Any truth in what I've been told - lump sum

[cheekymonkey91]

I have been told by two people (one a recent union rep) that whether p+l has come to your office or not, RM will be paying out the lump sum payment in March/April to the remaining workers who haven't received it. Anyone else heard this?

[fishtank]

It's probably just 2+2=?.
The agreement was supposed to end in March/April next year so it kind of makes sense but there's been nothing official yet.
Doesn't mean it is/isn't true though.

[dvbuk55]

It's probably just 2+2=?.
The agreement was supposed to end in March/April next year so it kind of makes sense but there's been nothing official yet.
Doesn't mean it is/isn't true though.

Well wouldn't that be a kick in the balls for the rest of us.

[cheekymonkey91]

TrueBlueTerrier mentioned this last month in another post;


Re: lump sum ?
by TrueBlueTerrier » Wed Sep 12, 2012 5:30 pm

I believe there is ongoing discussion about paying those that have not qualified by a certain date - April 2013 IIRC.

[arnold cheshire]

it was mentioned on here by someone official but nothings been said in our office

[Cut Off King]

Until it's in your hand, don't count on it....even then, prey RM don't try to claw it back.

[RTP]

There was talk a while back of offices that had revisions and were swindled out of the final £200 possibly getting it in the new financial year.

Wouldn't bank on though.

[dvbuk55]

There was talk a while back of offices that had revisions and were swindled out of the final £200 possibly getting it in the new financial year.

Wouldn't bank on though.

As far as I'm aware the payments were set out as staged payments for revision. If they are now to be paid out for nothing - then why have 700 offices - probably the most efficient of the 1500 been jumping through hoops. If the money could have been paid out for NOT having a revision then why didn't the union say so in the first place? It does beg the question though of the arrangement for beyond 1 April 2013 which is when the present agreement finishes. If there are talks going on then I think the membership should be privy to them. Some offices will already be on a 39 hour week so the pay rise for 2013 .....................???????????

[gb93]

Everyone will be on 39 hour week by end of Jan 2013, DM Revision done or not.
We getting told money will be paid out too, DM Revision done or not.
But I haven't spent it yet just in case

[dvbuk55]

Everyone will be on 39 hour week by end of Jan 2013, DM Revision done or not.
We getting told money will be paid out too, DM Revision done or not.
But I haven't spent it yet just in case

What a crock of s**t, this is absolutely diabolical a total farce of an agreement as many of us said from the word go. The union should hang its head in shame and never mind the members agreed to it.........they were led like sheep to the slaughter.

[DGP1]

Everyone will be on 39 hour week by end of Jan 2013, DM Revision done or not.
We getting told money will be paid out too, DM Revision done or not.
But I haven't spent it yet just in case

What a crock of s**t, this is absolutely diabolical a total farce of an agreement as many of us said from the word go. The union should hang its head in shame and never mind the members agreed to it.........they were led like sheep to the slaughter.

I don't believe they'll give out the money without the revision but it's their own fault because they haven't even tried to do the revisions properly.

[gb93]

Everyone will be on 39 hour week by end of Jan 2013, DM Revision done or not.
We getting told money will be paid out too, DM Revision done or not.
But I haven't spent it yet just in case

What a crock of s**t, this is absolutely diabolical a total farce of an agreement as many of us said from the word go. The union should hang its head in shame and never mind the members agreed to it.........they were led like sheep to the slaughter.

If RM are holding back revisions because no savings can be made or indeed hours may need to be put in.
Why shouldn't people get the money due by the agreement, if they don't RM are getting it both ways

[fishtank]

If RM are holding back revisions because no savings can be made or indeed hours may need to be put in.
Why shouldn't people get the money due by the agreement, if they don't RM are getting it both ways

You could probably argue both sides and i'm sure Royal Mail will.
In areas that have stalled or withdrawn from revision activity completely who is holding up the revisions?
Is it management's fault for breaking the agreement or an unwillingness by members to face real change in these areas unless it's entirely on their terms?
Human nature being what it is it must at least be an element of both.
You could say why should people get the money due by the agreement without the changes that are also in the agreement,if they do some members are getting it both ways.

This is not a dig at anyone,we are still due £200 but the overall position of the members in my D.O. is that it isn't worth the upheaval of another revision so they are quite happy for Royal Mail to keep the money.
They are therefore quite happy to accept the fact that it was a payment for change and if they don't want the change they will forfeit the payment.
My position is pretty neutral although i do wonder what incentive for change Royal Mail would then have to use in these areas if they simply paid out the lump sums before a revision was started.
Goodwill?

[dvbuk55]

Everyone will be on 39 hour week by end of Jan 2013, DM Revision done or not.
We getting told money will be paid out too, DM Revision done or not.
But I haven't spent it yet just in case

What a crock of s**t, this is absolutely diabolical a total farce of an agreement as many of us said from the word go. The union should hang its head in shame and never mind the members agreed to it.........they were led like sheep to the slaughter.

If RM are holding back revisions because no savings can be made or indeed hours may need to be put in.
Why shouldn't people get the money due by the agreement, if they don't RM are getting it both ways

Simple really it is the agreement that stipulates what the payment is for - it doesn't suggest that failing to enable revision would also accrue payment - if it did - why would anyone go ahead - except of course because the union is fully behind it. No revision - No money..................simple.... more than half have not gone forward and that money should go into the next pay rise, not a nice little earner for those who have stalled revision and cannot accept change.

[DirtyHarry]

It would appear that both RM, and the CWU, knew that further cuts in staff and duties would result in total chaos, but were prepared to chance their arm, and force through as many revisions as they possibly could, in order to trigger bonuses for the senior management crooks.
If the CWU lead us into another agreement resulting in cuts to staff and duties, after this disgraceful one has run it's accursed course, then that should be the end for them.