Royal Mail Pay - April 2013

[fishtank]

Fish why It acceptable to introduce the reduction in the shorter working week and increase part timers hour rate outside of the revison process.

It is acceptable because leaving that issue festering meant that members in some offices were losing the benefit of the SWW at an incremental rate which meant the longer it dragged on the more they lost.
That was clearly unfair.
The lump sums are fixed which means that although the payments are delayed members will not lose out financially by that delay,unless you have an account in the British Virgin Islands paying interest worth talking about.

[gb93]

Dont need to go into detail about individual offices or areas
But we all know the payments for revisions have had the goalposts moved by RM every which way they can to avoid payment.
Yes it has been a complete farce the way revisions have been done & payments made.
The best way to sort it out is as was done for the 39 hour week, set a date as soon as possible for everybody to get the full £1000.
For those people who had revisions 2-3 years ago and feel strongly against those who havent had a DM revision getting it.
Tough I resent having to worked 104-156 hours more than them or PT not getting the pay rise they recieved but I didnt shout they shoudnt get it.

[dvbuk55]

Dont need to go into detail about individual offices or areas
But we all know the payments for revisions have had the goalposts moved by RM every which way they can to avoid payment.
Yes it has been a complete farce the way revisions have been done & payments made.
The best way to sort it out is as was done for the 39 hour week, set a date as soon as possible for everybody to get the full £1000.
For those people who had revisions 2-3 years ago and feel strongly against those who havent had a DM revision getting it.
Tough I resent having to worked 104-156 hours more than them or PT not getting the pay rise they recieved but I didnt shout they shoudnt get it.

They would have done IF they'd had a revision but as for the 39 hours that needed to be rectified for the forthcoming pay rise. The lump sums remain available for payment to those who haven't yet had it - what I don't understand is the reasoning behind wanting receipt of the payment without a revision when clearly they aren't entitled to it.

[hans solo]

well from what i can make of it is rm is in breach of agreement
what is cwu going to do
firstly a national rule 13 should be put in place
if rm dont want to pay up agreement should be ripped up and all revisions reversed and back to 3.5 delivery spans
and dont say you cant do that if they can move goalposts so can we

[gb93]

The point is a lot of offices HAVE had revisions & made savings and have not recieved the money due to them.
As l said earlier how many offices are in receipt of walk sequenced mail, made savings & have not recieved a penny for it.
It is not as cut & dried as offices doing absolutely nothing & wanting all the money.
The cleanest way to sort it is everybody nationally to get it same time.
Or are we saying local agreement is the way to go, each area to fight alone

[dvbuk55]

Or are we saying local agreement is the way to go, each area to fight alone

Is that not current CWU Policy - it was certainly the policy for the revisions.

[Cut Off King]

Local agreement has devided the union members.

Why should we all pay the same subs, but recieve DIFFERENT treatment depending on which area we are in.

Local agreements mean that the CWU leaders don't have to work out the details of an agreement, things are agreed in general terms, this allows RM to pick us off office by office. LAZY negotiations !

National agreements that apply to all would ensure fairness

Black and white, plain English wording would ENSURE that RM could not twist the wording & interpretation of an agreement... "You WILL do this / You WON'T do that"

Members would also know what they were voting for.... NOT just seeing the ££££ at the start of an agreement.

RM would also be UNABLE to wriggle out & twist agreements

Branches would also have to face up to agreements....NOT as happens now where some branches impliment agreements in full, while other branches avoid the pain !

We need a union that represents us all, not just some of us.

Get back to basics, and RESIST RM's plans to strip us all of our hard won T&C's

[careful]

We had bt2010 revison 3 year ago by executive action it failed we went back to the way we working pre bt 2010 that where we're at today and making savings absorptions ...... point is they owe the money its not our fault it failed , it's mis -management

[Stormproof]

The DOM told me today that management were going to be balloted for industrial action due to their payrise not happening..........had to bite my tongue to stop myself saying 'would anyone notice if you lot went on strike'.

[dvbuk55]

We had bt2010 revison 3 year ago by executive action it failed we went back to the way we working pre bt 2010 that where we're at today and making savings absorptions ...... point is they owe the money its not our fault it failed , it's mis -management

They owe the money when you have fulfilled your end of the agreement however long it takes apparently which is as it should be. It didn't work so you abandoned it and forfeited any right to the cash - if you want the money you'll redo it until all obstacles have been overcome.

[spoodoo]

Lets all go back to the way it was ,uncomplicated ,straightforward and customer friendly ,we should be starting earlier too non of this starting later crap.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

They owe the money when you have fulfilled your end of the agreement however long it takes apparently which is as it should be. It didn't work so you abandoned it and forfeited any right to the cash - if you want the money you'll redo it until all obstacles have been overcome.

To put it bluntly --- wrong

Lump Sums

The payment of £1,000 (pro rata for part time employees) consisting of 3 lump sums will be paid as follows.

£200 will be paid to everyone in the delivery unit on deployment of their first non walk sequencing revision.
£600 will be paid to everyone in the delivery unit on deployment of the walk sequencing revision.
£200 will be paid to everyone in the delivery unit when the Walk Sequencing revision has been implemented, and objectives achieved in line with the local agreement and no later than the end of the 6 week bedding in period.

Nothing about it working - infact on deployment you can't tell if its working only after...

Hoping you were being sarcastic

[gb93]

Yeah done all of above & have recieved £200
But then we are not worthy according to some to full amount

[fishtank]

Yeah done all of above & have recieved £200
But then we are not worthy according to some to full amount

If you've had the revisions and not been paid what excuse are RM using not to pay the lump sums?
Has your office used the IR Framework?
Is your Area Rep/Branch/Divisional Rep involved?
Have you thought about taking some action as an office?

[dvbuk55]

They owe the money when you have fulfilled your end of the agreement however long it takes apparently which is as it should be. It didn't work so you abandoned it and forfeited any right to the cash - if you want the money you'll redo it until all obstacles have been overcome.

To put it bluntly --- wrong

Lump Sums

The payment of £1,000 (pro rata for part time employees) consisting of 3 lump sums will be paid as follows.

£200 will be paid to everyone in the delivery unit on deployment of their first non walk sequencing revision.
£600 will be paid to everyone in the delivery unit on deployment of the walk sequencing revision.
£200 will be paid to everyone in the delivery unit when the Walk Sequencing revision has been implemented, and objectives achieved in line with the local agreement and no later than the end of the 6 week bedding in period.

Nothing about it working - infact on deployment you can't tell if its working only after...

Hoping you were being sarcastic

No I wasn't being sarcastic and you choose your words carefully I note highlighting implemented but quite deliberately leaving out AND OBJECTIVES ACHIEVED which of course they haven't been. Lets not be pedantic here teebs when the money is due and the OBJECTIVES have been reached it's paid, playing at it and then abandoning the BT2010 Agreement and going back to "as we were" isn't even a reasonable attempt - and after two years - give me a break.