are we happy with the deal

[milly]

If you put extra money in your AVC to mitigate the reduction of the employer contribution even after the payrise it most probably ends up being a pay cut.
It is a shameful deal.

[30+YEARMAN]

Its a NO from me

[rambo1]

Anyone saying yes? I fear it's the best we're gonna get. Every big company shafts it's employees in this day and age. As a consumer we all want cheaper things, be it food, beer, holidays, cars ....whatever. To compete and keep business afloat (and said employees in a job) said business has to make cuts and lean up. Every business is doing it. It's life. If this deal isn't acceptable by the workforce an improved deal if there is one will benefit employees in the short term but long term, royal mail will go out of business. Do you think you're improved pension will be paid then? Wake up people, smell the coffee and watch the news. GL all.

Lol royalmail will go out off business have you been drinking
There turning out massive profits every yr
And paying millions out in dividends
Every business has to make cuts
Yip we've been doing it for years nearly down to a Skelton staff in most offices now and most are nearly at breaking point .

P.s every company's are different some respect there workforce

Don't see any doing pensions at NRA 67 yet

P.s I don't think it's the best were going to get.
my god with the way you sound wee should all bend over and take this pish poor deal

Did you not see the news on carrillion?

[frankieboy]

Asked my union rep this morning when the next vote is likely to be , he said more likely to be mid April. Other union reps he said are getting very negative feedback about the new proposals. He said after reading the whole 38 page agreement he himself would be voting no if it came to it. The general consensus around our office and myself included is a big no. Time to make a stand me thinks.

[datasaint]

No from me, new starts are on an inferior pension for first 5 years, nothing concrete on what the pension will be, below inflation pay-rise, SWW might not be implemented, PTers T&Cs overlooked again.

[Jpro747]

No from me

[maisymoo04]

cwu has been quite don't you think folks

quite what

He means quiet

thanks Arnold

[k979aaa]

No this so called agreement is not fit for the words of such never will I agree to rip up all we have fought for in the passed all the strikes all the hardship and times to have it ripped up on the back of the agreeing to end our DB pension scheme a below inflation pay rise no mention of the B&H nor non payment of overtime or the sweeping under the carpet of grievances or the IR framework all these agreements as well as the MTFS agreement ended and for what NOTHING!

[TheTrolleyMan]

Seems the CWU are dragging out the vote ( when does the 89% strike vote become void ? ). Mmmmmm !

[aiden01]

cwu has been quite don't you think folks

quite what

He means quiet

I know what he meant hence the ffs.

[Northbynorthwest]

I'll be voting no too. Effectively clocking on and off will mean you giving them that hour back. Changes to sick leave and the way we pick annual leave. Keep their below inflation pay rise. I'd rather have my leave when I want it, be able to go off sick when I'm ill

etc. We will regret for years if we accept this. Oh and a 67 age for your pension

[edwardo]

It’s a massive NO for me B&H something has to be done , we’ve been left high and dry by union the last 20 yrs .Im sick of it

[The Postman]

How hard is it to offer an April to April pay rise in line with inflation instead of trying to fleece your employees? 5% from October to April is abysmal for a company that relies on o/t to get the job done, they've looked at the figures and decided they can save more backdating 5% to October instead of 2.5% to April. And, using the % increase in October for the 1 hour reduction in the working week to offset their lack of a decent annual rise is just wrong, the campaign was about getting a reduction with NO loss of pay due to automation and the toll it would take on our bodies with more hours on the street, not for the company to offset the cost of the shorter working week by bring pay back down over the years with poor annual rises.

The pension offer is shocking also, with no certainty that it will ever materialise. The wording in the agreement suggests it will take at least a year to come into effect. That's IF the legislation is approved by parliament. In the mean time anyone who's been in the company less than 5 years will be on an inferior scheme to those that are 5 years +. (An obvious attempt to win more YES votes from people that were shafted in the last pension cut). Sound familiar? And IF the pension never happens, what's the backup plan? Same as before with two separate schemes?

Look at what they want in return for this,

Later starts, later finishes, data capture of hours (which I'm not against btw) active and inactive, multi-bundle of d2d's. And that's just the start, feel free to add.

They say SOME offices will be starting and finishing later, what about in 2022 when the agreement has to be renewed and they decide everyone WILL be starting and finishing later. They say 3 months notice will be given for the later starts and finishes to address issues people may have with childcare etc... Yet, no mention of addressing B&H, so we all know there will be no flexibility for the offices with B&H issues.

NO mention of average hours worked being paid for p/t's that work voluntary o/t which the business is run on. This is the only way of addressing the issue of making p/t up to f/t, equal pay all across the board.

Just my thoughts, but far too much uncertainty in the agreement. They're asking too much and giving too little in return. So I'll be voting No.

[crimson king]

This is the best summary of what is wrong with the proposed agreement that I've seen so far.

[Alfreton]

We seem to sell our finish times for a pay rise every time.

If you don't mind working late it's a good deal