Negotiators agreement reached

[rambo1]

Would prefer the 6% consolated up front, now. Also it would be going in to boost your pension.

But if you plan on staying 2 yrs or more it makes no difference.

[rambo1]

Lets hope the union endorse the 6 percent rise and lower lump sum to many short sighted posties not letting there brains kick in

What's the difference in £ terms?

and it depends on your situation which one you choose anyway....

Some people may have debts to pay, something to buy, want to invest, may be leaving the company within a year....so they'd be more likely to choose the larger lump sum which makes total sense.

Those who are committed to the company and the above does not apply to - may choose the lower lump sum.

I will look at it later, someone's saying the difference is £500 between the 2.... if so, then I may choose the smaller lump sum....

That’s correct the difference is £500ish if the back pay was calculated properly it’s a lot more. People fall for the lump sum crap every time

Example of £25,000 at April 23.
2% is £500 . So April 24 would be £25,500
6% of £25,500 is £1,530 so would be £27,030 at end of deal plus get £1500 now.

Example of £25,000 at April 23
6% is £1,500 so April 24 would be £26,500
2% of £26,500 is £530 so would be £27,030
at end of deal plus get £500 now.

Same end salary of £27,030 .
Only the lump sum is £1000 better to take the larger lump sum option.
Know which I'd sooner have.

But you are not taking into account that in the 2nd example you earn £1000 more through your salary. Both deals have the same monetary value.

No. The salary over 2 yrs works out the same, as I said.
The only difference is the lump sum, which is £1000 more for the larger, and obviously, not salary.

[rambo1]

At the end of the 2 yr deal, the £25k now example will be on £27,030 after 2 yrs WHICHEVER option is chosen.
Difference is just in the lump sum.

[awalkinthepark]

Lets hope the union endorse the 6 percent rise and lower lump sum to many short sighted posties not letting there brains kick in

What's the difference in £ terms?

and it depends on your situation which one you choose anyway....

Some people may have debts to pay, something to buy, want to invest, may be leaving the company within a year....so they'd be more likely to choose the larger lump sum which makes total sense.

Those who are committed to the company and the above does not apply to - may choose the lower lump sum.

I will look at it later, someone's saying the difference is £500 between the 2.... if so, then I may choose the smaller lump sum....

That’s correct the difference is £500ish if the back pay was calculated properly it’s a lot more. People fall for the lump sum crap every time

Example of £25,000 at April 23.
2% is £500 . So April 24 would be £25,500
6% of £25,500 is £1,530 so would be £27,030 at end of deal plus get £1500 now.

Example of £25,000 at April 23
6% is £1,500 so April 24 would be £26,500
2% of £26,500 is £530 so would be £27,030
at end of deal plus get £500 now.

Same end salary of £27,030 .
Only the lump sum is £1000 better to take the larger lump sum option.
Know which I'd sooner have.

But you are not taking into account that in the 2nd example you earn £1000 more through your salary. Both deals have the same monetary value.

No. The salary over 2 yrs works out the same, as I said.
The only difference is the lump sum, which is £1000 more for the larger, and obviously, not salary.

No, let me put it this way.
This years pay.
Example 1
25000 + 2% = 25500 + 1500 = 27000 total pay
Example 2
25000 + 6% = 26500 + 500 = 27000 total pay.

As you say both pay 27030 next year.

[LouBarlow]

Not sure any of the options are going to be worth all the changes that could be coming.

They are coming anyway. Might as well get paid for them.

[cobrakai]

At the end of the 2 yr deal, the £25k now example will be on £27,030 after 2 yrs WHICHEVER option is chosen.
Difference is just in the lump sum.

Do you trust them over 2 years. I don’t. They ripped up the last 2 agreements and just ignored them

[Acca Dacca]

Not sure any of the options are going to be worth all the changes that could be coming.

They are coming anyway. Might as well get paid for them.

You still never answered my question if managers now get docked pay for their second absence?

[rambo1]

Lets hope the union endorse the 6 percent rise and lower lump sum to many short sighted posties not letting there brains kick in

What's the difference in £ terms?

and it depends on your situation which one you choose anyway....

Some people may have debts to pay, something to buy, want to invest, may be leaving the company within a year....so they'd be more likely to choose the larger lump sum which makes total sense.

Those who are committed to the company and the above does not apply to - may choose the lower lump sum.

I will look at it later, someone's saying the difference is £500 between the 2.... if so, then I may choose the smaller lump sum....

That’s correct the difference is £500ish if the back pay was calculated properly it’s a lot more. People fall for the lump sum crap every time

Example of £25,000 at April 23.
2% is £500 . So April 24 would be £25,500
6% of £25,500 is £1,530 so would be £27,030 at end of deal plus get £1500 now.

Example of £25,000 at April 23
6% is £1,500 so April 24 would be £26,500
2% of £26,500 is £530 so would be £27,030
at end of deal plus get £500 now.

Same end salary of £27,030 .
Only the lump sum is £1000 better to take the larger lump sum option.
Know which I'd sooner have.

But you are not taking into account that in the 2nd example you earn £1000 more through your salary. Both deals have the same monetary value.

No. The salary over 2 yrs works out the same, as I said.
The only difference is the lump sum, which is £1000 more for the larger, and obviously, not salary.

No, let me put it this way.
This years pay.
Example 1
25000 + 2% = 25500 + 1500 = 27000 total pay
Example 2
25000 + 6% = 26500 + 500 = 27000 total pay.

As you say both pay 27030 next year.

Over one yr, yes
Over the second yr though, your example 1 will give you an extra 6% of the 25500
And example 2 will only give 2% extra of 26500.
There's the difference if you are staying for 2 yrs

[CRIBMAD]

My concern is any new starters, which was a red line.

If they allow that to continue, then that will be the Pandora's box end game

Hey up Filthy Len/Keith - have you had a good weekend?

Read anymore George Orwell?

Great to see you adding your two penneth with more important info

Anyone who says you’re a banter account needs their bumps feeling

You’re the most clued up poster on here

Had a great weekend thanks. Even better now a deal is close.
George Orwell? No. Not read him in a long time.
And thanks for you kind words. But it’s a good job you are in a union as I can tell by your constant attempts at goading and insults that you are a little bit simple and probably need the union rep to help you go to the toilet.

Filthy Len/Keith you replied via the wrong alias you fine,fellow

Don’t want people thinking you’re a sock puppet account that’s only here for the banter,do we?

Don’t worry - I don’t think anyone noticed

Looking forward to more top class important information as the day rolls on - have a good one Filthy Len/Keith

wow calling someone SIMPLE nowadays is totally unacceptable ! Glad he responded with his other id though they always slip up !

[awalkinthepark]

Lets hope the union endorse the 6 percent rise and lower lump sum to many short sighted posties not letting there brains kick in

What's the difference in £ terms?

and it depends on your situation which one you choose anyway....

Some people may have debts to pay, something to buy, want to invest, may be leaving the company within a year....so they'd be more likely to choose the larger lump sum which makes total sense.

Those who are committed to the company and the above does not apply to - may choose the lower lump sum.

I will look at it later, someone's saying the difference is £500 between the 2.... if so, then I may choose the smaller lump sum....

That’s correct the difference is £500ish if the back pay was calculated properly it’s a lot more. People fall for the lump sum crap every time

Example of £25,000 at April 23.
2% is £500 . So April 24 would be £25,500
6% of £25,500 is £1,530 so would be £27,030 at end of deal plus get £1500 now.

Example of £25,000 at April 23
6% is £1,500 so April 24 would be £26,500
2% of £26,500 is £530 so would be £27,030
at end of deal plus get £500 now.

Same end salary of £27,030 .
Only the lump sum is £1000 better to take the larger lump sum option.
Know which I'd sooner have.

But you are not taking into account that in the 2nd example you earn £1000 more through your salary. Both deals have the same monetary value.

No. The salary over 2 yrs works out the same, as I said.
The only difference is the lump sum, which is £1000 more for the larger, and obviously, not salary.

No, let me put it this way.
This years pay.
Example 1
25000 + 2% = 25500 + 1500 = 27000 total pay
Example 2
25000 + 6% = 26500 + 500 = 27000 total pay.

As you say both pay 27030 next year.

Over one yr, yes
Over the second yr though, your example 1 will give you an extra 6% of the 25500
And example 2 will only give 2% extra of 26500.
There's the difference if you are staying for 2 yrs

No difference.
2nd years pay.
Example 1
25500 + 6% = 27030
Example 2
26500 + 2% = 27030

[Cedar_Room]

My concern is any new starters, which was a red line.

If they allow that to continue, then that will be the Pandora's box end game

Hey up Filthy Len/Keith - have you had a good weekend?

Read anymore George Orwell?

Great to see you adding your two penneth with more important info

Anyone who says you’re a banter account needs their bumps feeling

You’re the most clued up poster on here

Had a great weekend thanks. Even better now a deal is close.
George Orwell? No. Not read him in a long time.
And thanks for you kind words. But it’s a good job you are in a union as I can tell by your constant attempts at goading and insults that you are a little bit simple and probably need the union rep to help you go to the toilet.

Filthy Len/Keith you replied via the wrong alias you fine,fellow

Don’t want people thinking you’re a sock puppet account that’s only here for the banter,do we?

Don’t worry - I don’t think anyone noticed

Looking forward to more top class important information as the day rolls on - have a good one Filthy Len/Keith

Keep paying those subs. You clearly need support.

Is that it,Filthy Len/Keith?

The best red hot info you’ve got?

You need to read more George Orwell,your lack of literature reading is effecting your sardonic responses

People will start to suspect you’re a multiple sock puppet account only here for the banter & we both know that isn’t true,don’t we Filthy Len/Keith

[rambo1]

Lets hope the union endorse the 6 percent rise and lower lump sum to many short sighted posties not letting there brains kick in

What's the difference in £ terms?

and it depends on your situation which one you choose anyway....

Some people may have debts to pay, something to buy, want to invest, may be leaving the company within a year....so they'd be more likely to choose the larger lump sum which makes total sense.

Those who are committed to the company and the above does not apply to - may choose the lower lump sum.

I will look at it later, someone's saying the difference is £500 between the 2.... if so, then I may choose the smaller lump sum....

That’s correct the difference is £500ish if the back pay was calculated properly it’s a lot more. People fall for the lump sum crap every time

Example of £25,000 at April 23.
2% is £500 . So April 24 would be £25,500
6% of £25,500 is £1,530 so would be £27,030 at end of deal plus get £1500 now.

Example of £25,000 at April 23
6% is £1,500 so April 24 would be £26,500
2% of £26,500 is £530 so would be £27,030
at end of deal plus get £500 now.

Same end salary of £27,030 .
Only the lump sum is £1000 better to take the larger lump sum option.
Know which I'd sooner have.

But you are not taking into account that in the 2nd example you earn £1000 more through your salary. Both deals have the same monetary value.

No. The salary over 2 yrs works out the same, as I said.
The only difference is the lump sum, which is £1000 more for the larger, and obviously, not salary.

No, let me put it this way.
This years pay.
Example 1
25000 + 2% = 25500 + 1500 = 27000 total pay
Example 2
25000 + 6% = 26500 + 500 = 27000 total pay.

As you say both pay 27030 next year.

Over one yr, yes
Over the second yr though, your example 1 will give you an extra 6% of the 25500
And example 2 will only give 2% extra of 26500.
There's the difference if you are staying for 2 yrs

No difference.
2nd years pay.
Example 1
25500 + 6% = 27030
Example 2
26500 + 2% = 27030

But you added the one off lump sums to your example over one year! Thats why I said the overall difference in your examples ( total salary plus varying lump sums) would come from the differring amount of % increase on salary in the second yr .
It really isn't difficult to grasp.

[awalkinthepark]

So we've agreed that the monetary value of both deals is the same. The only difference is whether you get the money upfront or not. To put the difference into context the difference between putting nett 1000 into savings v nett 333 is £40 over a year. On the flipside if you intend on working overtime you have a year at a greater rate.

[Clappedoutpostie]

Chuck in getting down to 35 hours by 2025 and I would probably vote yes, might even stay at RM if they did that.

[postslippete]

even though it will take years to even break even on how much we lost due to striking.

So many people view the strikes as 'lost money'....

You didn't work those days. It's not like you worked and didn't get paid. You had a day off - yeah you might have gone down the picket line for a bit, but for most of the day you had time off from this strenuous job.

All you have to do is work some of your annual leave and you will get that 'lost' money back.

That wasn't my quote Norris - it was taurus88 and I agree with most of what he said.

Bring on more time off from this strenuous job!