CWU Has Sold US OUT on Sick Pay and IHR

[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.

There's no way it costs them 200 million a year. Even if every employee was sick 115,000 for 5 days a week, It still woudln;t break 100,000,000 if I got my maths right. It's ridiculous

[Rumple]

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.

Mr Walsh. I understand what you are saying here. Could you please explain to me, as plain as possible, “win the ballot, win the dispute!” Because I totally misinterpreted it.

[carlosevenos]

why did the union promise so much if they couldn't deliver martin? They mislead their members, and that's why everyone doesn't think the deal is good enough.

[chuckychucks]

A company owned by multi billionaires but they have no money the truth is that they are stripping as much as they can to feed their greed…their biggest asset comes a very distant second..I’ve never been so angry

[chuckychucks]

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.

Since you seem to be in the loop do you know if the UNUM option is and will be still available if this deal gets voted in?

It’s disgusting that the lump sum has been reduced as I thought it was already crap at 46 weeks but there seems to be no information on the UNUM with pension and 3 years at half pay option under IHR

[denhamhoop]

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.

There's no way it costs them 200 million a year. Even if every employee was sick 115,000 for 5 days a week, It still woudln;t break 100,000,000 if I got my maths right. It's ridiculous

I would guess Royal Mail's calculation factors in the cost of Casuals to replace those off sick which is quite ironic because I cannot honestly remember ever seeing a single duty ever covered by overtime or casuals whilst someone is off sick. I work in Processing so maybe on Walks they do actually replace someone who is off sick.

[enskied]

No they don't cover walks with casuals (yet)
They either lapse it or ignore it. The tracked will go out with collection drivers or by hook or crook.

[Boltonian-White]

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.

yeah steve, you're so anti union it's embarrassing. Same theme and very, very boring. Complaining on an internet forum constantly makes people question why you're even here and what your agenda is. Just what are you trying to achieve? Anyone with half a brain can work it out so give it a rest eh. Boring

[enskied]

Mr Walsh,
You say royal mail has a legal obligation to come up with a business plan before it goes into administration.

That would have to include the delivery of the mail. Which as we know from the parliamentary committee meetings, they have no plan for.

This agreement has a massive detrimental affect on delivery staff and nothing in it has secure our jobs. We will be picked off and replaced one by one.
You have no power to stop it.

[Valentina@1]

Martin Walsh is shameless,he’s totally switched allegiance,I’m in total shock.this stinks

[stevejm]

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,

Thank you for taking the time to monitor the posts and especially respond to them and this one in particular.

You say this issue only affects 20% of the workforce. I disagree. maybe 20% over one year, but what about the next year or over the course of a life-time? There are 100,000 heart attacks in the UK every year. That is 0.15% of the UK's population affected every year. Imagine if the government turned around and said "we don't need to fund specialist surgeons/emergency response/public health education because it affects such a small amount of the population." such a position would be deemed as inept short-term planning. For all those posties who are under 40 and there bodies are holding up until now - you should be advocating for them too - even though they likely form a large part of the 80% with one sick absence per year - because in the years to come a sizeable proportion of them with suffer ill health due to body breaking down.

Regards your points 1. through 5. While it is good that you negotiated less harsh terms, I would say that you could and should have negotiated a good deal harder. And especially with IHR. For me, and with no vested personal issue but advocating for all, IHR, much more than SSP should have been a red line. Getting between 12 and 18 weeks pay after giving perhaps 30 -45 years effort is a very poor compensation for flogging our bodies in a health-detrimental work place. Those colleagues who busted a gut for all those years and then are unfit to work get a pat on the pack and 3-4 month's pay - what are they supposed to do with that?

CWU needs to put it's thinking caps on and come up with suggestions when around the negotiating table. Colleagues pulling sickies is an issue. Colleagues skiving off for months on end is a disaster for RM finances and affects all the rest of us as in these new policies.

£200 million is a horrendous figure but I can see it because its the people who are off long term sick who cost so much. I would advocate that R.M buys group income protection or similar to offset this cost https://www.metlife.co.uk/intermediary/ ... %20period.

Regards all health and mental health in particular I would advocate early intervention. Once a person is depressed it's difficult to treat them - there is quite good support but it probably needs to be promoted better. Maybe more health checks for new employees. Orthopedic specialists doing checkups and interventions on staff. If one expert checks 4 people a day that is a 1000 per year. Could have a checkup every two years. meaning perhaps a team of 60 specialists needed to check every body every 2 years. A team of 60 specialist might be needed. Would cost maybe £3 million per year - it should easily pay for itself. Union should be suggesting these things. If they already are, apologies, but I'm unaware of such initiatives.

The point is, CWU were in a dispute for a year. Around the negotiating table, on and off, for months. There was plenty of time to advocate solutions PRIOR to making an agreement than to backslide and put in clauses, paraphrasing, about "working parties will be formed to discuss" What incentive has either R.M or CWU to form working parties after the agreement has already been signed off?

[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.

yeah steve, you're so anti union it's embarrassing. Same theme and very, very boring. Complaining on an internet forum constantly makes people question why you're even here and what your agenda is. Just what are you trying to achieve? Anyone with half a brain can work it out so give it a rest eh. Boring

Pro union but anti this agreement. Meanwhile, thanks for bumping this thread to the top of the list.

[sweepster70]

Martin Walsh is shameless,he’s totally switched allegiance,I’m in total shock.this stinks

Yes, I'm sure you're in total shock. Stop going overboard, you're a grown man.
Oh and please in future, it might be better not typing while on the toilet. We don't want to know your poo stinks.

[Boltonian-White]

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.

yeah steve, you're so anti union it's embarrassing. Same theme and very, very boring. Complaining on an internet forum constantly makes people question why you're even here and what your agenda is. Just what are you trying to achieve? Anyone with half a brain can work it out so give it a rest eh. Boring

Pro union but anti this agreement. Meanwhile, thanks for bumping this thread to the top of the list.

still boring steve. try hard

[iHateD2Ds]

Of course we have, use your vote.