Union pressure brings progress on annual leave

[My feet are on fire]

Legislation was brought in in England and Wales in 2014 putting a cap at 2 years back pay, NI have no such legislation also legal case Patterson vs Castlereagh council states voluntarily worked overtime is covered as making up annual leave so must be paid.

[leolion855]

I can see your train of thought, but there's another way to look at it. If, like me, you've been lucky enough to get made up to full time then you get a full week's wages when on holiday or sick. But, if you're unfortunate to be part-time yet still work full time hours, you're a hundred quid down when on leave or sick. Yes, overtime is voluntary, but many need it to pay rent, mortgages, feed the kids etc.

RM know all this, it saves them hundreds of thousands if not more, every time they stiff a part timer when they go on leave.

The simple answer here is if you NEED full time money and the jobs been advertised as part time dont apply for it!
Overtime should be viewed as a nice extra to your regular wages if you can get any.Otherwise look for a full time job.

[FacesOfStone]

The simple answer here is if you NEED full time money and the jobs been advertised as part time dont apply for it!
Overtime should be viewed as a nice extra to your regular wages if you can get any.Otherwise look for a full time job.

It’s not that simple though. In plenty of offices overtime is essentially expected; they’d literally fall apart without part-time staff working above and beyond their contract; it seems to me that a rolling amount based on the last 12 weeks worked is fair. If there’s less OT available / the part-timer wants to work less, they get less. Still, given that the writing seems to be on the wall, I wouldn’t be surprised to see RM look to maintain their savings by cutting back on how much OT can be taken over contracted hours and instead put the rest of the burden on full-timers who regularly finish before their time.

[Woody Guthrie]

It does not matter whether these members are part-time or fulltime as this is about additional hours worked and average earnings, As I have posted previously.

I'm aware of the judgements roger I'm not an idiot but what you're failing to see is that this isn't just about money it's also about annual leave entitlement.

At the moment if your contact is 38 hrs a week's annual leave costs you 38 hrs, if your contract is 25 hrs it costs you 25 hrs.

Now if someone on a 25 hr contract regularly works 38 hrs they should be paid 38 hrs during an annual leave week and the only way to do that legally is to allocate them 38 hrs annual leave for that week.

That throws up some problems, first of all the number of hours worked would have to be averaged over an entire leave year otherwise you run the risk of someone working 38 hrs for 12 weeks, taking 6 weeks at 38 hrs and then working 25 hrs for the rest of the year, this would open up the possibility of a legal issue with someone who worked 30 hrs a week over the entire leave year receiving less annual leave over the year despite working more hours. Do you follow?

Another potential legal issue is sex discrimination, since a female member of staff is far more likely to be the primary carer in a family then it is obvious that her overtime opportunities will be reduced accordingly, if it comes down to increasing holiday allocation based purely on someone's ability and opportunitiy to work overtime we may have serious legal compliance issues.

It may be that the business adopts some kind of bi-annual system of balancing payments similar to scheduled attendance to avoid the annual leave issue but the whole thing is a complicated legal minefield.

[rogersh]

It does not matter whether these members are part-time or fulltime as this is about additional hours worked and average earnings, As I have posted previously.

I'm aware of the judgements roger I'm not an idiot but what you're failing to see is that this isn't just about money it's also about annual leave entitlement.

At the moment if your contact is 38 hrs a week's annual leave costs you 38 hrs, if your contract is 25 hrs it costs you 25 hrs.

Now if someone on a 25 hr contract regularly works 38 hrs they should be paid 38 hrs during an annual leave week and the only way to do that legally is to allocate them 38 hrs annual leave for that week.

That throws up some problems, first of all the number of hours worked would have to be averaged over an entire leave year otherwise you run the risk of someone working 38 hrs for 12 weeks, taking 6 weeks at 38 hrs and then working 25 hrs for the rest of the year, this would open up the possibility of a legal issue with someone who worked 30 hrs a week over the entire leave year receiving less annual leave over the year despite working more hours. Do you follow?

Another potential legal issue is sex discrimination, since a female member of staff is far more likely to be the primary carer in a family then it is obvious that her overtime opportunities will be reduced accordingly, if it comes down to increasing holiday allocation based purely on someone's ability and opportunitiy to work overtime we may have serious legal compliance issues.

It may be that the business adopts some kind of bi-annual system of balancing payments similar to scheduled attendance to avoid the annual leave issue but the whole thing is a complicated legal minefield.

Woody, I can only restate my response to your previous post in its entirety, Which you have not clarified.

Woody, By saying "annual leave is paid leave, that pay should reflect what you regularly earn otherwise it's not paid leave." you have answered "If that's the case does a full-time member of staff working 60 hrs have his/hers increased to 60 hrs"

It does not matter whether these members are part-time or fulltime as this is about additional hours worked and average earnings, As I have posted previously.

EAT rules that voluntary overtime should be included in holiday pay
By Katie Scott 1st August 2017

{EDIT}The EAT found that under the European Union’s Working Time Directive, there is no distinction between contractually required work and tasks that are performed voluntarily under other special or separate arrangements because levels of normal remuneration have to be maintained when calculating holiday pay in relation to the guaranteed four weeks of annual leave provided under EU law. The EAT also upheld that where voluntary shifts, standby and call-out payments form part of normal pay, they should be included in holiday pay calculations so that there is no financial disadvantage that may deter employees from taking leave.


Citing part of the EAT decision was intended to inform all who read the thread. I did not imply you are an idiot & it is unfortunate you have made that accusation.

[crimson king]

I can see your train of thought, but there's another way to look at it. If, like me, you've been lucky enough to get made up to full time then you get a full week's wages when on holiday or sick. But, if you're unfortunate to be part-time yet still work full time hours, you're a hundred quid down when on leave or sick. Yes, overtime is voluntary, but many need it to pay rent, mortgages, feed the kids etc.

RM know all this, it saves them hundreds of thousands if not more, every time they stiff a part timer when they go on leave.

The simple answer here is if you NEED full time money and the jobs been advertised as part time dont apply for it!
Overtime should be viewed as a nice extra to your regular wages if you can get any.Otherwise look for a full time job.

Fair enough...except, sometimes part time is better than nothing if you are out of work. Couple that with a DOM misleading you during the interview process about how most people turn full time very quickly and, before you know it, you're a long serving part timer grabbing whatever f***ing overtime you can to put food on the table and pay the rent.

It's the rat trap, baby and we've been caught.

[Dorset Plodder]

It’s not that simple though. In plenty of offices overtime is essentially expected; they’d literally fall apart without part-time staff working above and beyond their contract; it seems to me that a rolling amount based on the last 12 weeks worked is fair. If there’s less OT available / the part-timer wants to work less, they get less. Still, given that the writing seems to be on the wall, I wouldn’t be surprised to see RM look to maintain their savings by cutting back on how much OT can be taken over contracted hours and instead put the rest of the burden on full-timers who regularly finish before their time.

I agree FoS, there's likely to be a clamp down on Over Time (Over Contracted Hours), as you say most DOs wouldn't operate without loads of OT being done on a Regular Basis. It's Win Win for RM .... when the Mail "Slows Down" for Summer they save on the Reduced Hours of the PTers, but expect them to immediately step back up to 40 hours plus when it suits them. IMO that's a shitty way to treat your staff..... (some would say it's Good Management Technique but I think it's a cynical piss take).

You mention the Burden falling onto FTers who finish early.... well really it's no burden at all because they should be working ALL their contracted hours anyway. Why do DOMs make such a fuss about OPGs who are trying to claim 30 mins overtime for Pressure, when at the same time they're quite happy to let other OPGs finish 90 mins a day early? At least the guys claiming the Pressure are actually working for that extra time, I hope the "Early Finishers" get hammered over this!

[ennabee]

The simple answer here is if you NEED full time money and the jobs been advertised as part time dont apply for it!
.

Feasable if it s a 20 hour a week job, if it's a 25 hrs a week it's classed as full time by the DWP for the purpose of claiming and the job centre may send you after one AND expect you to take it if offered, not the case for 24 hours


You don't have to justify refusing a job of less than 24 hours every week and they do not count as "Notified Vacancies". But under the JSA they can order you to apply for these by issuing a Job Seekers Direction. If you don't apply you get treated as having refused a Direction. But if you apply and are offered the job you can't be sanctioned for refusing to take it. Sounds odd but the thing is people signing on are agreeing to look for full time work not part time work. If the job offers less than 24 hours each week you can refuse it.
http://www.urban75.com/Action/Jsa/jsa5.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Celgar]

It’s not that simple though. In plenty of offices overtime is essentially expected; they’d literally fall apart without part-time staff working above and beyond their contract; it seems to me that a rolling amount based on the last 12 weeks worked is fair. If there’s less OT available / the part-timer wants to work less, they get less. Still, given that the writing seems to be on the wall, I wouldn’t be surprised to see RM look to maintain their savings by cutting back on how much OT can be taken over contracted hours and instead put the rest of the burden on full-timers who regularly finish before their time.

I agree FoS, there's likely to be a clamp down on Over Time (Over Contracted Hours), as you say most DOs wouldn't operate without loads of OT being done on a Regular Basis. It's Win Win for RM .... when the Mail "Slows Down" for Summer they save on the Reduced Hours of the PTers, but expect them to immediately step back up to 40 hours plus when it suits them. IMO that's a shitty way to treat your staff..... (some would say it's Good Management Technique but I think it's a cynical piss take).

You mention the Burden falling onto FTers who finish early.... well really it's no burden at all because they should be working ALL their contracted hours anyway. Why do DOMs make such a fuss about OPGs who are trying to claim 30 mins overtime for Pressure, when at the same time they're quite happy to let other OPGs finish 90 mins a day early? At least the guys claiming the Pressure are actually working for that extra time, I hope the "Early Finishers" get hammered over this!

I agree with you but if RM pay extended delivery they see that as an additional cost. RM are currently looking at where posties finish early via the PDA actuals interface. The data is looked at & acted on collectively though so if action is taken everyone effectively gets hit by the hammer. As yet individuals cannot be targeted with the PDA actuals data. In our DO the percentage of duty hours not worked is under three percent which has been deemed not worth tackling. Other DOs have a percentage figure of as much as fifteen percent which, if in a large DO, could result in losing a number of walks.
Because the PDA actuals data is currently dealt with collectively if you have some posties finishing later than duty time, then whether they are receiving overtime payment or not, their additional time worked is added to the data of posties finishing early. This then effectively covers up the visibility of posties finishing early and/or later and potentially gives your DO a better percentage. This is by no means an ideal or possibly even fair situation but it's where we are currently.
There are quite a few ideas being floated and discussed at the moment such as the new parcel strategy, a two tier workforce, and switching to a five day operation so anything could happen really.

[Dorset Plodder]

I agree with you but if RM pay extended delivery they see that as an additional cost. RM are currently looking at where posties finish early via the PDA actuals interface. The data is looked at & acted on collectively though so if action is taken everyone effectively gets hit by the hammer. As yet individuals cannot be targeted with the PDA actuals data. In our DO the percentage of duty hours not worked is under three percent which has been deemed not worth tackling. Other DOs have a percentage figure of as much as fifteen percent which, if in a large DO, could result in losing a number of walks.
Because the PDA actuals data is currently dealt with collectively if you have some posties finishing later than duty time, then whether they are receiving overtime payment or not, their additional time worked is added to the data of posties finishing early. This then effectively covers up the visibility of posties finishing early and/or later and potentially gives your DO a better percentage. This is by no means an ideal or possibly even fair situation but it's where we are currently.
There are quite a few ideas being floated and discussed at the moment such as the new parcel strategy, a two tier workforce, and switching to a five day operation so anything could happen really.

An interesting point Celgar, and makes it a warped kind of sense. I can never get over the way DOMs get so stressed over paying 30 mins Pressure, for a Duty they know is too Big.... But repeatedly ignore the guys finishing up to an hour and a half early Regularly. It's been explained that the Pressure is extra to their Budget, but the Early Finishing doesn't cost them anything (in Budget Terms). I'm sure it doesn't take the Brains of an Accountant to work out that if someone is getting paid an extra days pay a week, and not doing the work, there's got to be a saving there? Obviously it's a bit too subtle for a thicky like me!

[SpacePhoenix]

The bean counters will just see a DO with staff finishing x number of hours total early (lets say for example 250 a week across all walks) they'll then take 250 hours a week out that DO's budget and the DOM will be expected to cover all the walks with the reduced budget

[Woody Guthrie]

The bean counters will just see a DO with staff finishing x number of hours total early (lets say for example 250 a week across all walks) they'll then take 250 hours a week out that DO's budget and the DOM will be expected to cover all the walks with the reduced budget

The bean counters are more interested in driving indoor savings than outdoor finishing times, the biggest target at the moment is indoor overtime, people working their day off and part-timers working full-time hours.

The biggest PDA concern now is how early members are commencing their delivery which is showing up a surplus of indoor hours. At some point they may consider finish times but they're not stupid. They know that without outdoor performance standards any budget savings based on finish times alone could result in massive delivery office failures if members decide to take their time outdoors.

If they get any kind of outdoor performance standards then you'll see budget related savings based on finish times but at the moment it isn't happening.

[Celgar]

The bean counters will just see a DO with staff finishing x number of hours total early (lets say for example 250 a week across all walks) they'll then take 250 hours a week out that DO's budget and the DOM will be expected to cover all the walks with the reduced budget

The bean counters are more interested in driving indoor savings than outdoor finishing times, the biggest target at the moment is indoor overtime, people working their day off and part-timers working full-time hours.

The biggest PDA concern now is how early members are commencing their delivery which is showing up a surplus of indoor hours. At some point they may consider finish times but they're not stupid. They know that without outdoor performance standards any budget savings based on finish times alone could result in massive delivery office failures if members decide to take their time outdoors.

If they get any kind of outdoor performance standards then you'll see budget related savings based on finish times but at the moment it isn't happening.

I would say there are outdoor performance standards currently which are being acted on although this is purely based on matching what time the PDA re-enters the 'forcefield' compared to the duty or delivery end time on the '318'.

[Woody Guthrie]

Those are not outdoor performance standards.

At the moment I could take 4 hours to complete my delivery or 5 hours to complete my delivery and there's very little RM could do about it, management could moan and ask questions but little else because there are no individual performance standards for outdoor delivery work. There are planned times but these are simply a resourcing tool and can't be applied to individuals.

This very fact is why RM cannot use the PDA data in the way they would like to, if they see me finishing half an hour early and give me half an hour's extra work what do they do if I take an hour to do it? They can't conduct me.

That half hour of work has just cost them an hour and any attempt at savings has just gone up in smoke. This makes them very wary about addressing finish times.

If they ever get any kind of outdoor performance standards that may change.

[97gaz]

[