Romec Pay 2011

[POSTMAN]

To: All Branches with Postal Members

Dear Colleagues,

Romec Pay 2011

Branches will be aware that the 2010 Romec pay agreement brought the settlement date for the 2011 review forward to 1st January.

As reported in previous LTBs, Romec refused to make any offer on pay until issues relating to engineering efficiency were resolved. The agreement to resume talks with Romec on the engineering dispute included a deadline of 19th August for the resolution of the Union’s pay claim for all CWU represented grades in Romec.

Attached is the final offer letter from Romec in settlement of the pay claim which was unanimously endorsed by the Postal Executive today.

The offer provides for an increase in pay, flowing through to allowances and overtime of 2% from 1st October 2011. For the period from 1st January to 1st October, the offer provides for a lump sum payment of £225 per head, pro rata for part-timers.

The overall pay bill effect over 12 months is 1.5% but the structure of the offer provides for an exit rate of 2% whilst maximising the cash value of the offer for the lowest paid grades.

The PEC decision takes account of a very difficult negotiating background, which is the financial pressure on Romec as a result of the significant cost cuts contained within the new Enterprise contract with Royal Mail Group. Romec missed its financial targets for the first quarter of this financial year by a significant margin.

2% is the average level of settlements across the economy at the moment and it has been possible to shape the offer in a way which maximises its value to the lowest paid and maximises the exit point.

The offer will now be the subject of an individual member ballot of all members affected, conducted on a separate constituency basis with a recommendation to vote yes.

Whilst still subject to final confirmation, we anticipate the ballot timetable to be 9th to 26th September.

Yours sincerely Yours sincerely

Noel McClean Ray Ellis
A/Assistant Secretary Assistant Secretary

---------------------------------------

Dear Ray & Bob

2011 Romec Pay Review

Following our recent intensive pay discussions I am now pleased to make the following formal offer which I believe reflects the final position that we reached at the conclusion of our last meeting. We both recognise that this is against what was of course originally a 1 January review date.

In light of that we agreed to attempt to maximise the value, going forward, to employees of the very limited cash that the company has for pay this year.

I therefore make the following offer to you:

• A consolidated 2% pay increase to members of all grades represented by the CWU for the purposes of collective bargaining. The pay increase to take effect from 1 October 2011.
• An additional £225 unconsolidated lump sum for the same employees. This will be paid on a pro rata basis for less than full time employees.
Dependant on your response and the speed of your internal consultative process, my intention would be to make these payments at the end of September 2011.

Yours sincerely

John Fisher
People & Organisational Development Director

[TrueBlueTerrier]

2% is the average level of settlements across the economy at the moment

but is less than half the current accepted inflation rate. Not looking good for the 3.5% under BT2010 for RML.

Consumer prices index (CPI) inflation August 2011 (1) 4.5% (4.4%)
Government inflation (CPI) target 2%
Inflation: Retail prices index (RPI) July 2011 (2) 5.2% (5.0%)
Inflation: Retail prices index excl. mortgage payments (RPIX) July 2011 (3) 5.3% (5.0%)


Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news ... z1YefbC2vt" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[fishtank]

So let me get this straight...
It's a 12 month deal from Jan 2011,
The pay rise of 2% kicks in Oct 2011.
From Jan-Oct is covered by a lump sum of £255...pro-rata of course.
So the deal is actually worth 1.5% over the 12 months.
Why couldn't they have offered 2% backdated to Jan...How much more would it have cost taking into consideration the lump sums?
Is this an attempt to get this magical 2% figure on the table at any cost...even if it doesn't really mean 2%.