Pay

[barbario]

Heard yesterday that they don't want to give us a pay rise but a lump sum instead.How much that would be ,i don't know.Apparently the Union has turned that down flat.

[arnold cheshire]

Heard yesterday that they don't want to give us a pay rise but a lump sum instead.How much that would be ,i don't know.Apparently the Union has turned that down flat.

would that be the 1000 pound that they promised me in 2010 and all ive received is 200 pound ?

[krussel]

The counters are on strike today so it looks like they are not getting much luck with RM either.

[fishtank]

It's always an interesting argument...the overtime rate.

Increasing it makes it less attractive to the business which should in theory lead to less use of overtime to resource which should protect and increase jobs...but on the other hand it makes it more attractive to members which makes it easier for managers to resource using overtime which undermines jobs.

Also the higher an overtime rate the more the business will use part-timers to fill the gap because they obviously don't qualify for the higher rate until they reach full-time hours.
That's a double-edged sword because although I like the idea of the bulk of overtime going to part-timers I don't want a business incentive to recruit part-timers.

It's a complicated business overtime rates.

[fishtank]

Of course another possible unwanted side affect of an increase in the overtime rate could be an increase in bullying and harassment in delivery offices.

If members are being denied overtime payments now what chance will they have if that overtime is worth time and a half?

[Martin Walsh]

Cut Of King , you have one huge potato rather then chip on your shoulder.

I have no illusions that members have seen more change in the last 3 years then they have seen for the last 20. All be it there is still 30 million in outstanding lump sums which indicates a lot have seen very little change in those 3 years.

How you view the union varies , if you believe the union had a veto on door to door into workload , a veto on CSS sequencing which meant longer Saturdays , a veto on CDVs and delivery methods and a veto on the use of geo route and the IWT then of course you will hate the CWU.

However if you believe that given the fact that D2D was not going to remain the same , the CDVs were going to be introduced and revisons were going to be included then you examine the terms of the agreement which the CWU got.

Now in terms of D2D once it was going to be introduced into work load and the cap was going to be taken off what other method of payment was there then an hourly rate of pay which was calculated by the amount of hours you worked ?

Now I know that some revisons are working , I also know some revisons now be altered and I know some have been disasters. Now some of that is because the revison process is too complex for most and that they allow the planner to run away with the revisons plans. Now that is not the fault of necessary the local reps as they may be inexperienced. Equally how many revisons have accepted 100bsi again this is not in the agreement. Plus the fact that you negotiate the revison at phase 4 and it's not just on Royal Mail terms. Plus what is a concern out of the 800 revisons there have only been 120 proper PIRs.

In terms of bullying , I agree this is totally unacceptable and it's not just bullying but work place stress due to unacceptable performance requirements which needs to be stopped. I applaud the likes of Bristol and Kirby who have not allowed bullying and left some to suffer and decided to walk out and I would support others if they did so. But I do believe the union should demand an independent enquiry into Workplace stress and bullying and that the is the motion which was carried at the policy forum.

Now will members support the CWU in the fight against the sell off , unfair regulation and a whole list of workplace issues such as pay , pensions , mail centre and RDC and voc matters , the payment of lump sums and a whole range of delivery issues. Not withstanding the fact that in those offices which have got the £1000 they are now recieiving proposals for further savings.

The members will only support the CWU if we meet them in the workplace and explain the threats and tell them they will get a better deal on all of those issues if they support the union. I believe the majority of members will understand that but it will need face to face members meetings in the workplace. Of course Royal Mail will try and AT&T ract some to the sell off by saying what they will have as shares once the company has been rated at the end of April.

In terms of overtime rates it is quite simple on why the union has requested an improvement on basic overtime a Branch put this to conference last year and was supported and then became union policy.

[borders]

as bad as the Union may be in some eyes,if people think that without a strong backing for the Union now and in the future the RM management will suddenly become all nicey, nicey then they are deluded. dont be fooled by a stand alone offer of a few shares and not only that think of the future posties coming along , might be your son or daughter ?

[UnhappyGremlin]

Heard yesterday that they don't want to give us a pay rise but a lump sum instead.How much that would be ,i don't know.Apparently the Union has turned that down flat.

I also heard this a few weeks ago, apparently it was for a 3 year deal, and the amounts were £1000/£1200 +£1400. I'm glad the union turned it down if true. Not interested. I want a consolidated pay rise which is the best result for us, especially long term. It is nothing more than back door method of keeping down our pay. It is also why Post Office staff are on strike I believe, they were offered something similar. RM hope people's eyes will light up at the amount, and ignore the longer term implications of such a deal. The want us to accept what will eventually be a further real terms cut in pay, of which we've had plenty already.

I look at it this way, short term yes, we get £3600 approx. in a little over 2 years, but long term it's not worth it. If we were to get a similar deal to the last one, say about 7% over 3 years, split 2% year 1 + 2% year 2 + 3% year 3 and basic is about £370 per week that equates to £7.40 per week (£384.80 total) year 1, £7.54 per week (£392.08 total) year 2, £11.54 per week (£600.51 total) year 3. The total cumulative earnings in that 3 year period is £2539.07, which is basically £1061 less. than the £3600 apparently being offered (if that is the actual figure).

But, the yearly increases are forever, i.e. even with no further pay increase, year 4 would mean we would be on £26.48 per week (£1377.39 total per year) more than we are now. So it wouldn't take long before we would be miles ahead financially.

[fishtank]

You can't get a mortgage on the promise of a lump sum.
Given Royal Mail's past record on colleagueshares and lump sums I'd be surprised if anyone would take an offer like that seriously.
I would rather take my chances with the bloke from the Nigerian lottery.

[UnhappyGremlin]

You can't get a mortgage on the promise of a lump sum.
Given Royal Mail's past record on colleagueshares and lump sums I'd be surprised if anyone would take an offer like that seriously.
I would rather take my chances with the bloke from the Nigerian lottery.

Unfortunately FT, some lads in my office are. Tried to explain it to them but their eyes glazed over when I said £1ooo.

[dvbuk55]

The members will only support the CWU if we meet them in the workplace and explain the threats and tell them they will get a better deal on all of those issues if they support the union. I believe the majority of members will understand that but it will need face to face members meetings in the workplace. Of course Royal Mail will try and AT&T ract some to the sell off by saying what they will have as shares once the company has been rated at the end of April.

Well I seem to recall a similar promise in 2009 but it didn't work out too well. As for ALL the issues - they have been there throughout the BT2010 agreement and in truth there has been no protection whatsoever from the misdirection, mis-planning and the bullying in all that time. As for the CSS, D2D, CDV and uncle tom cobbley and all - the CWU embraced it like the prodigal son and could they have stopped it - well yes in part by simply stating that they did not agree and would not support the changes - the least they could have done was to say to the membership that they had serious reservations instead of rolling out the circus and declaring "The Deal of the Century". TBH the number of revisions still to be carried out will probably take a century.

[ewancurze]

Heard yesterday that they don't want to give us a pay rise but a lump sum instead.How much that would be ,i don't know.Apparently the Union has turned that down flat.

I also heard this a few weeks ago, apparently it was for a 3 year deal, and the amounts were £1000/£1200 +£1400. I'm glad the union turned it down if true. Not interested. I want a consolidated pay rise which is the best result for us, especially long term. It is nothing more than back door method of keeping down our pay. It is also why Post Office staff are on strike I believe, they were offered something similar. RM hope people's eyes will light up at the amount, and ignore the longer term implications of such a deal. The want us to accept what will eventually be a further real terms cut in pay, of which we've had plenty already.

I look at it this way, short term yes, we get £3600 approx. in a little over 2 years, but long term it's not worth it. If we were to get a similar deal to the last one, say about 7% over 3 years, split 2% year 1 + 2% year 2 + 3% year 3 and basic is about £370 per week that equates to £7.40 per week (£384.80 total) year 1, £7.54 per week (£392.08 total) year 2, £11.54 per week (£600.51 total) year 3. The total cumulative earnings in that 3 year period is £2539.07, which is basically £1061 less. than the £3600 apparently being offered (if that is the actual figure).

But, the yearly increases are forever, i.e. even with no further pay increase, year 4 would mean we would be on £26.48 per week (£1377.39 total per year) more than we are now. So it wouldn't take long before we would be miles ahead financially.

I hope everyone in my office thinks the same!

[arnold cheshire]

You can't get a mortgage on the promise of a lump sum.
Given Royal Mail's past record on colleagueshares and lump sums I'd be surprised if anyone would take an offer like that seriously.
I would rather take my chances with the bloke from the Nigerian lottery.

Unfortunately FT, some lads in my office are. Tried to explain it to them but their eyes glazed over when I said £1ooo.

who says we are getting a 1000 pound payout ?

[UnhappyGremlin]

You can't get a mortgage on the promise of a lump sum.
Given Royal Mail's past record on colleagueshares and lump sums I'd be surprised if anyone would take an offer like that seriously.
I would rather take my chances with the bloke from the Nigerian lottery.

Unfortunately FT, some lads in my office are. Tried to explain it to them but their eyes glazed over when I said £1ooo.

who says we are getting a 1000 pound payout ?

No one. It's just a rumour. Apparently the union has turned down a one off lump sum instead of a % pay rise.

[Martin Walsh]

It is just a rumour and has no truth to it.