New sick policy

[chickenwittle]

Is there a specific date for this to begin or will it be when /if the agreement gets voted in . Also will there be an amnesty on previous sickness, I say this because if you had gone sick earlier in the year and then went sick soon after the new policy was implemented, would that then count as your 2nd sickness and then fall under SSP .

[Rommagic]

August.

[chickenwittle]

August.

Thanks but what about an amnesty? Would an absence straight after the agreement count as 2nd absence and fall under ssp if you had gone sick earlier in the year.

[ted_e_bear]

viewtopic.php?f=87&t=109639

It reads to me that the new rules would apply from the start so your 1st absence in 12 months from the 1st August regardless of previous absences should be fully paid, then further absences paid as per the agreement.

No idea if they can implement it if the agreement doesn't get voted in though, also wonder what happens if you're currently on a stage 1 or 2 I'd guess the new stricter rules would apply before you get off them.

[Burghboy]

viewtopic.php?f=87&t=109639

It reads to me that the new rules would apply from the start so your 1st absence in 12 months from the 1st August regardless of previous absences should be fully paid, then further absences paid as per the agreement.

No idea if they can implement it if the agreement doesn't get voted in though, also wonder what happens if you're currently on a stage 1 or 2 I'd guess the new stricter rules would apply before you get off them.

Can’t implement it if there is no agreement, as it’s effectively changing your contract terms and conditions which is illegal.

[LouBarlow]

viewtopic.php?f=87&t=109639

It reads to me that the new rules would apply from the start so your 1st absence in 12 months from the 1st August regardless of previous absences should be fully paid, then further absences paid as per the agreement.

No idea if they can implement it if the agreement doesn't get voted in though, also wonder what happens if you're currently on a stage 1 or 2 I'd guess the new stricter rules would apply before you get off them.

Can’t implement it if there is no agreement, as it’s effectively changing your contract terms and conditions which is illegal.

There is nothing in your contract in regard sick pay and if this deal is turned down, there is literally no deal in place, as previous agreements were torn up when we embarked on industrial action last year due to the clause in them specifically mentioning this. Royal Mail are free to impose changes to sickness policies with or without the proposed agreement being in place.

[thefox]

So as usual nobody knows for sure then and is just posting what they think will happen.

[Acca Dacca]

viewtopic.php?f=87&t=109639

It reads to me that the new rules would apply from the start so your 1st absence in 12 months from the 1st August regardless of previous absences should be fully paid, then further absences paid as per the agreement.

No idea if they can implement it if the agreement doesn't get voted in though, also wonder what happens if you're currently on a stage 1 or 2 I'd guess the new stricter rules would apply before you get off them.

Can’t implement it if there is no agreement, as it’s effectively changing your contract terms and conditions which is illegal.

There is nothing in your contract in regard sick pay and if this deal is turned down, there is literally no deal in place, as previous agreements were torn up when we embarked on industrial action last year due to the clause in them specifically mentioning this. Royal Mail are free to impose changes to sickness policies with or without the proposed agreement being in place.

Explain this judgement then


https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... _Final.pdf



On 29th March 2021 the claimant was absent from work until her return to work on 2nd December 2021. In the period 29th March up to and including the 13th April 2021, that being the first two weeks of the claimant’s absence, the claimant received full contractual sick pay from the respondent. In that period the claimant had and, it is separately a matter of concession by the respondents, an entitlement in law, to receive full contractual sick pay under and in terms of her Contract of Employment and the respondent’s sick pay policies.

[LouBarlow]

viewtopic.php?f=87&t=109639

It reads to me that the new rules would apply from the start so your 1st absence in 12 months from the 1st August regardless of previous absences should be fully paid, then further absences paid as per the agreement.

No idea if they can implement it if the agreement doesn't get voted in though, also wonder what happens if you're currently on a stage 1 or 2 I'd guess the new stricter rules would apply before you get off them.

Can’t implement it if there is no agreement, as it’s effectively changing your contract terms and conditions which is illegal.

There is nothing in your contract in regard sick pay and if this deal is turned down, there is literally no deal in place, as previous agreements were torn up when we embarked on industrial action last year due to the clause in them specifically mentioning this. Royal Mail are free to impose changes to sickness policies with or without the proposed agreement being in place.

Explain this judgement then


https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... _Final.pdf



On 29th March 2021 the claimant was absent from work until her return to work on 2nd December 2021. In the period 29th March up to and including the 13th April 2021, that being the first two weeks of the claimant’s absence, the claimant received full contractual sick pay from the respondent. In that period the claimant had and, it is separately a matter of concession by the respondents, an entitlement in law, to receive full contractual sick pay under and in terms of her Contract of Employment and the respondent’s sick pay policies.

Check the date - we hadn’t been on strike back then and there was still an agreement in place. We have no agreements now, for the reason I mentioned. Employment law will be the only thing RM will have to adhere to, if a no vote comes about. That is why we have had a ton of executive actions rammed in over the last year, which were covered in the agreements we tore up.

[Acca Dacca]

viewtopic.php?f=87&t=109639

It reads to me that the new rules would apply from the start so your 1st absence in 12 months from the 1st August regardless of previous absences should be fully paid, then further absences paid as per the agreement.

No idea if they can implement it if the agreement doesn't get voted in though, also wonder what happens if you're currently on a stage 1 or 2 I'd guess the new stricter rules would apply before you get off them.

Can’t implement it if there is no agreement, as it’s effectively changing your contract terms and conditions which is illegal.

There is nothing in your contract in regard sick pay and if this deal is turned down, there is literally no deal in place, as previous agreements were torn up when we embarked on industrial action last year due to the clause in them specifically mentioning this. Royal Mail are free to impose changes to sickness policies with or without the proposed agreement being in place.

Explain this judgement then


https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... _Final.pdf



On 29th March 2021 the claimant was absent from work until her return to work on 2nd December 2021. In the period 29th March up to and including the 13th April 2021, that being the first two weeks of the claimant’s absence, the claimant received full contractual sick pay from the respondent. In that period the claimant had and, it is separately a matter of concession by the respondents, an entitlement in law, to receive full contractual sick pay under and in terms of her Contract of Employment and the respondent’s sick pay policies.

Check the date - we hadn’t been on strike back then and there was still an agreement in place. We have no agreements now, for the reason I mentioned. Employment law will be the only thing RM will have to adhere to, if a no vote comes about. That is why we have had a ton of executive actions rammed in over the last year, which were covered in the agreements we tore up.

Thats not how it works.

And you said that sick pay wasnt contractual - when ive shown it is.

[LouBarlow]

viewtopic.php?f=87&t=109639

It reads to me that the new rules would apply from the start so your 1st absence in 12 months from the 1st August regardless of previous absences should be fully paid, then further absences paid as per the agreement.

No idea if they can implement it if the agreement doesn't get voted in though, also wonder what happens if you're currently on a stage 1 or 2 I'd guess the new stricter rules would apply before you get off them.

Can’t implement it if there is no agreement, as it’s effectively changing your contract terms and conditions which is illegal.

There is nothing in your contract in regard sick pay and if this deal is turned down, there is literally no deal in place, as previous agreements were torn up when we embarked on industrial action last year due to the clause in them specifically mentioning this. Royal Mail are free to impose changes to sickness policies with or without the proposed agreement being in place.

Explain this judgement then


https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... _Final.pdf



On 29th March 2021 the claimant was absent from work until her return to work on 2nd December 2021. In the period 29th March up to and including the 13th April 2021, that being the first two weeks of the claimant’s absence, the claimant received full contractual sick pay from the respondent. In that period the claimant had and, it is separately a matter of concession by the respondents, an entitlement in law, to receive full contractual sick pay under and in terms of her Contract of Employment and the respondent’s sick pay policies.

Check the date - we hadn’t been on strike back then and there was still an agreement in place. We have no agreements now, for the reason I mentioned. Employment law will be the only thing RM will have to adhere to, if a no vote comes about. That is why we have had a ton of executive actions rammed in over the last year, which were covered in the agreements we tore up.

Thats not how it works.

And you said that sick pay wasnt contractual - when ive shown it is.

There is a reason that contractual is in “” in that statement. The agreement referred to in that judgement is based on the sick pay policy at the time. That is as far as sick pay is ‘contractual’ in that regard. You go look in your contract you signed when you started and you will see this for yourself.

[Acca Dacca]

viewtopic.php?f=87&t=109639

It reads to me that the new rules would apply from the start so your 1st absence in 12 months from the 1st August regardless of previous absences should be fully paid, then further absences paid as per the agreement.

No idea if they can implement it if the agreement doesn't get voted in though, also wonder what happens if you're currently on a stage 1 or 2 I'd guess the new stricter rules would apply before you get off them.

Can’t implement it if there is no agreement, as it’s effectively changing your contract terms and conditions which is illegal.

There is nothing in your contract in regard sick pay and if this deal is turned down, there is literally no deal in place, as previous agreements were torn up when we embarked on industrial action last year due to the clause in them specifically mentioning this. Royal Mail are free to impose changes to sickness policies with or without the proposed agreement being in place.

Explain this judgement then


https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... _Final.pdf



On 29th March 2021 the claimant was absent from work until her return to work on 2nd December 2021. In the period 29th March up to and including the 13th April 2021, that being the first two weeks of the claimant’s absence, the claimant received full contractual sick pay from the respondent. In that period the claimant had and, it is separately a matter of concession by the respondents, an entitlement in law, to receive full contractual sick pay under and in terms of her Contract of Employment and the respondent’s sick pay policies.

Check the date - we hadn’t been on strike back then and there was still an agreement in place. We have no agreements now, for the reason I mentioned. Employment law will be the only thing RM will have to adhere to, if a no vote comes about. That is why we have had a ton of executive actions rammed in over the last year, which were covered in the agreements we tore up.

Thats not how it works.

And you said that sick pay wasnt contractual - when ive shown it is.

There is a reason that contractual is in “” in that statement. The agreement referred to in that judgement is based on the sick pay policy at the time. That is as far as sick pay is ‘contractual’ in that regard. You go look in your contract you signed when you started and you will see this for yourself.

This applies to new entrants, not current employees

https://www.cwu.org/wp-content/uploads/ ... Grades.pdf
___________________________________________________________________________
''Paragraph 11.2 – Sick Pay and Sickness
“The Sick Pay and Sick Pay Conditions Policy does not form part of your contract of
employment…”
This conflicts with the previous wording by replacing the word “does” with “does not”
in the sentence above. ''
____________________________________________________________________________


So our current contracts should therefore state that the sick pay and sick pay conditions policy does form part our contract of employment

[LouBarlow]

viewtopic.php?f=87&t=109639

It reads to me that the new rules would apply from the start so your 1st absence in 12 months from the 1st August regardless of previous absences should be fully paid, then further absences paid as per the agreement.

No idea if they can implement it if the agreement doesn't get voted in though, also wonder what happens if you're currently on a stage 1 or 2 I'd guess the new stricter rules would apply before you get off them.

Can’t implement it if there is no agreement, as it’s effectively changing your contract terms and conditions which is illegal.

There is nothing in your contract in regard sick pay and if this deal is turned down, there is literally no deal in place, as previous agreements were torn up when we embarked on industrial action last year due to the clause in them specifically mentioning this. Royal Mail are free to impose changes to sickness policies with or without the proposed agreement being in place.

Explain this judgement then


https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... _Final.pdf



On 29th March 2021 the claimant was absent from work until her return to work on 2nd December 2021. In the period 29th March up to and including the 13th April 2021, that being the first two weeks of the claimant’s absence, the claimant received full contractual sick pay from the respondent. In that period the claimant had and, it is separately a matter of concession by the respondents, an entitlement in law, to receive full contractual sick pay under and in terms of her Contract of Employment and the respondent’s sick pay policies.

Check the date - we hadn’t been on strike back then and there was still an agreement in place. We have no agreements now, for the reason I mentioned. Employment law will be the only thing RM will have to adhere to, if a no vote comes about. That is why we have had a ton of executive actions rammed in over the last year, which were covered in the agreements we tore up.

Thats not how it works.

And you said that sick pay wasnt contractual - when ive shown it is.

There is a reason that contractual is in “” in that statement. The agreement referred to in that judgement is based on the sick pay policy at the time. That is as far as sick pay is ‘contractual’ in that regard. You go look in your contract you signed when you started and you will see this for yourself.

This applies to new entrants, not current employees

https://www.cwu.org/wp-content/uploads/ ... Grades.pdf
___________________________________________________________________________
''Paragraph 11.2 – Sick Pay and Sickness
“The Sick Pay and Sick Pay Conditions Policy does not form part of your contract of
employment…”
This conflicts with the previous wording by replacing the word “does” with “does not”
in the sentence above. ''
____________________________________________________________________________


So our current contracts should therefore state that the sick pay and sick pay conditions policy does form part our contract of employment

That whole statement proves my point. Since the agreements were torn up by us, they are not obligated by them and can modify contracts because there is no legal protection in place now.

Either way, if the vote comes back a no, we will see for ourselves who is right.

[Acca Dacca]

New contracts Lou.

You said that our contracts never had any mention of sick pay in them - ive just shown that they do and what RM have changed NEW future contracts to

That doesnt include our current contracts of those employed before they changed the wording on new entrants contracts to NOT include sick pay as contractual

RM serving notice on parts of an agreement didnt mean everyones entire contract of employment was null and void like you seem to think is the case

[TopperGas]

I don't believe an employer can change it's sickness policy without it's employee's prior agreement, if it could then surely RM would just announce from XX date that the new policy would be in force, instead of trying to get our prior agreement?

RM could always go down the Fire & Rehire route but that seems unlikely as it opens them up to potential Employment Tribunal claims, possibly somebody with health issues could claim that they are being discriminated against by the new policy??