what's and why's, but even where we can make a difference we are faced with it not fitting in with their blinkered objectives.

How can you have a core purpose of serving Britons shoppers a little better everyday, when the Culture is generic which limits a reactions needs based approach.

How can individuals make a significant difference worthy of the effort when their opportunities to do so are seriously limited.

[Equalizer87]

Totally agree with your post Equalizer87, whatever the top table are going to do now or in the future is never in a million years for the benefit of Tesco customers, this is the biggest shambles I have ever witnessed in all of my working life. Which may I add is in excess of 45 years.

I will defer to your seasoned knowledge of the company. I myself only suffered 8 years of Tesco and can see everything wrong with it as veteran staff had concluded, in a shorter time frame. This shows how staff with two vastly different lengths of service can see the same problems, yet are ignored by idiots who probably can't move a roll cage without a confab.

@Durecell

We would never be listened to, we aren't  lucky enough to have "Harvard  Business School" stamped on our CV's  like Drastic has.