Even if you say we will be better of by back dating it to October which I can't see how.
Every pay negotiation is a complex game of number crunching.
An employer may make multiple offers with different percentage rates depending on overall costing, how much back pay is involved, whether it's front loaded or back loaded, whether there are strings attached.
It's up to the union to sort the wheat from the chaff and get the best deal for members in the long-term.
If the union can get a decent pay rise covering the two years with nothing tied to performance or targets in this climate with the other issues facing us members would be stupid to reject it on the basis that they might have got a couple of quid more some other way that might or might not have even been on the table.
Even if you say we will be better of by back dating it to October which I can't see how.
Every pay negotiation is a complex game of number crunching.
An employer may make multiple offers with different percentage rates depending on overall costing, how much back pay is involved, whether it's front loaded or back loaded, whether there are strings attached.
It's up to the union to sort the wheat from the chaff and get the best deal for members in the long-term.
If the union can get a decent pay rise covering the two years with nothing tied to performance or targets in this climate with the other issues facing us members would be stupid to reject it on the basis that they might have got a couple of quid more some other way that might or might not have even been on the table.
I think most people see it as that they are owed that backpay, they have worked hard over the last 12 months to make rm the success and the profits it's made. All they want is what's due to them .
Myself included.
nudenut wrote:I think most people see it as that they are owed that backpay, they have worked hard over the last 12 months to make rm the success and the profits it's made. All they want is what's due to them .
Myself included.
How can you know "what's owed to you" when there hasn't even been an offer put to the members?
Royal Mail wanted to bung full-time staff £375 no actual pay rise and unattainable strings attached to get that consolidated into pay, at the moment that's all that's "owed to you".
Would you rather have that and I'll have your pay rise?
nudenut wrote:I think most people see it as that they are owed that backpay, they have worked hard over the last 12 months to make rm the success and the profits it's made. All they want is what's due to them .
Myself included.
How can you know "what's owed to you" when there hasn't even been an offer put to the members?
Royal Mail wanted to bung full-time staff £375 no actual pay rise and unattainable strings attached to get that consolidated into pay, at the moment that's all that's "owed to you".
Would you rather have that and I'll have your pay rise?
OK thanks all I know is that everyone in my office expects pay back dated . And need recognition for all the efforts of the last few years. Like you say nothing's owed yet as no agreement but it's just how the members in my office feel that's all.
I know extra jam "tomorrow" wouldn't get my vote at all . However, the collective vote will ultimately decide on whether whatever is finally proposed is acceptable or not.
I can understand the feeling, I could do with some back pay myself but as I said earlier there will be back pay either way and members need to look at the entire deal and where we were 6 months ago before they make any decision.
mw7485 wrote:I know extra jam "tomorrow" wouldn't get my vote at all . However, the collective vote will ultimately decide on whether whatever is finally proposed is acceptable or not.
What if the union has to surrender the back pay to maybe get a better deal elsewhere like a higher % for the long term or for a slightly better pension term.
I'd take higher percentages on my earnings than any backpay or lump sum.
Obviously it would be even better if we do get backpay as well but nobody should be relying on it. Also think of the money you've saved by so far not having to strike.
manchesterpunk wrote:Anyone relying on backpay is an idiot
What if the union has to surrender the back pay to maybe get a better deal elsewhere like a higher % for the long term or for a slightly better pension term.
I'd take higher percentages on my earnings than any backpay or lump sum.
Obviously it would be even better if we do get backpay as well but nobody should be relying on it. Also think of the money you've saved by so far not having to strike.
Exactly. Backdated pay along with a 38 hour working week could and should be used as a leverage and negotiating tool by the union to achieve a fair deal on the pension and pay rise from 2017-18. Don’t forget there would be tax to pay on a lump sum.
manchesterpunk wrote:Anyone relying on backpay is an idiot
What if the union has to surrender the back pay to maybe get a better deal elsewhere like a higher % for the long term or for a slightly better pension term.
I'd take higher percentages on my earnings than any backpay or lump sum.
Obviously it would be even better if we do get backpay as well but nobody should be relying on it. Also think of the money you've saved by so far not having to strike.
Is not about relying on the back pay its about feeling like when an agreement is reached on 2017 pay it should be paid back to when it should have started. If the union can get a better longer term deal by using it as a bargining tool thats fine as long as its a clearly better deal and its going to have to be explained to the memebers why there is no back pay.
. However, the collective vote will ultimately decide on whether whatever is finally proposed is acceptable or not.