Unite (CMA) National Committee response to managerial redundancy announcement

This came into our possession this evening. We regret any compulsory redundancies among staff of RMG. The business may thrive better if they sacked the Board.
Unite (CMA) National Committee
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH
RMG OD Review Update 4
October update 4th November 2020
Dear Colleague
Here is the latest update on the Royal Mail Group (RMG) Managerial Organisational Design Review relating to the reduction of 2,000 managerial jobs and group wide management reorganisation: –
Introduction
“The Numbers are the Numbers” – Business Mantra
When organisations such as RMG makes an announcement to the shareholders and the City, to reduce the managerial template to cut costs, it is usually based on a comprehensive plan. You would expect that any large company that wanted to cut a large proportion of its managers would have key enablers to facilitate the reductions in numbers, such as USO changes, Parcel Hubs, CWU efficiency agreements and staff hours reductions? Yet the enablers are missing. From a UNITE CMA perspective there needs to be detailed evidence provided so we can determine if there is a true situation of redundancy or just a slash and burn approach. To date this evidence has been missing in many of the proposals.

During the consultation exercise we have repeatedly tried to mitigate against the reductions and have offered many counter proposals, but the business negotiators appear to be driven solely by the numbers of job cuts the CEO has promised the stakeholders. The “Numbers are the Numbers” is their mantra.
They seem oblivious to the negative impact that the reductions will have on the operation itself, and only serves to demonstrate to us that they have a distinct lack of commercial awareness and a lack of foresight as to the potential damage these cuts will have on the organisation.
Current situation on Consultation on Business propositions
 We have now received most of the propositions from the key business unit functions which come into two main categories; Those under the CCO Chief Commercial Officer, Nick Landon and those that come under the COO Chief Operations Officer, Achim Dunnwald.
 Each of the two main categories have been tasked with making the businesses required headcount reduction savings and the approximate numbers for each area are as follows.
 CCO = 1133 and the COO = 677 the figures at this stage are still fluid as we seek to mitigate as much as possible.
 Commercial are bearing the brunt of these headcount reductions.
 Other smaller business units and the Levels 2-6 have also
contributed to the overall total of 2,000 roles.
 We have been able to reach a way forwards in some particular business units, others are still work in progress, but some are proving to be so implausible as to warrant sheer recklessness and high risk that we cannot comprehend why the business would want to so jeopardise and undermine the operations in service delivery with such a proposition. Up to this point the business has not been able to demonstrate any convincing or clear commercial imperative or rationale for these moves either.

Examples of some of the more preposterous proposals / propositions are below for your attention.
 Processing; removal of 176 work area manager positions, see below for some key examples but almost all Mail Centres are affected
 Manchester removal of 12 work area manager roles
 London Mount Pleasant removal of 11 work area manager roles
 Glasgow removal of 8 work area manager roles
 Nottingham removal of 8 work area manager roles
 Bristol removal of 7 work area manager roles
 Removal of all 30 Processing PIM’s
 Collections; removal of all 30 Area Collection manager positions
 Delivery; removal of 300 plus frontline managers positions
 In a three line or less managed unit, the DOM will have line responsibility for up to 40 frontline staff
 Removal of 38 Performance coaches
 HR; removal of 58 HRBP and associated
 PFSL; removal of 59 roles
 Commercial; significant across the board cuts
 Sales; removal of 88 plus Sales & associated managerial roles
 Distribution; removal of 9 LDM & support to RDCs
 PFW; removal of 20 DCM graded managers
Major concerns
 We have formed the belief that this proposal to remove 2000 jobs will damage the performance of the company.
 The proposals are in breach of our existing Agreements, namely the MTSF and AFL.

 There are no enablers to support many of the proposed reductions. There are no workload impact assessments to support any of the reductions in Operations, with workload increasing as a result of these proposals.
 The psychological & physiological impact on our loyal and dedicated managerial community is being exacerbated when the business is asking them to work long and hard hours volunteering to support the Operations during the run up to Christmas, whilst simultaneously awaiting their fate from the redundancy programme.
 The protection of the service delivery and operations elements, which are the engine of the business itself. There are no enablers to support many of the proposed reductions. No workload impact assessments have been undertaken with workload increasing in these areas.
 Our major competitors are expanding their workforce, buying and building major Hubs to facilitate the growth in the parcels market and expanding their Sales force to capture the markets. Enhancing their Fleet capacity and generally being positive about the opportunities for growth. RMG seem to be looking to manage decline.
 JE’s & JD’s job evaluations and descriptions. The scale of the exercise has a requirement for many changes to roles and all need to be checked and validated.
 Rush to open the preferencing portals in early November.
 There was a reluctance of the specific Business Units to expose their propositions to the directly affected communities to gather feedback and to not only check the viability of those propositions, but to reassure those in the post exercise templates that the jettisoned workloads do not fall onto them.
 Executive capability to professionally manage people through organisational change.

 Distinct lack of vision and ability to communicate effectively the method for change. Planning for success, as most of our competitors are doing and not managing decline.
 We can appreciate the removal of duplication where business units have been merged, but we cannot understand the reliance on mainly “self-service” options that are being relied upon to facilitate removal of roles whilst the options themselves are still under the research and development phase. We are given to understand that frontline managers will have more accountability, more responsibility, more ownership and become more reliant on the “self- service” options. All this equates to a major culture change and even more workload for all our managers which is unacceptable to us.
 Lack of progress in closing the massive revenue gap which contributes to the requirement for more managerial headcount reductions. Whilst simultaneously removing Revenue protection and Security and Investigations roles.
 Conflicting messaging from the business, in that it is building an exciting vision for the future yet neglecting the dire consequences of its current actions towards those facing redundancy at Christmas time and whilst working through a dreadful pandemic with all the uncertainty that this brings.
 The failure of RMG to respond to our request for them to suspend the application of the pernicious 64.5-year age Taper mechanism. Which reduces VR payments for anyone over the age of 64.5 we believe that this could be discriminatory and is unnecessary in the greater scheme of things and is “Penny pinching”.
 This is not an inexhaustive list, but hopefully it will provide you with a glimpse into the business proposals / propositions themselves.
Conclusion
In our opinion the current proposals / propositions not only have a significant impact on our members, but on the ability of the company to perform. Although our overriding commitment is to our members, their jobs and welfare, we believe as a responsible Trade Union we have a duty to protect the sustainability of the company and only support proposals that are viable and workable. This one is most definitely NOT.
We will be contacting you in the next week or two to seek your views through a Consultation exercise.
Thank you all for your continued support.
Mike Eatwell National Unite Officer CMA 5th November 2020
Please contact your local Unite CMA representative if you require any further information.
Your Union working hard on your behalf

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: