how do you pick your leave

[UnhappyGremlin]

Local agreements can supersede national ones, can't they?

No.

Why not?
We're happy with it, why change?

[motherhubbard]

Local agreements can only exist as long as they are in line with National Agreements.
Seniority was done away with because it is probably illegal.
I doubt very much if everyone is happy with the situation but perhaps they dare not speak out because of what the "opinion formers" in the DO would say.
If I had low seniority I'd be putting in a grievance against your DOM and your rep.

[UnhappyGremlin]

Local agreements can only exist as long as they are in line with National Agreements.
Seniority was done away with because it is probably illegal.
I doubt very much if everyone is happy with the situation but perhaps they dare not speak out because of what the "opinion formers" in the DO would say.
If I had low seniority I'd be putting in a grievance against your DOM and your rep.

You can doubt it, I don't. We took a vote, and EVERYBODY agreed.
There is no one in my office that won't speak out.
And grievances are irrelevant. Nothing ever happens as a result of them, they are ignored.
In fact, one particular manager tells people to file them, stating it will get nowhere.

[IcanthelpthewayIam]

Ours IS done on seniority, and any attempt at changing it is met with mass opposition.
Quite rightly.

quite wrongly, it was agreed to do away with seniority when it comes to annual leave

your office needs a decent rep there

Got one.
And they lead the march.
We're happy for it to be done this way, why should anyone have an issue with it?
Local agreements can supersede national ones, can't they?

cant be that good

grievances being ignored as well

office not being trained correctly on equipment

ignoring national agreements, especially part of one which was brought in to make things fairer for all members of staff which you are now intentionally ignoring

Yes actually local agreements can supersede national ones actually but not where they are in direct contradiction with the agreement and when it specifically states on the national agreement "It replaces all existing national and local agreements on leave from 3 April 2000, and local agreements reached after that date must confirm in full with these provisions"

[UnhappyGremlin]

Ours IS done on seniority, and any attempt at changing it is met with mass opposition.
Quite rightly.

quite wrongly, it was agreed to do away with seniority when it comes to annual leave

your office needs a decent rep there

Got one.
And they lead the march.
We're happy for it to be done this way, why should anyone have an issue with it?
Local agreements can supersede national ones, can't they?

cant be that good

grievances being ignored as well

office not being trained correctly on equipment

ignoring national agreements, especially part of one which was brought in to make things fairer for all members of staff which you are now intentionally ignoring

Yes actually local agreements can supersede national ones actually but not where they are in direct contradiction with the agreement and when it specifically states on the national agreement "It replaces all existing national and local agreements on leave from 3 April 2000, and local agreements reached after that date must confirm in full with these provisions"

And there isn't much we can do about grievances being ignored, is there?
Whenever someone pushes for them to be completed and followed up, they're never upheld. Always goes against staff.

Training is hardly our responsibility, is it? We ask, if they don't provide, they can't discipline for any failures.

If local agreements have to comply fully with national ones, what's the point? Nothing could be changed, could it?

[IcanthelpthewayIam]

And there isn't much we can do about grievances being ignored, is there?
Whenever someone pushes for them to be completed and followed up, they're never upheld. Always goes against staff.

A decent rep would be able to deal with this or know where to get support from the union to get it dealt with

Training is hardly our responsibility, is it? We ask, if they don't provide, they can't discipline for any failures.

A decent rep would be able to sort this out or know where to get support from the union to get it dealt with

If local agreements have to comply fully with national ones, what's the point? Nothing could be changed, could it?

well theres usually no point in local ones, but there are circumstances where they are allowed, ie in the bt2010 agreement offices were allowed to agree locally how to manage the d2d workload until the office went through the revisions

[UnhappyGremlin]

A decent rep would be able to deal with this or know where to get support from the union to get it dealt with

When I was disciplined, it was dealt with by the area Rep (who is also in charge of Branch). So, you'd agree, a decent one.
When my sacking was prevented, they lost interest. The manager did what they wanted, and they weren't interested in appeals etc.
I'd done nothing wrong, and they just didn't want to fight it.

As for training issues, as I said, it's a get out clause. We can hardly be disciplined if we haven't been trained, can we? Why would we correct it? It's a line of defence.

As for grievances, we have the Area Rep who never does anything here either.
If there is a genuine and serious issue, it's better to file a formal complaint with HR. They get dealt with.

[IcanthelpthewayIam]

When I was disciplined, it was dealt with by the area Rep (who is also in charge of Branch). So, you'd agree, a decent one.
When my sacking was prevented, they lost interest. The manager did what they wanted, and they weren't interested in appeals etc.
I'd done nothing wrong, and they just didn't want to fight it.

i wouldnt agree that an area rep is necessarily a decent one, a decent rep would have fought it or known how to get help to fight it

As for training issues, as I said, it's a get out clause. We can hardly be disciplined if we haven't been trained, can we? Why would we correct it? It's a line of defence.

actually no as the office will have training records which will show that the training was carried out during the roll out of the PDA which you would have signed, so you are in the position of signing saying you have been trained but clearly have not

As for grievances, we have the Area Rep who never does anything here either.
If there is a genuine and serious issue, it's better to file a formal complaint with HR. They get dealt with.

well if area rep is that bad find someone better and get him to stand against him

Remember your the one who is stating that you have a decent office rep not me

[POSTMAN]

Without wanting to put the cat amongst the flying rat thingies,see what Dingo has posted in this thread,page 4,Fish has also put the document mentioned in there...

I think your find that after the way forward agreement , there was a further agreement covering annual leave section between Martin Collins and Adrain Delslo from Royal Mail. This further document allowed for offices to keep seniority and a lot of offices have still got these in place.

http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/communit ... 15&t=40008" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[IcanthelpthewayIam]

Without wanting to put the cat amongst the flying rat thingies,see what Dingo has posted in this thread,page 4,Fish has also put the document mentioned in there...

I think your find that after the way forward agreement , there was a further agreement covering annual leave section between Martin Collins and Adrain Delslo from Royal Mail. This further document allowed for offices to keep seniority and a lot of offices have still got these in place.

http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/communit ... 15&t=40008" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

this document does not specifically state seniority is still allowed, it does state that offices can agree a local agreement but it must be fair to all members of staff which seniority is not for annual leave allocation

[UnhappyGremlin]

When I was disciplined, it was dealt with by the area Rep (who is also in charge of Branch). So, you'd agree, a decent one.
When my sacking was prevented, they lost interest. The manager did what they wanted, and they weren't interested in appeals etc.
I'd done nothing wrong, and they just didn't want to fight it.

i wouldnt agree that an area rep is necessarily a decent one, a decent rep would have fought it or known how to get help to fight it

But as I said, WASN'T INTERESTED. And therefore, didn't bother to find help, and as they were branch secretary, I'd have had to go really high up.

As for training issues, as I said, it's a get out clause. We can hardly be disciplined if we haven't been trained, can we? Why would we correct it? It's a line of defence.

actually no as the office will have training records which will show that the training was carried out during the roll out of the PDA which you would have signed, so you are in the position of signing saying you have been trained but clearly have not

Actually no. As I have never signed any PDA training schedule/document. EVER.

As for grievances, we have the Area Rep who never does anything here either.
If there is a genuine and serious issue, it's better to file a formal complaint with HR. They get dealt with.

well if area rep is that bad find someone better and get him to stand against him

Remember your the one who is stating that you have a decent office rep not me

The Area Rep and office rep are two different people. The Area Rep has too many supporters elsewhere to get rid.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Carrying leave into another year

Annual leave should generally be taken in the year that it is due, and the business expects all employees to have at least four weeks away from work every year. However up to one week (or 5 odd days) may be carried over into the next leave year, and up to five days may be anticipated during the last month of the previous leave year. Transfer of leave in excess of these limits requires written permission from the line manager, except that leave that cannot be taken due to sick leave may be allowed in the following year. Where this is granted and would reduce the annual leave taken in a particular leave year to less than four weeks, the individual must also confirm in writing that they are willing to voluntarily forgo their statutory leave entitlement under the Working Time Regulations 1998.

Bumped for question on RMC Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/groups/113280832071002/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;