Equalisation and the elephant in the room

[loyalsnail]

Equalisation aint gonna happen. No way id stay in a job , where financially your being shafted big time by your employer . JMO soz

How is someone getting paid the amount quoted in their contract being shafted?

I think we can all agree new posties aren't being paid particularly well, yet people apply for the job and the majority don't leave, so Royal Mail will feel vindicated and those accepting the new terms are doing so of their own free will.

It's not a great look to find out the person you work next to is paid more than you for the same job, but that's not exclusive to posties and it's not exclusive to Royal Mail.

As a general principle it's a bit crass to discuss your pay with someone else, particularly if you know you're paid more than them, yet here we are with posties blaming the business and the union for a situation which the former are fully entitled to try and the latter had no ability to stop being introduced.

Of course, the union could call a strike on the issue of two tier pay, but I wonder how much solidarity there would actually be in a scenario where the majority of those walking out had nothing to gain from strike action.

[heraldmoth]

Surely the elephant in the room is the fact that new starters took these contracts, whether the workforce be 2,3 or 4 tiered has no relevance…it is what it is and non of the tiers are happy with either their workload or wage slip, use the job as a stepping stone as recommended before and during the last strike ballot and action.

[tramssirhc]

The CWU have a long-running promise for all inferior contracts at RM to be equalised, yet they have never explained in any meaningful detail how they plan to achieve it. Instead they appear permanently held hostage by a company that reported massive revenue's of £13.1 billion for the Year end 2025 whilst only showing an adjusted operating profit of £278 million, according to this:

https://www.ipc.be/news-portal/general- ... 25-results

In real terms that is a profit margin of just 2.1%. In other words, for every £1,000 that RM earns, it keeps only £21 as profit. That is barely above break-even, and for context, UPS operates at around an 8-10%, DHL 5-8% and DPD 5-6%

The potential savings that Ofcom projected of circa £300 million per year via USO reform might have been blown out the water but the workloads that I've seen remain high with unachievable duties, parcel volumes up 20%, increased collections and pick-ups and bulk mail still not going out on a daily basis.

So the question is - if the company can't afford full equalisation right now, when are they ever?? Imho never. The CWU's leverage looks weak because their entire argument hinges on RM's own financial narrative and ironically one of the biggest savings the company has achieved in recent years has come from recruiting new staff on inferior contracts - the very group the union claims it wants to uplift. The CWU's initial proposal to upscale the first few hundred new entrants who have served 3 years when there are still thousands of new entrants and more being recruited every year is just a token gesture. How does the union plan on scaling this when the business are still hiring more under the old model??

A 2.1% margin suggests that RM has almost no room for full equalisation, investment in automation, absorbing cost shocks or bonuses. Yet when management are still being rewarded for a system that benefits from maintaining a two-tier workforce - while subsequently telling our union that equalisation is unaffordable - that doesn't sit right.

It just reinforces that the hardship message continues to travel in one direction. How exactly does the CWU square this circle??

EP Group did not buy Royal Mail. It brought IDS which makes massive profits of which Royal Mail is a part. The CWU talk like Royal Mail is a stand alone company and it is not. It's a company in a group of companies . The letters part of the workload has always been cross subsidised. Even Ward and Walsh acknowledge that.

The CWU has zero intention of squaring the circle. It is simply covering for the decision not to put all workers on the best terms and conditions. Ward and Walsh have been told the way it is. The executive have been told the way it is. They are simply lying to us. The CWU's first concern is the finances of the union. It needs new recruits desperately because unlike Royal Mail, the CWU is bankrupt. Both financially and industrially. If you want the best t's and c's you'll need to leave the CWU and start a real rank and file led independent trade union.

[yellowbelly]

EP Group did not buy Royal Mail. It brought IDS which makes massive profits of which Royal Mail is a part. The CWU talk like Royal Mail is a stand alone company and it is not. It's a company in a group of companies . The letters part of the workload has always been cross subsidised. Even Ward and Walsh acknowledge that.

The CWU has zero intention of squaring the circle. It is simply covering for the decision not to put all workers on the best terms and conditions. Ward and Walsh have been told the way it is. The executive have been told the way it is. They are simply lying to us. The CWU's first concern is the finances of the union. It needs new recruits desperately because unlike Royal Mail, the CWU is bankrupt. Both financially and industrially. If you want the best t's and c's you'll need to leave the CWU and start a real rank and file led independent trade union.

Let's face it, EP didn't/doesn't really want RM letters, why would they if the letters make a loss. They want/wanted the profitable parcels side of RM and it's infrastructure. What they do/intend to do with letters is unknown in the medium term, long term it'll go to the wall through digitisation/AI - how long that'll take - who knows? Short term, they'll just keep putting band-aids on an arterial bleed.

[tramssirhc]

The clue to how long it will last is the 'golden share' the government, or the taxpayer, were given in the sale. Everyone knows where the letters are going - back to the taxpayer. That's not renationalisation but the CWU will claim it is.

[TopperGas]

I feel RM are just playing the long game until new starters out number legacy contracts and at that point they'll offer to buy out the delivery supplements etc, possibly they'll be some give and take on paid breaks and then, before you know it, contracts will all be equalised with RM having to pay little more, or even less, than they do at present.

If RM really wanted to equalise contracts now there's nothing stopping them doing so, or at least setting a date, given it's highly likely USO reforms of some kind will commence early next year leading to savings of some kind, if not the £300m suggested by OFCOM.

RM will have some sort of idea of how much they'd have to pay out per employment tribunal if they forced everyone onto a newer contract. As there becomes less and less staff on legacy contracts, there must be a point at which they'll decide that it's worth taking the financial hit of employment tribunals to force everyone onto the newer contracts.

They wouldn't need to worry about ET costs if they just offered to buy put delivery supplements etc as most worker would take the money upfront, they have anyway in previous jobs when companies have been taken over and they've decided to equalise all the contracts.

[TopperGas]

The clue to how long it will last is the 'golden share' the government, or the taxpayer, were given in the sale. Everyone knows where the letters are going - back to the taxpayer. That's not renationalisation but the CWU will claim it is.

There's no real signs letters are going back to the Government, given letters and parcels are still heavily interlinked within RM it'll take some move to split the two businesses when they can't even sort out the USO reforms after a year of trying. Assuming the USO reforms are brought in it won't be long before RM want deliveries reduced even further.

[broughts]

Dk will bide his time get the 5 years over and done with then watch the choas begin if u think now is bad and watch this space with a Asda style take your new contract terms or off u trot

[Mr Rush]

Of course, the union could call a strike on the issue of two tier pay, but I wonder how much solidarity there would actually be in a scenario where the majority of those walking out had nothing to gain from strike action.

The union was completely routed at the end of 2022. This much is obvious, though politely unstated.

There's no real signs letters are going back to the Government, given letters and parcels are still heavily interlinked within RM

They seem very dissociated to me. The packets go out, the letters do not. The only reason they haven't explicitly revived the Royal Mail Parcels brand is because it might raise the inconvenient question of the whereabouts of Royal Mail Letters.

[abuch1980]

The CWU have a long-running promise for all inferior contracts at RM to be equalised, yet they have never explained in any meaningful detail how they plan to achieve it. Instead they appear permanently held hostage by a company that reported massive revenue's of £13.1 billion for the Year end 2025 whilst only showing an adjusted operating profit of £278 million, according to this:

https://www.ipc.be/news-portal/general- ... 25-results

In real terms that is a profit margin of just 2.1%. In other words, for every £1,000 that RM earns, it keeps only £21 as profit. That is barely above break-even, and for context, UPS operates at around an 8-10%, DHL 5-8% and DPD 5-6%

The potential savings that Ofcom projected of circa £300 million per year via USO reform might have been blown out the water but the workloads that I've seen remain high with unachievable duties, parcel volumes up 20%, increased collections and pick-ups and bulk mail still not going out on a daily basis.

So the question is - if the company can't afford full equalisation right now, when are they ever?? Imho never. The CWU's leverage looks weak because their entire argument hinges on RM's own financial narrative and ironically one of the biggest savings the company has achieved in recent years has come from recruiting new staff on inferior contracts - the very group the union claims it wants to uplift. The CWU's initial proposal to upscale the first few hundred new entrants who have served 3 years when there are still thousands of new entrants and more being recruited every year is just a token gesture. How does the union plan on scaling this when the business are still hiring more under the old model??

A 2.1% margin suggests that RM has almost no room for full equalisation, investment in automation, absorbing cost shocks or bonuses. Yet when management are still being rewarded for a system that benefits from maintaining a two-tier workforce - while subsequently telling our union that equalisation is unaffordable - that doesn't sit right.

It just reinforces that the hardship message continues to travel in one direction. How exactly does the CWU square this circle??

Stop comparing us to UPS, DHL and DPD. They do not deliver letters.

[abuch1980]

Equalisation aint gonna happen. No way id stay in a job , where financially your being shafted big time by your employer . JMO soz

How is someone getting paid the amount quoted in their contract being shafted?

I think we can all agree new posties aren't being paid particularly well, yet people apply for the job and the majority don't leave, so Royal Mail will feel vindicated and those accepting the new terms are doing so of their own free will.

It's not a great look to find out the person you work next to is paid more than you for the same job, but that's not exclusive to posties and it's not exclusive to Royal Mail.

As a general principle it's a bit crass to discuss your pay with someone else, particularly if you know you're paid more than them, yet here we are with posties blaming the business and the union for a situation which the former are fully entitled to try and the latter had no ability to stop being introduced.

Of course, the union could call a strike on the issue of two tier pay, but I wonder how much solidarity there would actually be in a scenario where the majority of those walking out had nothing to gain from strike action.

I have and will never have, a problem with someone in a company being paid more than a new start. It's an incentive to stay longer and reach those pay goals. Comparing the job someone who's been there long term to a new start is uncomparable, and disrespectful to the legacy staff. FYI I'm not legacy or a newbie.

[yellowbelly]

I have and will never have, a problem with someone in a company being paid more than a new start. It's an incentive to stay longer and reach those pay goals. Comparing the job someone who's been there long term to a new start is uncomparable, and disrespectful to the legacy staff. FYI I'm not legacy or a newbie.

I agree with your principle in the first sentence, in a previous career I had, an incremental pay system was introduced for the number of years you were employed up to a maximum which didn't breach the next pay band above yours. If you stayed at the maximum level in your band but didn't progress a band then that was what you remained at.

However that's not the case with the 'new start' contracts we have is it? They don't have any (pay) goals to reach. They stay at the level they joined at no matter how long they remain in the job.

[abuch1980]

Totally agree, incremental pay steps should be introduced, we aren't all doing the same job. MC, Collections, Delivery Ops, LATs etc etc can't all be as skilled as the next postie.

[Woody84]

I have and will never have, a problem with someone in a company being paid more than a new start. It's an incentive to stay longer and reach those pay goals. Comparing the job someone who's been there long term to a new start is uncomparable, and disrespectful to the legacy staff. FYI I'm not legacy or a newbie.

I agree with your principle in the first sentence, in a previous career I had, an incremental pay system was introduced for the number of years you were employed up to a maximum which didn't breach the next pay band above yours. If you stayed at the maximum level in your band but didn't progress a band then that was what you remained at.

However that's not the case with the 'new start' contracts we have is it? They don't have any (pay) goals to reach. They stay at the level they joined at no matter how long they remain in the job.

Exactly.

Increased pay over a set amount of months/year(s) or/and linked to passing of probation period is what should be happening. But it won’t ever be that way here and new contract staff will continued to be used and treated like like second class employees.

[TopperGas]

Totally agree, incremental pay steps should be introduced, we aren't all doing the same job. MC, Collections, Delivery Ops, LATs etc etc can't all be as skilled as the next postie.

I've been on the same rate of pay, apart from annual inflation pay rises, ever since I started at RM, it seems a case of newcomers accepting they are getting a reasonable rate of pay or reject the job offer and work elsewhere.