massdebate121 wrote:It was me that hasn't had a night off since March. It does seem that we have been replaced by cheaper workers. There's also more of them. Apparently in my MC tonight, there are 94 new casuals in. Not sure if that's including the casuals already there though. So now I'm staying up and waiting for Angard to phone me. Highly doubtful of course.
CASUALTIES OF AWR
Initially it was suggested by CWU that Royal mail set up Angard to avoid the new AWR, as the legislation does not apply to in-house agencies, but this was dismissed as “nonsense” by a Royal mail spokesman who said: “Through Angard, our costs are lower than we’d pay to external agencies.” He added that its main job would be to recruit 18,000 temporary staff for the busy Christmas period.
As Angard have no obligation to the new AWR, as it does not apply to them, I do not understand why they state “Angard staffing are fully committed to this legislation and as a result are making adjustments to pay of those individuals reaching 12 weeks.”
You lose AWR status after break in assignment of over 6 weeks, even after qualification, according to agency worker regulations 2010 No 93- part 2 rights- 8(b)
Now it appears that several Angard workers who have achieved parity status are losing out because of a break in assignment. Having a 28 day clause for termination of contract without notice is absurd given the fluctuation levels of work within Royal mail. Then a 3 week break for re-vetting occurs which means a break in assignment of over 6 weeks.
As “Recruiter” reported, Angard will not be recruiting seasonal staff this Christmas at mail & distribution centres.
In September 2012 Angard casuals were notified not to apply for the Christmas temporary vacancies with Royal mail. Now the new Christmas casuals, on minimum wage, are being given priority over flexible resource workers because the majority are on a substantially higher rate of pay under AWR Qualification.
Are Royal mail/Angard really “fully committed to the legislation!!”
