RMCtv : Pay and change offer - your questions answered

[Acca Dacca]

Worth noting that when they say they will pay statutory sick pay for the first three days of second absence, that means ZERO PAY

I’m not sure that is accurate but you can blame the decimation of our previous sick pay policy on the morons that have abused it over the years. We had people who you could guarantee would be out the week before Christmas or were suddenly struck down the week before annual leave.

We have long been our own enemies and now we are all suffering regardless.

I already knew that statutory was zero for first three days but Ricky McAuley confirms second absence will be unpaid for first three days at 7:00 mins of the video which is the first time they have confirmed it will be zero pay rather than using the term 'statutory pay' which sounds like we will still be paid just a bit less to those who didnt know that statutory is actually £0 for first three days.

My point stands. Just like you should be blaming the ridiculous revisions on people running around, starting early and working through their breaks, blame those milking sick pay for where we are now.

Are managers docked pay when off for second time in a year? Genuine question.

[Acca Dacca]

SSP is this £60 for the whole week off YOU need to claim it back here https://www.gov.uk/employers-sick-pay/e ... -form-ssp1 If your full time in our job!

First 3 days of sickness are not paid SSP - so if they are saying they will apply SSP rules then that is zero for first 3 days. If they are saying they will pay the daily rate of SSP for those first 3 days then that would be about £22/day.

For the first time, McAuley has confirmed that it is the former - zero pay first three days of second absence

It had been ambiguous before.

[Wolf91]

Worth noting that when they say they will pay statutory sick pay for the first three days of second absence, that means ZERO PAY

I’m not sure that is accurate but you can blame the decimation of our previous sick pay policy on the morons that have abused it over the years. We had people who you could guarantee would be out the week before Christmas or were suddenly struck down the week before annual leave.

We have long been our own enemies and now we are all suffering regardless.

Completely the wrong way to go about it though, don’t you think?
If you’re an employer with any degree of integrity that genuinely wants to sort the issue at hand out.
The thing is they don’t.
They just want to slash sick pay to save costs. That’s the bottom line. It lines up perfectly with their overall agenda, and is a convenient excuse.

People pulling fast ones before A/L? Discipline them.
People pulling fast ones before Xmas? Discipline them.
People pulling fast ones the same time every year? Discipline them.

You don’t go nuclear with it and decimate sick pay for everyone, unless it conveniently lines up with your agenda… like I said.


To use that as an excuse to f**k over 100K workers whenever they are genuinely ill is sinister at best.

[k979aaa]

Most of it is stress related because they caused it and get paid for causing their own problems at the behest of those who gave intro. In times to come they will say they were only following orders!

[Acca Dacca]

We currently have an attendance system where one day = one absence and 4 weeks = one absence

So if this was agreed, you could be off for a single day ( paid ) in January and then in the November are off for three days and lose three days pay. You are only off for a total of four days in the year but have lost three days pay.

Whilst someone else could be off for a week or even four weeks all at one time in June. Thats their only absence. They will lose no pay.

4 days = two absences, three days loss of pay
over a week consecutively = one absence, no loss of pay

You could actually be off for just two days a year and lose pay . That is a joke.

[k979aaa]

SSP is this £60 for the whole week off YOU need to claim it back here https://www.gov.uk/employers-sick-pay/e ... -form-ssp1 If your full time in our job!

First 3 days of sickness are not paid SSP - so if they are saying they will apply SSP rules then that is zero for first 3 days. If they are saying they will pay the daily rate of SSP for those first 3 days then that would be about £22/day.

For the first time, McAuley has confirmed that it is the former - zero pay first three days of second absence

It had been ambiguous before.

Don't forget they can claim some of it back of the taxman!

[k979aaa]

SSP is this £60 for the whole week off YOU need to claim it back here https://www.gov.uk/employers-sick-pay/e ... -form-ssp1 If your full time in our job!

First 3 days of sickness are not paid SSP - so if they are saying they will apply SSP rules then that is zero for first 3 days. If they are saying they will pay the daily rate of SSP for those first 3 days then that would be about £22/day.

For the first time, McAuley has confirmed that it is the former - zero pay first three days of second absence

It had been ambiguous before.

If three days now next year none sick pay this is like the pensions we had!

[enskied]

Be it you agree with what has been said or not, you have to give credit for the professionalism shown in updating employees.
Straight talking with no horseplay or tomfoolery.

Something Chris Webb take notice of.

Are you for real ?

As I say, it has been established once and for all that he is part of management. Can we please just leave him to it now he's been rumbled?

Well?

[enskied]

Be it you agree with what has been said or not, you have to give credit for the professionalism shown in updating employees.
Straight talking with no horseplay or tomfoolery.

Something Chris Webb take notice of.

"Be it" a bit west country

[k979aaa]

We currently have an attendance system where one day = one absence and 4 weeks = one absence

So if this was agreed, you could be off for a single day ( paid ) in January and then in the November are off for three days and lose three days pay. You are only off for a total of four days in the year but have lost three days pay.

Whilst someone else could be off for a week or even four weeks all at one time in June. Thats their only absence. They will lose no pay.

4 days = two absences, three days loss of pay
over a week consecutively = one absence, no loss of pay

You could actually be off for just two days a year and lose pay . That is a joke.

It's the paving slab though roof routine if it ain't broken break it crash and burn capitalism at it's worst!

[sixfoottwo]

Dress it however they like we are getting shafted royally here

Horrible Bast****

It's a no from me.

[Shadedpostie]

Okay, from taking this video from face value the only thing stopping an agreement between them is the sick pay and the new starters. Everything else the CWU has agreed with. Doesn't really line up with CWU also caring about the reps and others suspended in limbo so not entirely true unless they are pretty much considering this a separate issue, which pretty much is. However, Ricky lied on the back pay.

There was NEVER an option on that, you cannot blame
that on the industrial action. In no of the deals you came up with was there an option of back pay. There was your lump sum that was pretty pitful and based on if the revisions went well, which not a single person would believe would work.

[sindba]

All this "we all know people take the piss on the sick" stuff does my head in.

None of us know our colleagues circumstances.

People DO get stressed, they DO get sick at Christmas and weekends, they ARE often in ill health. 9 times out of10 these things are genuine. To build a punishing sick pay system around anecdotal "everyone knows they take tne piss" bullshit is unacceptable.

[guardianangel]

The pay rise is still s**t after Royal Mail gave away all the profits we worked our ass off to make.

[Shadedpostie]

Worth noting that when they say they will pay statutory sick pay for the first three days of second absence, that means ZERO PAY

I’m not sure that is accurate but you can blame the decimation of our previous sick pay policy on the morons that have abused it over the years. We had people who you could guarantee would be out the week before Christmas or were suddenly struck down the week before annual leave.

We have long been our own enemies and now we are all suffering regardless.

Whilst I agree that those that abuse the system and take the absolute piss should be punished, don't agree with this settlement of punishing an entire workforce for minor amount of people doing this. All down to piss poor managers not acting accordingly to them. Old job, any suspicious management had of you taking obvious absences patterns you'd be dragged straight into the office.