Hoax or genuine?

[DirtyHarry]

What a bloody mess this company is now.

[enskied]

If this is true it could blow their whole agreement out the water

Hopefully the sick pay fiasco next. It would seem one employee has done this where a whole union and their legal team couldn't! Hang your heads in shame CWU if this is true!

seasonal hours is illegal and not paying you for 8 months is most definitely illegal,dont listen to the cwu they are in cahoots with illegal activity, maybe they could be taken to court for illegally signing us up.

Being paid for the hours you work is not really a thing. For example, RM pay you when you are off sick and doing no work. Is this open to a legal challenge from RM? No, it is part of the agreement signed on to by employer and employee via your union. As is the seasonal variation agreement.

God you are tiresome.
Even the inland revenue insists you are paid for your hours worked. Not to do so is a tax fraud

[ted_e_bear]

What I don’t understand how I can work less next summer. Unless they take off the extra half duty I’m to my time every day in the summer. Will need these two extra hours to try and complete in the winter

Nah you're missing the point, rm upper management are obsessed that we finish early every day in summer as we have next to no work

[aiden01]

Says Who?

Our resident legal expert who despite having the qualifications to earn loads of money as a QC, has decided to be a postman and impart his wisdom in a chat room.
I am sure his next few posts will outline the steps he is going to take in order to prevent the implementation of seasonal hours and we will all be very grateful.

You can't stop the seasonal hours 70 % of doughnuts voted for it,but legally you should have the choice of whether you want to be paid for hours worked ,but dont expect the cwu to fight for this their pockets are already full.

Ffs get over it the majority voted yes.

In other posts he saying the jobs never been as easy and he’s getting more pay and no he insults the people who voted yes to get him the pay rise. I don’t see it as been much different to the 5 in 1 duties where you are basically working one day a week for free. I would imagine to most it won’t be a big deal.

Yep an hes still insulting people who voted yes sad life.

[spaceman07]

What a bloody mess this company is now.

I'll be out of it soon so past caring lol...

[guardianangel]

Says Who?

Our resident legal expert who despite having the qualifications to earn loads of money as a QC, has decided to be a postman and impart his wisdom in a chat room.
I am sure his next few posts will outline the steps he is going to take in order to prevent the implementation of seasonal hours and we will all be very grateful.

You can't stop the seasonal hours 70 % of doughnuts voted for it,but legally you should have the choice of whether you want to be paid for hours worked ,but dont expect the cwu to fight for this their pockets are already full.

Ffs get over it the majority voted yes.

In other posts he saying the jobs never been as easy and he’s getting more pay and no he insults the people who voted yes to get him the pay rise. I don’t see it as been much different to the 5 in 1 duties where you are basically working one day a week for free. I would imagine to most it won’t be a big deal.

Voting yes got me a pay cut and worse conditions in no way what so ever do i see this as a win,its a sellout ,you know it i know it everyone knows it and no matter how you try and silence the no voter as in union spiel goes we are still here.

[LouBarlow]

If this is true it could blow their whole agreement out the water

Hopefully the sick pay fiasco next. It would seem one employee has done this where a whole union and their legal team couldn't! Hang your heads in shame CWU if this is true!

seasonal hours is illegal and not paying you for 8 months is most definitely illegal,dont listen to the cwu they are in cahoots with illegal activity, maybe they could be taken to court for illegally signing us up.

Being paid for the hours you work is not really a thing. For example, RM pay you when you are off sick and doing no work. Is this open to a legal challenge from RM? No, it is part of the agreement signed on to by employer and employee via your union. As is the seasonal variation agreement.

God you are tiresome.
Even the inland revenue insists you are paid for your hours worked. Not to do so is a tax fraud

So over the years then, when you went home before 12 and still were paid a day’s wage, why were you not informing the inland revenue that you were sitting on your arse at home, being paid? Hope you aren’t too tired to respond.

[Nickvilla20]

Says Who?

Our resident legal expert who despite having the qualifications to earn loads of money as a QC, has decided to be a postman and impart his wisdom in a chat room.
I am sure his next few posts will outline the steps he is going to take in order to prevent the implementation of seasonal hours and we will all be very grateful.

You can't stop the seasonal hours 70 % of doughnuts voted for it,but legally you should have the choice of whether you want to be paid for hours worked ,but dont expect the cwu to fight for this their pockets are already full.

Ffs get over it the majority voted yes.

In other posts he saying the jobs never been as easy and he’s getting more pay and no he insults the people who voted yes to get him the pay rise. I don’t see it as been much different to the 5 in 1 duties where you are basically working one day a week for free. I would imagine to most it won’t be a big deal.

Voting yes got me a pay cut and worse conditions in no way what so ever do i see this as a win,its a sellout ,you know it i know it everyone knows it and no matter how you try and silence the no voter as in union spiel goes we are still here.

You aren’t been silenced if anything you’re one of the most vocal on here. You’re entitled to an opinion but it doesn’t get you anywhere insulting the majority of the workforce.

I’m still yet to hear now voting no would have stopped any of these changes coming in.

[aiden01]

Says Who?

Our resident legal expert who despite having the qualifications to earn loads of money as a QC, has decided to be a postman and impart his wisdom in a chat room.
I am sure his next few posts will outline the steps he is going to take in order to prevent the implementation of seasonal hours and we will all be very grateful.

You can't stop the seasonal hours 70 % of doughnuts voted for it,but legally you should have the choice of whether you want to be paid for hours worked ,but dont expect the cwu to fight for this their pockets are already full.

Ffs get over it the majority voted yes.

In other posts he saying the jobs never been as easy and he’s getting more pay and no he insults the people who voted yes to get him the pay rise. I don’t see it as been much different to the 5 in 1 duties where you are basically working one day a week for free. I would imagine to most it won’t be a big deal.

Voting yes got me a pay cut and worse conditions in no way what so ever do i see this as a win,its a sellout ,you know it i know it everyone knows it and no matter how you try and silence the no voter as in union spiel goes we are still here.

Not trying to silence you just cannot see the need to abuse those of us who voted yes.

[Moose67]

Cunning plan at our office is to use seasonal hours as a way to Fergus to do more flex as there will not be any more mail in the system

[Flashman_]

If this is true it could blow their whole agreement out the water

Hopefully the sick pay fiasco next. It would seem one employee has done this where a whole union and their legal team couldn't! Hang your heads in shame CWU if this is true!

seasonal hours is illegal and not paying you for 8 months is most definitely illegal,dont listen to the cwu they are in cahoots with illegal activity, maybe they could be taken to court for illegally signing us up.

I would imagine as long as the amount we earn, divided by the hours we worked to earn it. Doesn't drop below the minimum wage, Then they can do it?

overtime rate is below basic wage but no one seems to care. you get paid less for doing overtime now than you do for normal hours. seems they can do what they like. no one cares a jot anymore

I don`t do overtime(so don't know the rates) but the law on this states as long as the average of OT and normal pay does not fall below minimum wage it is all fine and dandy!
It might be worth working this out for those winter months if you do OT because with the extra unpaid time, the average will definitely get closer to and could possibly fall below minimum wage.(especially if you do a lot of OT)

[enskied]

If this is true it could blow their whole agreement out the water

Hopefully the sick pay fiasco next. It would seem one employee has done this where a whole union and their legal team couldn't! Hang your heads in shame CWU if this is true!

seasonal hours is illegal and not paying you for 8 months is most definitely illegal,dont listen to the cwu they are in cahoots with illegal activity, maybe they could be taken to court for illegally signing us up.

Being paid for the hours you work is not really a thing. For example, RM pay you when you are off sick and doing no work. Is this open to a legal challenge from RM? No, it is part of the agreement signed on to by employer and employee via your union. As is the seasonal variation agreement.

God you are tiresome.
Even the inland revenue insists you are paid for your hours worked. Not to do so is a tax fraud

So over the years then, when you went home before 12 and still were paid a day’s wage, why were you not informing the inland revenue that you were sitting on your arse at home, being paid? Hope you aren’t too tired to respond.

Our Great Union once won something called job and finish. You have to go back a long way to hear that. We were paid to complete our days work,that's it. If I worked hard and fast my duty ended, task completed.
No need to inform the tax man. I often wouldn't go home , I'd do something I vaguely remember called overtime and of course the tax man knew that I'd gone the extra mile or 9.

[Tman]

Our Great Union once won something called job and finish. You have to go back a long way to hear that. We were paid to complete our days work,that's it. If I worked hard and fast my duty ended, task completed.
No need to inform the tax man. I often wouldn't go home , I'd do something I vaguely remember called overtime and of course the tax man knew that I'd gone the extra mile or 9.

The union didn't "win" it, RM chose to go along with it (as with all the other little perks at that time) because it suited them to. The work was completed but no-one was watching the pennies to see if savings or efficiencies were possible.
Now RM is a PLC and has shareholders and accountants aplenty, things are different.

Equally annualised hours aren't "illegal" and HMRC couldn't care less. Ship-building (with it's peaks and troughs of work) had this system decades ago.

[LouBarlow]

If this is true it could blow their whole agreement out the water

Hopefully the sick pay fiasco next. It would seem one employee has done this where a whole union and their legal team couldn't! Hang your heads in shame CWU if this is true!

seasonal hours is illegal and not paying you for 8 months is most definitely illegal,dont listen to the cwu they are in cahoots with illegal activity, maybe they could be taken to court for illegally signing us up.

Being paid for the hours you work is not really a thing. For example, RM pay you when you are off sick and doing no work. Is this open to a legal challenge from RM? No, it is part of the agreement signed on to by employer and employee via your union. As is the seasonal variation agreement.

God you are tiresome.
Even the inland revenue insists you are paid for your hours worked. Not to do so is a tax fraud

So over the years then, when you went home before 12 and still were paid a day’s wage, why were you not informing the inland revenue that you were sitting on your arse at home, being paid? Hope you aren’t too tired to respond.

Our Great Union once won something called job and finish. You have to go back a long way to hear that. We were paid to complete our days work,that's it. If I worked hard and fast my duty ended, task completed.
No need to inform the tax man. I often wouldn't go home , I'd do something I vaguely remember called overtime and of course the tax man knew that I'd gone the extra mile or 9.

Ok that’s good. So we agree then that being paid for the actual hours we work has not been a thing since either you or I started working for RM.

[CamPostie]

Our Great Union once won something called job and finish. You have to go back a long way to hear that. We were paid to complete our days work,that's it. If I worked hard and fast my duty ended, task completed.
No need to inform the tax man. I often wouldn't go home , I'd do something I vaguely remember called overtime and of course the tax man knew that I'd gone the extra mile or 9.

The union didn't "win" it, RM chose to go along with it (as with all the other little perks at that time) because it suited them to. The work was completed but no-one was watching the pennies to see if savings or efficiencies were possible.
Now RM is a PLC and has shareholders and accountants aplenty, things are different.

Equally annualised hours aren't "illegal" and HMRC couldn't care less. Ship-building (with it's peaks and troughs of work) had this system decades ago.

The way RM are doing annualised hours, it could be illegal - we would only really know if someone took the issue to court and went all the way to the point of getting a ruling.

Now the key difference between what RM are doing and annualised hours in other companies is that in those other companies their employees tend to be salaried, NOT paid by the hour.

I certainly think the arrangement RM have put forward is open to more scrutiny/question, such as how RM plan to record the hours worked but not yet paid - something that will need to be done so that any worker leaving mid year receives the monies due to them.

But more than that - this is a company that was threatening administration only a few months back - so what are RM doing with the money earned but not yet paid over that 6 month or so period?

Are they putting aside that money, ring fencing it so that each employee is ensured that money if the worst happened?

There are other legitimate questions around holiday and sick pay too. If you want to take time off during peek does that cost you 35 or 39 hours of your holiday entitlement?

If you go sick for a week during peek - does that count as 39 hours too?

Realistically, RM should have had also these sort of things worked out and set out to everyone that voted for the agreement - but the fact they didn’t opens another potential avenue for someone to bring forward a legal challenge, arguing that not all necessary facts about this arrangement were provided before union members voting on it.