Compulsory Redundant

[worrieddave]

Like the previous correspondent I have also been made Compulsory Redundant, in my case after over 35 years service. In my case "hanging out" for CR was the best financial option as I was able to get my pension etc plus the enhancements so I was relatively happy given that the business is no longer the one I joined, hasn't been for some years and the opportunity presented itself to enable me to get the best deal for me. The Central Functions re-org (which everyone knew was needed) has removed over 1000 posts since October with people told "take VR or it's CR for you" - the financial difference for anyone under 55 means there is no real choice for anyone in that position so RMG is legitimately able to say "minimum compulsory redundancies". CMA?? They agreed to have a ballot over CR back in October but sat on their hands long enough to avoid doing it. Re the SAE process - 140 people for the 160 "vacancies" available (but not including the posts covered by temporary promotees) and only 7% of the 140 got jobs. How, you may ask, are the VR packages being funded? Well didn't the MD get all the major suppliers together in a room before Christmas and tell them they had 10 days to produce plans reduce their costs to RMG by a collective total of £168m? Failure to comply meant complete loss of RMG business. This has all been in the public domain (press) so it's nothing new. Now the job has been (almost) completed on Central Functions it will come to business near you in due course - the MD has set the precedent by bringing in Compulsory Redundancy (after hundreds of years of a "no compulsory redundancy understanding" - never was an agreement) without a murmur from the "union" - be warned it will happen to someone you know - if you're lucky!

[Budfrog]

Like the previous correspondent I have also been made Compulsory Redundant, in my case after over 35 years service.

Dave, sorry to hear that your RM career came to such a miserable end although you are maybe one of the luckier ones at have at least received a package that was reasonable. You are quite correct that the business has changed in the past few years and the hard nosed attitude from the top is driven by greed and fear, something that wasn't as evident a few years back. The CMA have proved themselves bot worthy of the name trade union and it is no surprise that they went AWOL when you and many others needed them most. To a large extent the finger needs to be pointed at the politicians who are all too aware of what is happening top this business and condone it with their silence.

Out of interest, you mention that CR was better for you than VR. Did you not sign the waiver form to fore go any rights to MTSF that they usually stick in front of your nose (and offer free legal advice )

[sentpacking]

I'll come in on this one although it wasn't directed to me. In my case, I didn't accept the compromise agreement (VR) as it wasn't enough money I was then told that I would be made compulsory redundant. I received a formal letter two days later. I never signed anything and the business didn't invite me to. There was never any mention (to me) of MTSF although the compromise agreement was very lengthy and had a number of clauses, none of which I bothered to read after getting past the financials.

[worrieddave]

Like the previous correspondent I have also been made Compulsory Redundant, in my case after over 35 years service.

Dave, sorry to hear that your RM career came to such a miserable end although you are maybe one of the luckier ones at have at least received a package that was reasonable. You are quite correct that the business has changed in the past few years and the hard nosed attitude from the top is driven by greed and fear, something that wasn't as evident a few years back. The CMA have proved themselves bot worthy of the name trade union and it is no surprise that they went AWOL when you and many others needed them most. To a large extent the finger needs to be pointed at the politicians who are all too aware of what is happening top this business and condone it with their silence.

Out of interest, you mention that CR was better for you than VR. Did you not sign the waiver form to fore go any rights to MTSF that they usually stick in front of your nose (and offer free legal advice )

Budfrog, the "Compromise Agreement" that underpinned VR basically meant that you signed away most of your rights. The Business concentrated on the financials and that's all people looked at. RMG no longer recognises MTSF (because it's over 10 years old and has never been reviewed) although some of the appendices are still being used (Pay Protection, Excess fares etc). In my case, when presented with the third VR offer and associated Compromise Agreement my comment was "Thank you very much but, without meaning to be rude, you can stick that where the sun don't shine. I am going to hold out for CR". I did not sign anything except supplying a confirmation e mail that I accepted RMG was "dismissing me by grounds of redundancy". I think that anyone who will in future go through this sort of exercise needs to do their own number crunching asap, refuse to be bullied and/or intimidated by the language RMG uses and, having determined what is best for them, stick to their guns and hold out for as long as possible thus maximising the amount they can get out of RMG. Do your homework first!

[worrieddave]

I'll come in on this one although it wasn't directed to me. In my case, I didn't accept the compromise agreement (VR) as it wasn't enough money I was then told that I would be made compulsory redundant. I received a formal letter two days later. I never signed anything and the business didn't invite me to. There was never any mention (to me) of MTSF although the compromise agreement was very lengthy and had a number of clauses, none of which I bothered to read after getting past the financials.

The problem with the whole exercise was that too many people didn't think that RMG would actually enforce CR and I believe the business didn't want to do it for anyone other than those for whom CR was better financially than VR. The CMA (who??) told me that RMG accepted that CR would be better for some people and were prepared to live with that on the basis that CR was the only way that people would get the 6 and two thirds years enhancements that used to be commonplace. This became obvious when Vince Cable stood up in the Commons and said that the Govt would be taking over the pension fund deficit -as a result the MD has simply dumped the enhancement costs onto the Govt (taxpayer).When it finally became apparent that the MD was prepared to go down the road of CR everyone presented with the VR/CR dilemma had their own set of personal circumstances (whether they be moral or/and financial) and RMG played on that to minimise the number of CRs. Most of those made CR took their pension so RMG hasn't had large numbers of CRs but a lot of staff who "retired" - good for the PR etc? You are absolutely right in that a lot of people were so shell shocked that they didn't read the documents (apart from the financials) and simply signed them.

[NumptyBumpty]

There are many people on this site who seemed quite pleased with the Central Functions re-org, gloating over people losing their jobs. A lot of good people (and some bad) lost their jobs through the re-org. The truth is, this is coming to us all and they don't care about the MTSF. CWU represented staff in central functions have now started preference exercises so it will be interesting if CR comes our way too.

[fishtank]

There are many people on this site who seemed quite pleased with the Central Functions re-org, gloating over people losing their jobs.

Many?
How many is many?
The site has over 20,000 members.
"A few" would have been a better choice of words.

[andy2007]

Well said Fishtank! A few did express delight in the job losses. But there were others (including me) who were, and still are, upset that this happened.

[POSTMAN]

There are many people on this site who seemed quite pleased with the Central Functions re-org, gloating over people losing their jobs.

Some on here thought it was frontline managers(CMA members) who we're getting shafted,re the managers on strike at xmas threads.
They were told a hundred times it wasn't them but the threads still ran and ran.

[POSTMAN]

You are absolutely right in that a lot of people were so shell shocked that they didn't read the documents (apart from the financials) and simply signed them.

Oops.

[NumptyBumpty]

Many?
How many is many?
The site has over 20,000 members.
"A few" would have been a better choice of words.

Yes sorry, "a few" would have been more appropriate.

[Mad Max]

Just been made redundant after many years service. CMA were nowhere to be seen. What a shambles

[R@YAL F@IL]

The management structure at Royal Mail is unique in the sense that anyone, including those who cannot/fail to do a delivery duty can get a management position in which then they can tell any post person how to do the job There are a few in my office at the moment Knowing all this I would never be happy to see them lose their job, I would never wish that on anyone.

[POSTMAN]

Will you fit in a SAE?

[DGP1]

Will you fit in a SAE?

Self Addressed Envelope