2% Pay Rise and Potential Problem

NW11851 · Post by **NW11851** » 11 Jul 2017, 16:29

As an Angard Casual and a CWU member, I can see a conflict of interest approaching.

I have received an email from CWU advising that RM intend to impose a 2% pay rise in August, backdated to 1st April.

So far, so good.

CWU is, quite rightly, not happy, especially in view of the huge bonuses/salary increases paid to senior executives, and others.

If this plays out as I fear, I can foresee CWU calling for industrial action.

This could pose a problem for Angard Casuals.

RM will undoubtedly ask Angard, which it owns, to bring in vast numbers of the under-employed Casuals.

CWU will not wish us to strike-break.

If we go in, CWU may wish to sanction members. If we do not accept offers of work, either Angard or Local Management will blacklist us.

Does anyone know what has happened in the past in a scenario like this?

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 11 Jul 2017, 16:44

Just checking but I think the 2% imposition is on POL workers not Royal Mail.

However, you must act on your own conscience and circumstances. Its unlikely the CWU will sanction anyone in an official capacity as they have, to my knowledge, not done so to Royal Mail members in the past.

To be honest, if there are strikes the bottleneck will be in deliveries and as far as I know not many casuals work in delivery, so it could be a CF if they tried to break the strike using Angardies for delivery work.

However, to be honest, Angard was created just for this situation and no doubt if forms part of RMs anti-strike planning. But then if the usual happen as with most of RM plans I don't think we have much to worry about.

NW11851 · Post by **NW11851** » 11 Jul 2017, 16:52

Thank you. I don't want to end up between a rock and an unemploed hard place.

ennabee · Post by **ennabee** » 11 Jul 2017, 21:45

I seem to remember from a previous looming dispute (when i was with Angard) that RM can't hire EXTRA casual staff to cover a strike . In a dispute before that they only got (RM) casuals in to help clear the backlog, the Union reps advice in the more recent case which failed to materialize was to not answer phonecalls from Angard !!

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003 ... ion/7/made" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"...an employment business shall not introduce or supply a work-seeker to a hirer to perform—

(a)the duties normally performed by a worker who is taking part in a strike or other industrial action (“the first worker”), or
(b)the duties normally performed by any other worker employed by the hirer and who is assigned by the hirer to perform the duties normally performed by the first worker,..."

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 12 Jul 2017, 07:13

Hiring agency workers

Currently, employers facing industrial action are able to directly hire staff to carry out work normally performed by workers taking industrial action or sub-contract a service to another employer. However, employment businesses cannot provide temporary agency staff to cover striking workers’ duties (or the duties of workers covering the striking workers). The UK government consulted on a proposal to remove this prohibition but in the end no provisions on this were included in the Trade Union Act 2016.

NW11851 · Post by **NW11851** » 12 Jul 2017, 08:22

Thank you for that.

However although my contract is with Angard, that company is wholly -owned by RM.

They always seem to operate in s 'grey' area of employment law.
(Witness endless other threads in here about differences in working conditions between RM staff and AWR Angard staff.)

ennabee · Post by **ennabee** » 12 Jul 2017, 20:12

NW11851 wrote:Thank you for that.

However although my contract is with Angard, that company is wholly -owned by RM.

)

but its still classed as an Agency otherwise they wouldn't have to adhere to AWR rules