Preference excercise

[kiki123]

And they also ask if you have flexible working agreement so maybe looking for the ones hardest to change duty’s and have the law not just the union to worry about I maybe wrong but looks very suspicious

[grchpo]

If you agree to accept VR how long before you know f you are going or not.

[rambo1]

This exercise is based on VR so why include do you have a disability.
In their questions . Surely that's not irrelevant, or is it ?

Well exactly, it's not relevant if people are requesting redundancy.

But it is a protected characteristic, and if a company got rid of a high percentage of their disabled workers, in any redundancy action. They could leave themselves open to legal action.

Bear in mind, on the preference exercise, you can state that your preference is "no". I also wouldn't assume that all redundancies going forward will be voluntary tbh, given the state of things.

Well in our office of 110 people, halfway through yesterday there were 12 people on a list of people interested. That's over 10%. Extrapolated into the whole business and you have 13-14k people interested in 6,000 VR positions. I really don't think they'd struggle on VR tbh, there won't be compulsory redundancy.

[rambo1]

We are swaying away from the original question.
I repeat why are RM asking the question when coming to the preference exercise that they feel the need to ask DO YOU HAVE A DISABILITY.
Let's try to get to the bottom of this as this could lead RM discriminating under the equality act !!
Unless they make it clear why they have asked the question then I am intrigued why they have ask this personal question which is related to VR What they may see as dead wood for for example iii
What are RM up to when offering a preference exercise .
They are up to something that's for sure!!!!

If they picked someone with a disability over me I'd be discriminated against. It works both ways. There is no one fair way of doing it, which is why in the past it's been on seniority. Maybe they should have an auction to see what the lowest amount people would take is? Like an ebay sale for redundancy LOL. I'll start the bidding at £1000

[redlen]

It is shocking how little people know how the Equality Act works with protected characteristics and employment.

People really do need to research first before postiong on opinions.

[Acca Dacca]

If I had to guess, they're going to use high sick absence as a qualifier for Voluntary redundancy (or compulsory if it comes to that), but disability is a protected characteristic. So if your sick absences were related to disability, that would be discrimination and would leave them open to legal action.

That would be incentivising having a bad sick record

Everyone who has applied for VR has done so because they want it

Giving it to those with bad sick records out of the group who want it over those who don’t isn’t a good idea when it comes to future VRs is it?

[rambo1]

If I had to guess, they're going to use high sick absence as a qualifier for Voluntary redundancy (or compulsory if it comes to that), but disability is a protected characteristic. So if your sick absences were related to disability, that would be discrimination and would leave them open to legal action.

That would be incentivising having a bad sick record

Everyone who has applied for VR has done so because they want it

Giving it to those with bad sick records out of the group who want it over those who don’t isn’t a good idea when it comes to future VRs is it?

People would just string out sickness, which is probably what's they'll do on the new terms anyway. Might as well have a full week if you don't get anything for the first 3 days.

[tractorboy2]

Can you only exercise a preference via the people app ?

[yellowbelly]

[......
If they picked someone with a disability over me I'd be discriminated against.
.......

Not in the eyes of the law you wouldn't.

[wandle]

If I had to guess, they're going to use high sick absence as a qualifier for Voluntary redundancy (or compulsory if it comes to that), but disability is a protected characteristic. So if your sick absences were related to disability, that would be discrimination and would leave them open to legal action.

That would be incentivising having a bad sick record

Everyone who has applied for VR has done so because they want it

Giving it to those with bad sick records out of the group who want it over those who don’t isn’t a good idea when it comes to future VRs is it?

People would just string out sickness, which is probably what's they'll do on the new terms anyway. Might as well have a full week if you don't get anything for the first 3 days.

A risky game to play, given RM also want to change the medical retirement rules. They want to reduce the amount payable under IHR by one week for each and every week you’ve received full sick pay, down to a minimum payout of 8 weeks pay. So, if you’ve had 6 months off on long term sick, and you express a desire to leave the business - via the People app - they’ll likely say ‘ok… here’s your 8 weeks money… bye ’

[datasaint]

I really don't think they'd struggle on VR tbh, there won't be compulsory redundancy.

Except the business can lose all new starters that have joined in the last 2 years at zero cost, they don't have to pay them any redundancy.

So why would a business that's struggling financially pay people off to leave instead?

RM have carried out this 'preference' exercise to guage the feeling of employees in the business, if they can see 14k are at the point of leaving like you say, then they know they can whittle them down and they'll probably leave soon anyway.

[Murdoch]

If I had to guess, they're going to use high sick absence as a qualifier for Voluntary redundancy (or compulsory if it comes to that), but disability is a protected characteristic. So if your sick absences were related to disability, that would be discrimination and would leave them open to legal action.

That would be incentivising having a bad sick record

Everyone who has applied for VR has done so because they want it

Giving it to those with bad sick records out of the group who want it over those who don’t isn’t a good idea when it comes to future VRs is it?

Well it's at Royal Mail's discretion, it says so. That was just a theory on why they were asking the question. That historic sick absence may play a role in who they get rid of. Personally, I don't think much, if anything that Royal Mail does, is a good idea.

However, if Sick absences were to play a role in the decision making process. They'd have to discount absences related to disability in the decision making process, or they'd be breaking the law (equality act 2010). So that is a potential reason for asking the question, is all I'm saying.

[hans solo]

They shouldn’t be asking the question at all
Discrimination against disabled people straight away
And if Cwu lawyers were any good would take RM to court
With this on technical breach just as they do for trying to stop ballots and legal strike actions
I wouldn’t hold my breath as I don’t think Cwu or lawyers are competent of brave enough to do it

[hans solo]

They shouldn’t be asking the question at all
Discrimination against disabled people straight away one way or the other
And if Cwu lawyers were any good would take RM to court
With this on technical breach just as they do for trying to stop ballots and legal strike actions
I wouldn’t hold my breath as I don’t think Cwu or lawyers are competent of brave enough to do it

[Acca Dacca]

If I had to guess, they're going to use high sick absence as a qualifier for Voluntary redundancy (or compulsory if it comes to that), but disability is a protected characteristic. So if your sick absences were related to disability, that would be discrimination and would leave them open to legal action.

That would be incentivising having a bad sick record

Everyone who has applied for VR has done so because they want it

Giving it to those with bad sick records out of the group who want it over those who don’t isn’t a good idea when it comes to future VRs is it?

Well it's at Royal Mail's discretion, it says so. That was just a theory on why they were asking the question. That historic sick absence may play a role in who they get rid of. Personally, I don't think much, if anything that Royal Mail does, is a good idea.

However, if Sick absences were to play a role in the decision making process. They'd have to discount absences related to disability in the decision making process, or they'd be breaking the law (equality act 2010). So that is a potential reason for asking the question, is all I'm saying.

If it came to compulsory redundancies then maybe though I thought it'd be last in first out but I very much doubt they would give enhanced VR terms ( compared to compulsory ) to those with poor sick records