Union pressure brings progress on annual leave

[TrueBlueTerrier]

https://www.cwu.org/news/union-pressure ... ual-leave/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

National CWU representatives have made substantial progress this month with senior Royal Mail management in addressing annual leave problems being experienced by members – an issue which featured in eight separate motions at this year’s Annual Conference.

One of the biggest annual leave related problems at the moment is the difference between the contractual pay that is paid during leave periods and average earnings, which may often be higher because of part-time members performing additional hours, pressure overtime for full-time and bonus payments.

This causes significant reductions in pay for many members and the union is already pressing the business to reach a collective agreement to resolve this issue – members have been and are being, encouraged to commence formal grievances, ACAS early conciliation and, if settlements are not offered, Employment Tribunal claims.

Updating branches on this recently, deputy general secretary Terry Pullinger reports that the union has been in dialogue with ACAS on how this early conciliation process can be streamlined – given that the number of claims is now increasing on a daily basis – and this agreed process will commence next Monday (24th June).

“Like ourselves, ACAS believe that a collective resolution to the current impasse provides the best way forward and, in respect of this, a meeting was held with Royal Mail Group last Tuesday (11th June) and a further meeting date is set for this coming Friday (21st June),” Terry explains.

“We have made it clear to the business that this matter cannot remain unresolved for much longer and that, when we next meet, we have told them that we expect them to submit a proposal for a national collective agreement.”

Senior Royal Mail management have told the union that they want a collective agreement to resolve this matter and our DGSP insists that the company leadership “must now put their words into action.”

In the absence of such an agreement, the number of early conciliation claims from our members is “continuing to multiply,” he continues, adding that, until an appropriate agreement is reached, “we continue to encourage every member to make a claim if they are not in receipt of their average pay whilst on annual leave.”

Another big annual leave-related complaint from branches is the difficulty faced by members trying to book leave – and associated problems arising from the company’s recent change to a calculation of leave based on hours rather than days, and also issues that can arise when rest days coincide with Bank Holidays.

In talks with the company over the past month, CWU Postal Executive members have been aiming to reach an agreement that allows all members’ leave requests to be granted, providing that their leave application has been made with sufficient forward notice.

While this substantive work is ongoing, the union has achieved an agreement from the business to a joint statement which seeks to resolve all of the outstanding annual leave through unit reps and unit managers sitting down together and working out all annual leave that is currently outstanding.

[crimson king]

Whilst this is, obviously, good news and progress, it speaks volumes about our employer that they're having to be fought over this. Any half caring employer worth their salt would have dealt with this off their own backs ages ago.

It's so frustrating and tiring,the hoops RM make us jump through concerning this and so many other things. Fair play to the Union for battling on.

[leolion855]

im sorry but the unions wrong on this one. You get paid overtime when you work it, if your not working overtime because your on leave why the hell should the business pay for work that's not being done. When your off if you normally do ot then someone else would need to cover it so the business is paying out twice for the same thing?

I thought all ot was voluntary?

[crimson king]

im sorry but the unions wrong on this one. You get paid overtime when you work it, if your not working overtime because your on leave why the hell should the business pay for work that's not being done. When your off if you normally do ot then someone else would need to cover it so the business is paying out twice for the same thing?

I thought all ot was voluntary?

I can see your train of thought, but there's another way to look at it. If, like me, you've been lucky enough to get made up to full time then you get a full week's wages when on holiday or sick. But, if you're unfortunate to be part-time yet still work full time hours, you're a hundred quid down when on leave or sick. Yes, overtime is voluntary, but many need it to pay rent, mortgages, feed the kids etc.

RM know all this, it saves them hundreds of thousands if not more, every time they stiff a part timer when they go on leave. This is why they only recruit part-time staff for what are very obviously full time positions. I don't see that the business is paying out twice for the same thing- I see it that they are pulling a fast one even though the hours are there to recruit full time staff.

I'm hoping someone else will come along and explain this injustice more eloquently, because if too many share your point of view and can't see this absolute scandal then that's very worrying.

[Acca Dacca]

im sorry but the unions wrong on this one. You get paid overtime when you work it, if your not working overtime because your on leave why the hell should the business pay for work that's not being done. When your off if you normally do ot then someone else would need to cover it so the business is paying out twice for the same thing?

I thought all ot was voluntary?

I can see your train of thought, but there's another way to look at it. If, like me, you've been lucky enough to get made up to full time then you get a full week's wages when on holiday or sick. But, if you're unfortunate to be part-time yet still work full time hours, you're a hundred quid down when on leave or sick. Yes, overtime is voluntary, but many need it to pay rent, mortgages, feed the kids etc.

RM know all this, it saves them hundreds of thousands if not more, every time they stiff a part timer when they go on leave. This is why they only recruit part-time staff for what are very obviously full time positions. I don't see that the business is paying out twice for the same thing- I see it that they are pulling a fast one even though the hours are there to recruit full time staff.

I'm hoping someone else will come along and explain this injustice more eloquently, because if too many share your point of view and can't see this absolute scandal then that's very worrying.

On the flipside though, those doing overtime have the freedom of working less hours week to week if they wish - guys on contracts have no choice but to do the 38 or whatever it may be

[crimson king]

There's always flipsides and whilst I can't profess to speak for all part-timers,(many, I know, take the job to work around school runs) I would suspect that the majority of them would like full time hours- hence the amount of overtime that gets done and keeps the delivery side afloat.

[Dorset Plodder]

RM have been taking the piss for Decades over the Overtime Situation. How many of you remember the first time you asked what the Overtime Rate was? I distinctly remember Laughing Out Load, having previously been paid Time & A Third and Time & Two Thirds at my previous job. I remember being on a 20 hour contract .......working more like 50 hours a week .... and then only being paid 20 hours for Holidays. I couldn't afford to take more than a single week off at a time or I couldn't afford my Rent! I only hope the CWU manage to get some Claw Back deal, similiar to the PPI scandal, and make RM calculate, and pay back, the oustanding overtime they've been STEALING from Part Timers over the years. If I sound angry about this I am!

Our Local CWU Office is providing Pre-Populated Grievance Forms for anyone wishing to claim this Average Overtime, which I think is a great idea. When I gave it to my DOM and explained the situation, he had a bit of a think and said, "I don't know why I should pay this as when you were on Leave nobody claimed any overtime on your Duty", I suppose I should have torn up my Grievance form and thanked him for being so understanding! I had of course forgotten that we are in a race against each other to finish early.

Hopefully if RM are made aware of how much Overtime will cost them in the future, they won't be so keen to rely on the same people doing 16 hours plus OT a week, and actually employ more staff.

[rogersh]

As the Holiday Pay - Flow Chart states;
3. It does not matter whether these members are part-time or fulltime as this is about additional hours worked and average earnings.

[rogersh]

deleted

[rogersh]

I thought all ot was voluntary?

The process is for any colleagues (Full & Part Time) who routinely carry out overtime to ensure that they are paid on annual leave for the hours that they would normally work & not just their contracted hours.
So ot being voluntary is not relevant.

[Woody Guthrie]

To put it in simple terms annual leave is paid leave, that pay should reflect what you regularly earn otherwise it's not paid leave.

What part-time staff have to understand though is that this is a complicated issue.
Just for an example annual leave is calculated in hours, if you're a 20 hr contract and you regularly work 40 hrs can you receive 40 hrs pay for only using 20 hrs annual leave, that would surely cause pay inequality/discrimination issues, so the question is should your annual leave allocation be increased to 40 hrs if you regularly work 40 hrs? What if you only work 40 hrs for 12 weeks?

If that's the case does a full-time member of staff working 60 hrs have his/hers increased to 60 hrs.

[rogersh]

To put it in simple terms annual leave is paid leave, that pay should reflect what you regularly earn otherwise it's not paid leave.

What part-time staff have to understand though is that this is a complicated issue.
Just for an example annual leave is calculated in hours, if you're a 20 hr contract and you regularly work 40 hrs can you receive 40 hrs pay for only using 20 hrs annual leave, that would surely cause pay inequality/discrimination issues, so the question is should your annual leave allocation be increased to 40 hrs if you regularly work 40 hrs? What if you only work 40 hrs for 12 weeks?

If that's the case does a full-time member of staff working 60 hrs have his/hers increased to 60 hrs.

Woody, By saying "annual leave is paid leave, that pay should reflect what you regularly earn otherwise it's not paid leave." you have answered "If that's the case does a full-time member of staff working 60 hrs have his/hers increased to 60 hrs"

It does not matter whether these members are part-time or fulltime as this is about additional hours worked and average earnings, As I have posted previously.

EAT rules that voluntary overtime should be included in holiday pay
By Katie Scott 1st August 2017

{EDIT}The EAT found that under the European Union’s Working Time Directive, there is no distinction between contractually required work and tasks that are performed voluntarily under other special or separate arrangements because levels of normal remuneration have to be maintained when calculating holiday pay in relation to the guaranteed four weeks of annual leave provided under EU law. The EAT also upheld that where voluntary shifts, standby and call-out payments form part of normal pay, they should be included in holiday pay calculations so that there is no financial disadvantage that may deter employees from taking leave.

[The Postman]

im sorry but the unions wrong on this one. You get paid overtime when you work it, if your not working overtime because your on leave why the hell should the business pay for work that's not being done. When your off if you normally do ot then someone else would need to cover it so the business is paying out twice for the same thing?

I thought all ot was voluntary?

I can see your train of thought, but there's another way to look at it. If, like me, you've been lucky enough to get made up to full time then you get a full week's wages when on holiday or sick. But, if you're unfortunate to be part-time yet still work full time hours, you're a hundred quid down when on leave or sick. Yes, overtime is voluntary, but many need it to pay rent, mortgages, feed the kids etc.

RM know all this, it saves them hundreds of thousands if not more, every time they stiff a part timer when they go on leave. This is why they only recruit part-time staff for what are very obviously full time positions. I don't see that the business is paying out twice for the same thing- I see it that they are pulling a fast one even though the hours are there to recruit full time staff.

I'm hoping someone else will come along and explain this injustice more eloquently, because if too many share your point of view and can't see this absolute scandal then that's very worrying.

On the flipside though, those doing overtime have the freedom of working less hours week to week if they wish - guys on contracts have no choice but to do the 38 or whatever it may be

Or they could drop to part time and let someone who wants it have it.

[charlatans]

all overtime is not voluntary. Today i had an meeting for my flexible working request in which i asked not to do Sunday overtime and was offered that half of my Sunday overtime would be done by someone else on a three month review basis.

[hans solo]

i take it we will be backdating our al otime claims for the last 20 years like the irish police union are doing and winning