In the week that the new (non-pensionable) supplement to basic pay comes into effect my D2D and early shift allowance would have been £45.43, instead I will be paid £10.30. Who the hell thought that this was a good agreement? Why did 66% of the membership vote yes? I love my pay cut.
Coincidence or what?
In the week that the new (non-pensionable) supplement to basic pay comes into effect my D2D would have been £12.50, instead I will be paid £20.60. Who the hell allowed me to have been losing out so much during the last few years ? I love my pay rise.
Seriously though, things were going to change anyway, and there have to be some winners and some losers.
weasel wrote:Who the hell thought that this was a good agreement? Why did 66% of the membership vote yes? I love my pay cut.
They didn't.
66% of those who voted, said Yes to the deal.
What you should really be asking is why did 53,055 people NOT EVEN USE THEIR VOTE ?
When colleagues in your office agree with you that this was a cr@p deal, bear in mind at all times that there's a nearly 50% probability the person you're talking to didn't send off their completed ballot paper
Failing to vote against something, by not voting at all, is almost the same as casting a vote in favour, imho
banner18 wrote:At least the new system is fairer.
Everyone gets 51.5 pence per hour in the supplement instead of the D2D monies.
yes indeed , what could be fairer than walks with 600+ calls and walks with 200-300 calls getting the same amount , or indeed firms and indoor duties who don't deliver any D2D'S also benefitting from our increased workload , an excellent and satisfactory solution for all
banner18 wrote:At least the new system is fairer.
Everyone gets 51.5 pence per hour in the supplement instead of the D2D monies.
yes indeed , what could be fairer than walks with 600+ calls and walks with 200-300 calls getting the same amount , or indeed firms and indoor duties who don't deliver any D2D'S also benefitting from our increased workload , an excellent and satisfactory solution for all
Lounge Lizard wrote:Coincidence or what?
In the week that the new (non-pensionable) supplement to basic pay comes into effect my D2D would have been £12.50, instead I will be paid £20.60. Who the hell allowed me to have been losing out so much during the last few years ? I love my pay rise.
Seriously though, things were going to change anyway, and there have to be some winners and some losers.
Bit smug are you? You wouldn't be if the boot was on the other foot would you?
banner18 wrote:At least the new system is fairer.
Everyone gets 51.5 pence per hour in the supplement instead of the D2D monies.
How is it fair? Pro-rata supplement for part timers... yeah very fair.
I'll be paid £12.88 (25/40 of £20.60) per week for doing the same amount of D2D as a full time person on the full £20.60.
I know that my walk is supposed to be all prepped for me going in at 9am but in reality this never happens, I usually end up prepping for 20 or so minutes after I arrive and now I will also have to prep in the D2D now on top of that. I don't see why I shouldn't be paid the full £20.60 if I have to do all the prep work. I will be booking all overtime from now on, no matter if i'm even just 5 or 10 mins over, I feel screwed over.
Lounge Lizard wrote:Coincidence or what?
In the week that the new (non-pensionable) supplement to basic pay comes into effect my D2D would have been £12.50, instead I will be paid £20.60. Who the hell allowed me to have been losing out so much during the last few years ? I love my pay rise.
Seriously though, things were going to change anyway, and there have to be some winners and some losers.
No your wrong, nobody should have won or lost we should have all been equal, what was the big loss..£2 to full timers on this supplement
hummingbird's_wings wrote:
yes indeed , what could be fairer than walks with 600+ calls and walks with 200-300 calls getting the same amount , or indeed firms and indoor duties who don't deliver any D2D'S also benefitting from our increased workload , an excellent and satisfactory solution for all
But let's say the d2d market disappeared overnight.
Surely two postman, one doing 600+ calls, and the other with 200-300 calls, but both receiving the same basic pay, is still just as unfair ?
Or are you and everybody else letting the d2d issue cloud your commonsense, when you know full well there are so many factors as to why every walk is different ?
If Joe Bloggs does 600 calls in densely-packed urban housing estates, and Postie Pete does a rural devivery with 200 calls and long distances between the villages, are you going to now argue that Postie Pete should get 1/3rd of the wage that Joe Bloggs does ??????
hummingbird's_wings wrote:
yes indeed , what could be fairer than walks with 600+ calls and walks with 200-300 calls getting the same amount , or indeed firms and indoor duties who don't deliver any D2D'S also benefitting from our increased workload , an excellent and satisfactory solution for all
But let's say the d2d market disappeared overnight.
Surely two postman, one doing 600+ calls, and the other with 200-300 calls, but both receiving the same basic pay, is still just as unfair ?
Or are you and everybody else letting the d2d issue cloud your commonsense, when you know full well there are so many factors as to why every walk is different ?
If Joe Bloggs does 600 calls in densely-packed urban housing estates, and Postie Pete does a rural devivery with 200 calls and long distances between the villages, are you going to now argue that Postie Pete should get 1/3rd of the wage that Joe Bloggs does ??????
my original comment was only concerning the payment we received on the items formerly known as D2D as this was money which WAS earned solely in relation to the number of calls on each individual delivery . very obviously there are different types of delivery and given that most deliveries are supposed to be reasonably equal then yes , everyone should earn the same , but the prep and delivery of D2D was something we used to be paid for and it's hard to forget that !
spilie wrote:carnoustie why bother about fairness when mc,s got £8 for nothing under this agreement
Right then, spillie, I'll swap with you ...
You come and work in an MC that will probably close in 3 years time, and benefit to the tune of £8 x 52wks x 3
Personally, I'd rather have a guaranteed job for as long as I want it than a measly £1248, less tax
Who the hell allowed me to have been losing out so much during the last few years ? 
I love my pay rise. 
