LTB 035/17 - Post Office: Weekly to Monthly Pay Update - Post Office Rejection of our Proposal for a One-Off Lump Sum Payment of GBP1000

[TrueBlueTerrier]

LTB 035/17 - Post Office: Weekly to Monthly Pay Update - Post Office Rejection of our Proposal for a One-Off Lump Sum Payment of £1000

No. 035/2017

23rd January 2017

Dear Colleague

POST OFFICE: WEEKLY TO MONTHLY PAY UPDATE – POST OFFICE REJECTION OF OUR PROPOSAL FOR A ONE-OFF LUMP SUM PAYMENT OF £1000

Further to LTB 005/17 dated 5th January 2017. Branches will be aware of the Post Office’s attempts to move our weekly paid members to monthly pay after 3rd February 2017. In essence, the Post Office is seeking to unilaterally change contracts of employment (without a collective agreement) and in these circumstances this is a move we oppose, not least due to the financial difficulties this will potentially place our members under. Indeed, in the absence of a national agreement, these members are under no legal obligation to accept this contractual change.

As previously reported we provided our members with a model “Letter of Objection” which had to be returned to the Post Office by Friday 13th January. By all accounts received from our Representatives there has been a very good response with hundreds of “Letters of Objection” being returned to the Post Office HR Department.

At our instigation, a meeting took place on Friday 13th January with John Whitefoot, Employee Relations and Policy Director, during which we took the initiative to make a proposal for a national agreement to resolve this issue. This proposal, which was subsequently rejected by the Post Office, would have provided all weekly paid members with a £1000 one-off lump-sum payment (pro-rata for part-timers) in return for agreeing to the move to monthly pay as an integral part of a national agreement. Following the rejection of our proposal, as it stands, no further talks are planned.

The Post Office has though, as a consequence of our opposition coupled with the sheer volume of “Letters of Objection”, revised the terms of the “bridging loan” so that the debt members owe can be paid back over a longer period or alternatively when they leave Post Office employment.

Following management’s rejection of our proposal for a one-off £1000 lump sum payment and also the Post Office’s modification in terms of paying back the bridging loan, I wrote to our weekly paid members last week updating them on the current position. My letter also encouraged our members to resist management’s tactics of putting them under pressure in one-to-one meetings with line-managers or HR. Essentially, the Post Office is attempting to bounce our members into a position of accepting monthly pay against their wishes. Furthermore, I took the opportunity in my letter to stress to members their contractual right to weekly pay and the fact the Post Office does not have a unilateral right to vary contracts.



Branches are also advised that the Post Office, when writing to our members, previously had set a closing date for bridging loan applications of Friday 27th January. This in turn caused some trepidation amongst members who were supporting the stance of opposing the move from weekly to monthly pay. The fears expressed by these members related to the potential loss of the bridging loan if applications were not submitted by the closing date. With this in mind, we have provided our weekly paid members with the following pro-forma letter which enables them to apply for the bridging loan on a without prejudice basis whilst protecting their right to a legal claim:



Dear Sir/Madam

APPLICATION FOR SECURING THE RIGHT FOR A BRIDGING LOAN (WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO MY CONTRACTUAL POSITION) WHILST REAFFIRMING MY CONTRACTUAL ENTITLEMENT TO RETAIN WEEKLY PAY

For the avoidance of doubt, I am adamant I want to retain weekly pay and I continue to oppose any unilateral change to my contract of employment that introduces monthly pay.

I am, however, aware the closing date for applying for a bridging loan for 4 week’s pay is 27th January 2017. Without prejudice to my continued opposition to monthly pay, as outlined above, I wish to indicate my interest in securing a bridging loan in the regrettable event this is necessary due to management proceeding unilaterally by imposing monthly pay by Executive Action.

My indication of an interest in securing a bridging loan does not in any way override the fact I continue to oppose my contract of employment being changed to introduce monthly pay. Indeed I would regard the Post Office as being in breach of my contract of employment should monthly pay be imposed. Accordingly I reaffirm my right for my union to instigate legal proceedings on my behalf to remedy any breach and to seek damages for breach of contract.

Please confirm that I will continue to receive weekly pay after 3 February 2017.

Yours faithfully

....................................................................

Name: .........................................................

Workplace: ..................................................

Payroll number: ...........................................

Date: ...................................... January 2017



The above activity in no way undermines our opposition to the Post Office’s attempts to introduce monthly pay by Executive Action. It does, however, provide some peace of mind for our members who would want to avail themselves of the bridging loan in the event the Post Office proceeds without a national agreement. It should be remembered that when discussing this issue with members that it is the actions of the Post Office which are causing our members stress and anxiety.

In regards to next steps, a further letter was sent to Martin Kirke, Group HR Director on Friday 20th January, urging him to agree to a postponement of the introduction of monthly pay (which is after 3rd February) to allow for proper negotiations to take place. Additionally, my letter made it clear that should the Post Office proceed by Executive Action, we would support our members legally by seeking damages for breach of contract.

Our strong view, supported by the legal advice we have been given, is that our members are under no obligation to accept monthly pay. Indeed our members are perfectly within their legal rights to reject a change in contact and in doing so seek to retain weekly pay. The Post Office has clearly got this wrong with their attempts to bulldoze this through without a national agreement. In these circumstances we have no choice than to oppose the actions of the Post Office and if appropriate, we would pursue this matter through an Employment Tribunal on behalf of our weekly paid members.

The above matter will be discussed at the Postal Executive meeting on Tuesday 24th January and further developments will be reported.

Any queries in relation to this LTB should be directed to Lea Sheridan on 020 8971 7361 or lsheridan@cwu.org.

Yours sincerely

Andy Furey

Assistant Secretary