DINGO, BIG DAZ,?

[Big Daz]

You know - I can't work out if I am stupid or not intelligent enough to understand that the £20.60 is not new money, it is the money from ESA and formerly D2D money incorporated into a single payment and given to everyone in delivery regardless of their function and former entitlement.

So people who formerly had £12.60 ESA a week and no D2Ds gets an £8 pay rise, someone who formerly had £12.60 ESA and 3 lots of D2D @ 1.67p per item x say 400 which is £20 so then you add the two together and it comes out at £32.60 so they get a pay cut of £12 a week.

Right I think I've got it now - we use our money to finance a new pay structure that basically gives us a pay cut, but wait that is only for full timers - for part timers it's even worse because they lose even more because it is pro rata - in an office with 40% part timers it will certainly cause a little friction wouldn't you think?

Still - hey its a winners and losers world and if you're a loser wear a big L on your forehead

Less than £12 a week due to the increase in basic pay and supplement being paid 52 weeks a year, for some this is enough so they do not see the figures on the payslip go down by this time next year and sadly for some it isnt enough.

[welshy808]

There are a couple of reasons why the £20.60 has not been incorporated into basic pensionable pay.

1. That the payment if you look on page 67 of the agreement titled pay simplification states that the permanent (non pensionable ) supplement to basic pay. So it will be part of your overall pay for ever. In the past we had upap ( unconsolidated permanent addition to pay ) which went into pensionable pay under the way forward. The reason why it is not in pensionable pay is that this would damage the pension deficit further and make it more costly for Royal Mail. remember the money comes £52 million from D2D and £40 million from ESA. If you then wanted Royal Mail to pay pension cost on that sum then the sum would have been less than £20.60. Those who have the ESA will still have that in pensionable pay.

So there is no new money for us, even to make this supplement pensionable. While Royal Mail will receive Millions upon Millions in extra profits through new D2D contracts. Your argument might have held some credibility if the cap had not been removed, There must be new money or no need to remove the 3 item Cap.

2. The second reason is that if deliveries had the £20.60 in basic pensionable pay then they would be on higher basic pay than distribution , mail centre staff who only recieve £8 as in pay simplification and £11 in RDCs.

Why not at least make the lowest figure of £8 into basic pensionable pay. Then every one would have benefited, and at least £8 could not be negotiated away in future.

Now someone also asked why not use the old driving allowance and the ex phg allowances well there is not much money in both of them payments now left in delivery offices ( there is in mail centres ) and that is one of the reasons it was important not to wait too long and let the payments decrease in the ESA as it did in the other allowances. As Bob Gibson rightly states when you suffer a leak you do not wait till it becomes a flood to stop the leak.

So your argument for not including Drivers allowance and ex PHG allowance is that it will only be pennies, so not worth bothering with.
Bullshit. The same argument for sharing ESA & D2D equally should have been used, but now you get the scenario where Drivers and ex PHG's keep their allowances as they did the jobs that entitled them to these allowances but they also share in ESA and D2D monies whether they earned the right to them or not. your argument like the proposed agreement is a crock of sheet.

[dvbuk55]

You know - I can't work out if I am stupid or not intelligent enough to understand that the £20.60 is not new money, it is the money from ESA and formerly D2D money incorporated into a single payment and given to everyone in delivery regardless of their function and former entitlement.

So people who formerly had £12.60 ESA a week and no D2Ds gets an £8 pay rise, someone who formerly had £12.60 ESA and 3 lots of D2D @ 1.67p per item x say 400 which is £20 so then you add the two together and it comes out at £32.60 so they get a pay cut of £12 a week.

Right I think I've got it now - we use our money to finance a new pay structure that basically gives us a pay cut, but wait that is only for full timers - for part timers it's even worse because they lose even more because it is pro rata - in an office with 40% part timers it will certainly cause a little friction wouldn't you think?

Still - hey its a winners and losers world and if you're a loser wear a big L on your forehead

Less than £12 a week due to the increase in basic pay and supplement being paid 52 weeks a year, for some this is enough so they do not see the figures on the payslip go down by this time next year and sadly for some it isnt enough.

Hey BD - less than a £12 pay cut really makes me feel much better BUT how much worse off is a part timer who formerly had pro rata ESA but full payment for D2D it's a bloody sight more than £12 and how long is he going to wait to make up the difference? This was a stupid idea totally unrealistic thought out by people who had no idea of the scale of D2D and its impact on delivery officers pay.

[Glenno]

The debate on this subject seems to be about Winners & Loosers.....if you are a winner- you are
for it , if you are a Looser- expect to loose monies for the next few years , for the better good of
ALL

[lovejoy]

You know - I can't work out if I am stupid or not intelligent enough to understand that the £20.60 is not new money, it is the money from ESA and formerly D2D money incorporated into a single payment and given to everyone in delivery regardless of their function and former entitlement.

So people who formerly had £12.60 ESA a week and no D2Ds gets an £8 pay rise, someone who formerly had £12.60 ESA and 3 lots of D2D @ 1.67p per item x say 400 which is £20 so then you add the two together and it comes out at £32.60 so they get a pay cut of £12 a week.

Right I think I've got it now - we use our money to finance a new pay structure that basically gives us a pay cut, but wait that is only for full timers - for part timers it's even worse because they lose even more because it is pro rata - in an office with 40% part timers it will certainly cause a little friction wouldn't you think?

Still - hey its a winners and losers world and if you're a loser wear a big L on your forehead

Less than £12 a week due to the increase in basic pay and supplement being paid 52 weeks a year, for some this is enough so they do not see the figures on the payslip go down by this time next year and sadly for some it isnt enough.

Hey BD - less than a £12 pay cut really makes me feel much better BUT how much worse off is a part timer who formerly had pro rata ESA but full payment for D2D it's a bloody sight more than £12 and how long is he going to wait to make up the difference? This was a stupid idea totally unrealistic thought out by people who had no idea of the scale of D2D and its impact on delivery officers pay.

Well firstly the majority of PT members get NO shift allowance so won't lose their.

Secondly they will all gain from the hourly rate increase when the FT members move to a 39hr week.

Were you ever in the military Dvbuk? Serious question?

[dvbuk55]

You know - I can't work out if I am stupid or not intelligent enough to understand that the £20.60 is not new money, it is the money from ESA and formerly D2D money incorporated into a single payment and given to everyone in delivery regardless of their function and former entitlement.

So people who formerly had £12.60 ESA a week and no D2Ds gets an £8 pay rise, someone who formerly had £12.60 ESA and 3 lots of D2D @ 1.67p per item x say 400 which is £20 so then you add the two together and it comes out at £32.60 so they get a pay cut of £12 a week.

Right I think I've got it now - we use our money to finance a new pay structure that basically gives us a pay cut, but wait that is only for full timers - for part timers it's even worse because they lose even more because it is pro rata - in an office with 40% part timers it will certainly cause a little friction wouldn't you think?

Still - hey its a winners and losers world and if you're a loser wear a big L on your forehead

Less than £12 a week due to the increase in basic pay and supplement being paid 52 weeks a year, for some this is enough so they do not see the figures on the payslip go down by this time next year and sadly for some it isnt enough.

Hey BD - less than a £12 pay cut really makes me feel much better BUT how much worse off is a part timer who formerly had pro rata ESA but full payment for D2D it's a bloody sight more than £12 and how long is he going to wait to make up the difference? This was a stupid idea totally unrealistic thought out by people who had no idea of the scale of D2D and its impact on delivery officers pay.

Well firstly the majority of PT members get NO shift allowance so won't lose their.

Secondly they will all gain from the hourly rate increase when the FT members move to a 39hr week.

Were you ever in the military Dvbuk? Serious question?

Well it doesn't really address the problem about losing money lovejoy - which may well be adressed at a later date BUT it is not guaranteed and the 39 hour week will only be brought into being when the sequenced revision is implemented and that could actually be in 2012. The sequenced revison itself will bring time over workload issues and should only be agreed retrospectively to the ballot but in fact will be agreed now.

And the answer to your question is YES - though that bears no relationship today. As you see I take discipline well

Now here's a question for you - have you ever been a postman - and that is not a serious question

[Big Daz]

Hey BD - less than a £12 pay cut really makes me feel much better BUT how much worse off is a part timer who formerly had pro rata ESA but full payment for D2D it's a bloody sight more than £12 and how long is he going to wait to make up the difference? This was a stupid idea totally unrealistic thought out by people who had no idea of the scale of D2D and its impact on delivery officers pay.

You forget i fall into your catergory and I am not worse off. My basic pay increase is more than my ESA I loose, add on the spare onto the supplement mutiply by 52 weeks divide by 43 weeks compare against what my duty at 80% gets most weeks and Im very sorry to dissapoint you dvbuk55 but I do not loose.

2 sets of DTD last week 2 sets this week and supplement paid when on leave (6 weeks for me) thats 8 weeks allready of the 2010-2011 year where I have gained.