Equalisation

[TopperGas]

I can't see the OT rate being reduced is aiding anybody apart from RM, it seems to me that they've decided to make equalisation cost neutral i.e. the 1.75% pay rise will be paid for them by the reduction in the OT rate.

Perhaps RM really are skint and they simply can't afford equalisation?

After the initial anger that losing that OT rate is a pay cut for me, I'm actually not that bothered by it. I've been averaging around 60 hours a week throughout christmas pressures, sometimes hitting 65 hours or so chasing that OT rate and probably average around 52 hours a week over the year.
Those big weeks are tiring and I've been thinking of reducing my hours to focus on other side projects that I can make an income from and this change just makes it so I'll never work more than 50 hours a week at RM now.

But if others do this and so much of the christmas pressure relies on people doing massive amounts of overtime, who will do the work if parcels keep increasing? Are they planning on increasing staff levels to compensate for it? More staff means more contracted hours paid out and RM runs on overtime. I wonder if this is actually a mistake from RM or if I'm just overthinking it. Interesting to see how all these changes effect the busiest time of year.

They are probably working on the basis legacy staff are prepared to work OT at the flat rate but completely overlooking it's £15+ p/h not £13 p/h??

[goldy2007]

What is OT rate for legacy and does it drop further still after 10 hrs

[yellowbelly]

our negotiating team sold them yes vote on the last deal that we would all be equal by sept25, something that was never going to happen whoever run/owned RMG
then give them a kick in the ghoulies and say it's now jan27, probably then extended again,
they promised all that our pay trickle for years 2 & 3 meant that we would all get an inflation based raise, no matter
if it ends up a "no" vote then i really hope that all of those involved in negotiations over what seems an eternity admit they cannot do anything else and will all resign to give way to someone else to have a go at representing us, otherwise more and more will quit the union

New contracts only form a small minority of the CWU members voting, whatever they are offered as part of the deal is really irrelevant to the outcome of the vote.

I stand to be corrected but I understand that the additional 1.75% will only go to new entrants to vote on - of which, again I stand to be corrected, there are approx 15k members

Where do you understand this from?

From one of our Reps
We have about 12 and to be honest they came back from London in a state of confusion -

So most of 15k vote no to their part of the resolution and most of the remainder vote yes to their part. Then what happens?

[pm55]

What is OT rate for legacy and does it drop further still after 10 hrs

Not 100% but think it's currently 13.96 for 37-47 hours, then 13.50 after that for legacy. After the 3% increase this will become 14.37 and 13.91. Both rates higher than the new entrants standard rate of 13.68.

I could be wrong but some quick maths: 70 hours legacy is ~£1023 with 6 hours of paid breaks, 70 hours on new entrant terms £957 (down from ~£1012) with no paid breaks. Massive difference for anyone doing these hours as in reality legacy works only 64 hours but gets paid for 70. That's about an average of £16 an hour if legacy does 70 hours. New contract makes £875 doing 64 hours after this "equalization".

[goldy2007]

What is OT rate for legacy and does it drop further still after 10 hrs

Not 100% but think it's currently 13.96 for 37-47 hours, then 13.50 after that for legacy. After the 3% increase this will become 14.37 and 13.91. Both rates higher than the new entrants standard rate of 13.68.

I could be wrong but some quick maths: 70 hours legacy is ~£1023 with 6 hours of paid breaks, 70 hours on new entrant terms £957 (down from ~£1012) with no paid breaks. Massive difference for anyone doing these hours as in reality legacy works only 64 hours but gets paid for 70. That's about an average of £16 an hour if legacy does 70 hours. New contract makes £875 doing 64 hours after this "equalization".

Cheers

[pm55]

They are probably working on the basis legacy staff are prepared to work OT at the flat rate but completely overlooking it's £15+ p/h not £13 p/h??

True. I suppose someone starting after the deal won't know the difference, but for anyone on the new contracts before this deal are you willing to do more work for less money when they're throwing the word equalization around?

If you have an excellent base rate for your 37 hours, the overtime probably feels like a bonus. But when your base rate is bad it's a different story. That 1.25x was an opportunity to improve your overall hourly rate. Have no idea how this will play out, not everyone is in the position to just say oh well I'll just work less hours and make less than before. This will only affect a minority of new entrants but is pretty dirty towards those who NEED those hours.

I'd love to know the retention rate of those who do 50+ hours a week after these changes on the new terms. Is it actually in RMs best interest to lose those types of people?

[TopperGas]

It's probably to far forward thinking for RM but the sensible move would have been to keep the present OT rate for existing new contracts until pay is ever fully equalised but give new contract starters from 1 April just the flat OT rate.

Perhaps that's a concession they kept have up their sleeves if it ever looks likely to be a No vote??

[Valentina@1]

When’s this VOTE? ……I don’t think there will be one,it’s already agreed.

[world class male]

our negotiating team sold them yes vote on the last deal that we would all be equal by sept25, something that was never going to happen whoever run/owned RMG
then give them a kick in the ghoulies and say it's now jan27, probably then extended again,
they promised all that our pay trickle for years 2 & 3 meant that we would all get an inflation based raise, no matter
if it ends up a "no" vote then i really hope that all of those involved in negotiations over what seems an eternity admit they cannot do anything else and will all resign to give way to someone else to have a go at representing us, otherwise more and more will quit the union

New contracts only form a small minority of the CWU members voting, whatever they are offered as part of the deal is really irrelevant to the outcome of the vote.

I stand to be corrected but I understand that the additional 1.75% will only go to new entrants to vote on - of which, again I stand to be corrected, there are approx 15k members

the term i used "kick in the ghoulies" refers to the extra 1.75%
they were promised and the cwu posters still up in our office made it look guaranteed of equal pay & paid breaks

[postslippete]

I'd love to know the retention rate of those who do 50+ hours a week after these changes on the new terms. Is it actually in RMs best interest to lose those types of people?

There will probably be a bit of resentment but the business is determined to reduce overall overtime. The overtime rates for FT legacy have not kept pace with the contractual hourly rate for many years. It's something that the CWU have overlooked in many pay deals - but this one is deliberate. Overtime is expensive and signals poor workforce planning. RM usually prefer contracted hours that match the workload with part-time flexibility and better attendance patterns

[TopperGas]

I'd love to know the retention rate of those who do 50+ hours a week after these changes on the new terms. Is it actually in RMs best interest to lose those types of people?

There will probably be a bit of resentment but the business is determined to reduce overall overtime. The overtime rates for FT legacy have not kept pace with the contractual hourly rate for many years. It's something that the CWU have overlooked in many pay deals - but this one is deliberate. Overtime is expensive and signals poor workforce planning. RM usually prefer contracted hours that match the workload with part-time flexibility and better attendance patterns

One look at our daily office OT sheets suggests RM is failing hopelessly then? Although it's not helped by keeping staff on PT contracts for years when they are continually working FT hours.

[A2B]

Overtime is expensive and signals poor workforce planning. RM usually prefer contracted hours that match the workload with part-time flexibility and better attendance patterns

Got to disagree with that, offices run on overtime because it's cheaper than employing another person with the added costs involved to the company either in the short or long term.

Any company would rather be understaffed than overstaffed, they would rather get more from existing staff than employ someone who they may not have enough work for.

[pm55]

There will probably be a bit of resentment but the business is determined to reduce overall overtime. The overtime rates for FT legacy have not kept pace with the contractual hourly rate for many years. It's something that the CWU have overlooked in many pay deals - but this one is deliberate. Overtime is expensive and signals poor workforce planning. RM usually prefer contracted hours that match the workload with part-time flexibility and better attendance patterns

But isn't overtime the best way to adjust to changing work loads? I mean, in January in our office it was busier than November and Decemeber other than the black friday deluge in November. By January, so many people were on A/L that there was literally unlimited (up to 70 hours) overtime for anyone that wanted it. If people didn't volunteer for that overtime we would have been failing T24 and T48s massively.
Compare that to the January or Feburary the year before, I can't remember which, it was dead. We would take whatever overtime was avaliable and sometimes get a max of 30 minutes worth... A lot of the part timers were talking about getting a second job there was so little work.

Doesn't overtime give the buisness flexility to adjust without them being contracted hours that they have to pay even when it's quiet?

[Hitcher]

Paying people overtime while others are going home hours early makes no sense in any business.

[TopperGas]

Paying people overtime while others are going home hours early makes no sense in any business.

I assume the business doesn't realise that staff are leaving early?