CWU Has Sold US OUT on Sick Pay and IHR

[stevejm]

Walk further. Walk Later. Walk in the Dark in winter.

More Injuries. Plantar Fascitis, Knee replacements. Hip replacements. Falls. Twisted ankles. Dog bites. Back problems.

Less Sick Pay. Less IHR.

Why won't Martin Walsh or any other senior or rep address these points?

[clashcityrocker]

Why won't Martin Walsh or any other senior or rep address these points?

Why don't you write to them?

How many threads are you going to start around the same theme?
You think it is a bad agreement. Most people think it is a bad agreement but probably can't see a better one on the horizon.
You have one vote the same as everyone else. Let's all use it.

[Clairedarep]

I will ask the question in Birmingham next Thursday at the reps meeting

[koolishy67]

Last time I went on sick 2018 no plans to take IHR so I am ok

[stevejm]

I will ask the question in Birmingham next Thursday at the reps meeting

thank you - if you could report back - as you see fit - I'm sure I won't be the only one who is grateful.

[77SAMPOST77]

Last time I went on sick 2018 no plans to take IHR so I am ok

That is a selfish i am alright jack attitude to take Foolishy ,

Anybody can fall ill at any time no matter how fit you think you are .

[stevejm]

Why won't Martin Walsh or any other senior or rep address these points?

Why don't you write to them?

How many threads are you going to start around the same theme?
You think it is a bad agreement. Most people think it is a bad agreement but probably can't see a better one on the horizon.
You have one vote the same as everyone else. Let's all use it.

Hmm - you're a smart guy but your perception is lacking here in my estimation. I've actually started three threads in my time on this forum. Others have started a lot more, obviously, and sometimes just to ask "No news yet?" So if it's repetition of posts that grates with you then maybe you can look to others as well. Or just ignore - after all - the thread title makes it pretty clear what it's going to be about.

But, actually, for younger colleagues, I think long term sickness is perceived as something far off in the future if it happens to them at all. So my posts are my attempts at A/ raising awareness of this issue and B/ getting the union to respond on this specific point. As it is, Claire has offered to raise the issue.

And yes, posting threads is something I judge to be more effective than sending a letter that will end up at the bottom of somebody's in-tray at Wimbledon HQ. And I will be using my vote natch.

[stevejm]

Last time I went on sick 2018 no plans to take IHR so I am ok

There's people in their 30's who get cancer FFS - can be fit as a fiddle with best sick record then tread on a health landmine - or have an industrial accident.

[chuckychucks]

Walk further. Walk Later. Walk in the Dark in winter.

More Injuries. Plantar Fascitis, Knee replacements. Hip replacements. Falls. Twisted ankles. Dog bites. Back problems.

Less Sick Pay. Less IHR.

Why won't Martin Walsh or any other senior or rep address these points?

I’m with you on this, I’m majorly pissed that they sold us out on a lot of things to save their own skin…if this goes through I will never support the union again.

#stand by your post —utter shite

[guardianangel]

The IHR is a massive red line for me ive seen so many of my mates in their 50's have to go down the IHR after giving most of their working life to the business and most find it hard to get other jobs through knee, hip and back problems,sometimes they are unable to work again so have to go on benefits,personally i think its a disgrace giving away this benefit ,they have a duty of care to us who do they think they are just chucking you on the scrapheap,in my opinion they have done this on purpose because they know they have an ageing workforce and with longer more physically demanding walks on the way they want to shirk their responsibility,i'll never vote for any deal while this is still in it.

[Wigglypark]

CWU tried their best but it is obviously not good enough,
time they stood down and admitted it’s a crap deal and they are out of touch with the membership so therefore the only conclusion is they have been bought out by RM and want to protect their little perks (full time release,the yearly beano called Conference including envelope for each attendee which is apparently for food and drink, £300 plus )Reps signing for night duties to get max allowances even though they have never worked nights in their lives)this from a union who over the years has failed to accrue any sort of strike fund but has looked after it reps at the expense of the membership.Rant over

[Martin Walsh]

No one has sold anyone out.

Royal Mail were going to impose all the changes in sick at the end of May. They had already trained their managers up on it. They claim sick pay costs them 200 hundred million per year and is higher at 8.5% then it was during Covid.

The choice for the union was did we allow them to impose it by executive? Or did we try and modify those changes.

At any given time only 20% of the workforce is ever impact by the 3 changes in the sick procedure. Do you believe the other 80% would have taken more strike action to stop those changes ??

Instead we modified the changes by

1. 55% of those 20% who have more than than one sick never have a third absence so we reduce the SSP to just 2 days for the second absence.

2. That if sick reduces from 8% to 5.5% for 6 months then for the next 6 months SSP would be removed.

3. That the joint working parties would work to try and find solutions for some of periods of sick. For example the October half term holiday sickness went to to 12% so this is a potentially holiday issues rather sick so can we adjust the half term leave spread. Other issues will be can we support mental health.

4. That the first and second stage warnings would not be automatically issued as they originally wanted.

5: The agreement gives a minimum amount of ill health retirement an individual would get which would also include 12 weeks leave of notice and any outstanding annual leave. It is a reduction on the current agreement but Royal Mail were going to impose that for every week you were sick leading up to your ill health retirement your compensation would be reduced by one week.

The rest of the current attendance remains including accidents on duties , dog bites and those covered by the equality act.

So if you deciding to vote down the agreement on the attendance procedure your going to get worse imposed.

This is why It is important members are fully updated on why the CWU believe this is the best agreement which can be negotiated.

If members choose to reject it then that is their right but please go into it with your eyes wide open and Royal Mail are legally obligated to introduce a business plan without or without an agreement to avoid administration.

The difference between those two positions is that there is a price associated to an agreement with the union and that is worth to Royal Mail changing their position on almost every issuing reducing their predicted savings on each aspect of the agreement.

Or if they is no agreement then they will possibly go back to their original plans as that will produce more savings even without the support of the workforce or union.

That is the choice you have.

Anyone who thinks we going to get the members out like before Christmas is dreaming. Even on this site you had many posters demanding a vote just before Good Friday when talks had broken down and Royal Mail came out and said that was the end of the road and there was no deal.

Instead we held our nerve and got further concessions on later starts , sick pay , new entrants , job security and data use.

[fallenworld2022]

totally sold out! im still suffering from shock about the measly £500 only thats on offer, should be at least £1500 lump sum plus backdated pay, absoulte sickner

[77SAMPOST77]

No one has sold anyone out.

Royal Mail were going to impose all the changes in sick at the end of May. They had already trained their managers up on it. They claim sick pay costs them 200 hundred million per year and is higher at 8.5% then it was during Covid.

The choice for the union was did we allow them to impose it by executive? Or did we try and modify those changes.

At any given time only 20% of the workforce is ever impact by the 3 changes in the sick procedure. Do you believe the other 80% would have taken more strike action to stop those changes ??

Instead we modified the changes by

1. 55% of those 20% who have more than than one sick never have a third absence so we reduce the SSP to just 2 days for the second absence.

2. That if sick reduces from 8% to 5.5% for 6 months then for the next 6 months SSP would be removed.

3. That the joint working parties would work to try and find solutions for some of periods of sick. For example the October half term holiday sickness went to to 12% so this is a potentially holiday issues rather sick so can we adjust the half term leave spread. Other issues will be can we support mental health.

4. That the first and second stage warnings would not be automatically issued as they originally wanted.

5: The agreement gives a minimum amount of ill health retirement an individual would get which would also include 12 weeks leave of notice and any outstanding annual leave. It is a reduction on the current agreement but Royal Mail were going to impose that for every week you were sick leading up to your ill health retirement your compensation would be reduced by one week.

The rest of the current attendance remains including accidents on duties , dog bites and those covered by the equality act.

So if you deciding to vote down the agreement on the attendance procedure your going to get worse imposed.

This is why It is important members are fully updated on why the CWU believe this is the best agreement which can be negotiated.

If members choose to reject it then that is their right but please go into it with your eyes wide open and Royal Mail are legally obligated to introduce a business plan without or without an agreement to avoid administration.

The difference between those two positions is that there is a price associated to an agreement with the union and that is worth to Royal Mail changing their position on almost every issuing reducing their predicted savings on each aspect of the agreement.

Or if they is no agreement then they will possibly go back to their original plans as that will produce more savings even without the support of the workforce or union.

That is the choice you have.

Anyone who thinks we going to get the members out like before Christmas is dreaming. Even on this site you had many posters demanding a vote just before Good Friday when talks had broken down and Royal Mail came out and said that was the end of the road and there was no deal.

Instead we held our nerve and got further concessions on later starts , sick pay , new entrants , job security and data use.

Martin you did not hold your nerve at all , You bottled it ,

£200 million a year on sick pay (they claim), any proof on that Martin because that seems a bit exaggerated ,

Now you try and use scare tactics again by using the administration word ,

You are flogging a dead horse Martin .

[carlosevenos]

No one has sold anyone out.

Royal Mail were going to impose all the changes in sick at the end of May. They had already trained their managers up on it. They claim sick pay costs them 200 hundred million per year and is higher at 8.5% then it was during Covid.

The choice for the union was did we allow them to impose it by executive? Or did we try and modify those changes.

At any given time only 20% of the workforce is ever impact by the 3 changes in the sick procedure. Do you believe the other 80% would have taken more strike action to stop those changes ??

Instead we modified the changes by

1. 55% of those 20% who have more than than one sick never have a third absence so we reduce the SSP to just 2 days for the second absence.

2. That if sick reduces from 8% to 5.5% for 6 months then for the next 6 months SSP would be removed.

3. That the joint working parties would work to try and find solutions for some of periods of sick. For example the October half term holiday sickness went to to 12% so this is a potentially holiday issues rather sick so can we adjust the half term leave spread. Other issues will be can we support mental health.

4. That the first and second stage warnings would not be automatically issued as they originally wanted.

5: The agreement gives a minimum amount of ill health retirement an individual would get which would also include 12 weeks leave of notice and any outstanding annual leave. It is a reduction on the current agreement but Royal Mail were going to impose that for every week you were sick leading up to your ill health retirement your compensation would be reduced by one week.

The rest of the current attendance remains including accidents on duties , dog bites and those covered by the equality act.

So if you deciding to vote down the agreement on the attendance procedure your going to get worse imposed.

This is why It is important members are fully updated on why the CWU believe this is the best agreement which can be negotiated.

If members choose to reject it then that is their right but please go into it with your eyes wide open and Royal Mail are legally obligated to introduce a business plan without or without an agreement to avoid administration.

The difference between those two positions is that there is a price associated to an agreement with the union and that is worth to Royal Mail changing their position on almost every issuing reducing their predicted savings on each aspect of the agreement.

Or if they is no agreement then they will possibly go back to their original plans as that will produce more savings even without the support of the workforce or union.

That is the choice you have.

Anyone who thinks we going to get the members out like before Christmas is dreaming. Even on this site you had many posters demanding a vote just before Good Friday when talks had broken down and Royal Mail came out and said that was the end of the road and there was no deal.

Instead we held our nerve and got further concessions on later starts , sick pay , new entrants , job security and data use.

How can they impose that sick pay change by executive action? Isn't sick pay in our contracts? If they can change it, why would union agree to such a lacklustle contract with so many loop holes? Or is it not possible to get any binding agreements?