New European Ruling on Holiday Pay

[IloveMYredTROLLEY!]

You're forgetting that RM only keep time sheets etc for three years, so if the CWU has any clout at all it'll probably be a small lump sum paid to everyone employed over that period of time.

If that happens, this is one bonus that should not be pro-rata according to contract hours, I know numerous 22.5 hour that are on average working 35+ hours. If it is done pro-rata, the PT staff have every right to kick off!

[IloveMYredTROLLEY!]

Removing the bought leave and rounding down to 4 weeks could you be entitled to 10 years x 4 weeks x 8 hours = 320 hours?

Difficult to say, It depends on whether each individual case is settled on its own merits or the company decides to use a simple formula, records from pre-2000 are pretty non-existant and it might be down to you to prove earnings. What you can be sure of though is that businesses, not just ours are lining up to fight this so it aint over yet and most people definitely wont end up with anything near what they think they will.

Ok... cheers mate... will bring this up at WTLL tomorrow...

I suggest you do not say a word to management about this until the final hearing has been worked through and we get something from CWU.

[lollollol]

Removing the bought leave and rounding down to 4 weeks could you be entitled to 10 years x 4 weeks x 8 hours = 320 hours?

Difficult to say, It depends on whether each individual case is settled on its own merits or the company decides to use a simple formula, records from pre-2000 are pretty non-existant and it might be down to you to prove earnings. What you can be sure of though is that businesses, not just ours are lining up to fight this so it aint over yet and most people definitely wont end up with anything near what they think they will.

Ok... cheers mate... will bring this up at WTLL tomorrow...

I suggest you do not say a word to management about this until the final hearing has been worked through and we get something from CWU.

Haven't got a lot of faith in the CWU at present I'm afraid... It's up to individuals to chase what they believe they are entitled to... we are possibly talking a lot of of kite for some and it can't be settled with a collective agreement... I'm sure the business are already looking at the implications anyway... nowt wrong with giving my colleagues the heads up... run rings round my DIM on a daily basis... I'll get the normal blank goldfish expression from him and 7 seconds later he'll have forgot what I said...

[cheshirecheese]

Wait for the appeals court ruling before telling everyone they are due a load of back pay. If the rulings go the other way you will end up with a loadof pissed off colleagues.

[lollollol]

Wait for the appeals court ruling before telling everyone they are due a load of back pay. If the rulings go the other way you will end up with a loadof pissed off colleagues.

My intention was only to inform my colleagues what may be about to transpire... it's up to them whether they do anything about it or not... it seems Thompsons solicitors seem to believe there is a case to answer at present... anyway, we didn't have a WTLL today...

This link sheds further light on the debate:

http://www.mishcon.com/news/briefings/s ... al_10_2013" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[albebb]

http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/communit ... =1&t=62140" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[lollollol]

Interesting reading albebb... thanks for posting the link...

[DICKIEG]

Any updates on this

[albebb]

the appeals court heard 3 cases i believe on 31july for 3 days, the decision from that will likely be released around Oct/Nov

[cheshirecheese]

To:  All Branches with Postal Members
 

 

 

 

Dear Colleague
 

WORKING TIME DIRECTIVE – HOLIDAY PAY
 

In recent months the Union has been monitoring the developing legal situation on how holiday pay should be calculated in line with the Working Time Directive.
 

This involves three very significant Employment Tribunal cases in non CWU companies which have cast doubt over how an employer is required to calculate holiday pay under the European Working Time Directive.  A previous decision that has stood since 2004, held that adhoc overtime did not need to be included in the calculation.  However, this has now been contradicted both directly and indirectly in recent cases and the ET decisions in the three aforementioned cases have ruled that ad hoc overtime should now be included. 
 

Although these ET decisions are not yet binding, the legal advice received from our lawyers suggests that ultimately, this is likely, though not certain, to be confirmed as the correct interpretation of this particular Working Time Directive.
 

These decisions could have very significant implications and may mean that for any holiday taken since 1998, current Royal Mail employees may have a legitimate legal claim against the company to up to four weeks worth of overtime payments (the directive only covers a four week holiday period) each year.  A further issue that needs to be resolved legally is what reference period should be used for how any entitlement should be calculated. 
 

As you can imagine employers across the UK have been strongly lobbying against this interpretation of the directive and the CBI are claiming that this would have a major detrimental effect on the ability of British companies to remain competitive. 
 

 

The current position is that two of these recent ET decisions are being appealed against by employers and these appeals are pending.  Additionally, a third case brought by a transport employee has been settled outside of the tribunal and we are trying to establish the basis of this settlement.
 

The whole subject matter is a very live issue and we can confirm that CWU has now lodged a formal claim for both future entitlements and back pay with the Royal Mail Group on behalf of all CWU members working for the company.
 

Following initial discussions with Royal Mail under the auspices of Bobby Weatherall PEC Member, who has been diligently following developments for the Union, we have now arranged a meeting with the company’s senior management team to discuss the basis of our claim and try to reach a settlement.  Additionally, we are continuing to discuss with our lawyers the best way to protect the legal position of CWU Members, if necessary through the Employment Tribunal.
 

Further information will be sent out in the near future following our next meeting with the company.  In the meantime, it is important that all CWU branches and representatives circulate the content of this LTB and convey the Union’s position to our members in all work places.
 

Any enquiries on the content of this LTB should be addressed to the DGS(P) Department, quoting reference 60000.
 

Yours sincerely                                                 
 

                                       
Dave Ward                                                
Deputy General Secretary (P)