New sick policy

[ted_e_bear]

The CWU have stated on several occasions that before they reached an agreement Royal Mail informed them they intended to bring in changes to sick pay from this April by executive action.

So either

A - CWU have lied about this to their entire membership.

B - Royal Mail were quite happy to break employment law.

C - Those saying they can’t change sick pay policy without agreement are completely wrong.

They also told us that it was only the CWU and our strike action that stopped them forcing us to work Sundays and things like commit to deliver being implemented

The truth is both of those couldn’t have been forced upon us easily anyway

At present all posties are contracted to work a set number of hours per week, there's no way RM can force us to work extra hours doing commit to deliver, RM could tear up our contracts and go down the fire & rehire route but it's a dangerous one to follow with so many employees involved.

So does that mean without the agreement being voted in they can't enforce that seasonal variation bollox part of it, it's a biggy for me and others at our office, we do not want to be forced to work up to almost an hour extra per day (with the 30mins flex if that also comes in) especially at the busiest and crappiest weather time of year, we're knackered now on the current 37 HR week.

[Acca Dacca]

The CWU have stated on several occasions that before they reached an agreement Royal Mail informed them they intended to bring in changes to sick pay from this April by executive action.

So either

A - CWU have lied about this to their entire membership.

B - Royal Mail were quite happy to break employment law.

C - Those saying they can’t change sick pay policy without agreement are completely wrong.

They also told us that it was only the CWU and our strike action that stopped them forcing us to work Sundays and things like commit to deliver being implemented

The truth is both of those couldn’t have been forced upon us easily anyway

At present all posties are contracted to work a set number of hours per week, there's no way RM can force us to work extra hours doing commit to deliver, RM could tear up our contracts and go down the fire & rehire route but it's a dangerous one to follow with so many employees involved.

Precisely

[Acca Dacca]

The CWU have stated on several occasions that before they reached an agreement Royal Mail informed them they intended to bring in changes to sick pay from this April by executive action.

So either

A - CWU have lied about this to their entire membership.

B - Royal Mail were quite happy to break employment law.

C - Those saying they can’t change sick pay policy without agreement are completely wrong.

They also told us that it was only the CWU and our strike action that stopped them forcing us to work Sundays and things like commit to deliver being implemented

The truth is both of those couldn’t have been forced upon us easily anyway

At present all posties are contracted to work a set number of hours per week, there's no way RM can force us to work extra hours doing commit to deliver, RM could tear up our contracts and go down the fire & rehire route but it's a dangerous one to follow with so many employees involved.

So does that mean without the agreement being voted in they can't enforce that seasonal variation bollox part of it, it's a biggy for me and others at our office, we do not want to be forced to work up to almost an hour extra per day (with the 30mins flex if that also comes in) especially at the busiest and crappiest weather time of year, we're knackered now on the current 37 HR week.

Correct

They can’t enforce us to work extra hours unpaid this winter to get the hours back next summer without agreement

[TopperGas]

The CWU have stated on several occasions that before they reached an agreement Royal Mail informed them they intended to bring in changes to sick pay from this April by executive action.

So either

A - CWU have lied about this to their entire membership.

B - Royal Mail were quite happy to break employment law.

C - Those saying they can’t change sick pay policy without agreement are completely wrong.

They also told us that it was only the CWU and our strike action that stopped them forcing us to work Sundays and things like commit to deliver being implemented

The truth is both of those couldn’t have been forced upon us easily anyway

At present all posties are contracted to work a set number of hours per week, there's no way RM can force us to work extra hours doing commit to deliver, RM could tear up our contracts and go down the fire & rehire route but it's a dangerous one to follow with so many employees involved.

So does that mean without the agreement being voted in they can't enforce that seasonal variation bollox part of it, it's a biggy for me and others at our office, we do not want to be forced to work up to almost an hour extra per day (with the 30mins flex if that also comes in) especially at the busiest and crappiest weather time of year, we're knackered now on the current 37 HR week.

Correct

They can’t enforce us to work extra hours unpaid this winter to get the hours back next summer without agreement

Assuming that's the case it's worthwhile voting No just to stop that from being imposed, I can't get my head around why we should work 2 hours longer unpaid then wait months to get the time back,

[Flashman_]

The CWU have stated on several occasions that before they reached an agreement Royal Mail informed them they intended to bring in changes to sick pay from this April by executive action.

So either

A - CWU have lied about this to their entire membership.

B - Royal Mail were quite happy to break employment law.

C - Those saying they can’t change sick pay policy without agreement are completely wrong.

They also told us that it was only the CWU and our strike action that stopped them forcing us to work Sundays and things like commit to deliver being implemented

The truth is both of those couldn’t have been forced upon us easily anyway

At present all posties are contracted to work a set number of hours per week, there's no way RM can force us to work extra hours doing commit to deliver, RM could tear up our contracts and go down the fire & rehire route but it's a dangerous one to follow with so many employees involved.

So does that mean without the agreement being voted in they can't enforce that seasonal variation bollox part of it, it's a biggy for me and others at our office, we do not want to be forced to work up to almost an hour extra per day (with the 30mins flex if that also comes in) especially at the busiest and crappiest weather time of year, we're knackered now on the current 37 HR week.

Correct

They can’t enforce us to work extra hours unpaid this winter to get the hours back next summer without agreement

Assuming that's the case it's worthwhile voting No just to stop that from being imposed, I can't get my head around why we should work 2 hours longer unpaid then wait months to get the time back,

That is the biggest reason I am voting no also. It is also the one thing I am 100% sure they cannot impose without an agreement. They would be in breach of the Employment rights act 1996, if they tried to impose such conditions.
Ironically, the Union seems happy to give that right away in this agreement,(which is the only legal way of changing it, due to collective bargaining rules) meaning those rights in the act are undermined by the very organisation that should defend it.

[LouBarlow]

I’m not going to argue the point any further, despite Royal Mail, the PEC and the CWU all agreeing with my non-professional opinion, but some of you are in for a massive shock if this deal isn’t voted in.

[77SAMPOST77]

I’m not going to argue the point any further, despite Royal Mail, the PEC and the CWU all agreeing with my non-professional opinion, but some of you are in for a massive shock if this deal isn’t voted in.

More scaremongering from doom and gloom Lou .

[Acca Dacca]

I’m not going to argue the point any further, despite Royal Mail, the PEC and the CWU all agreeing with my non-professional opinion, but some of you are in for a massive shock if this deal isn’t voted in.

Can you show us where RM and the CWU have stated that sick pay terms don’t make up part of our contracts?

I’ve shown my evidence that it is included

Another poster has checked his contract and told you that there’s no clause to change the terms without agreement

So why don’t you just show us your evidence to the contrary?

I’ve never had a problem being proven wrong on here - it’s how you learn

[LouBarlow]

I’m not going to argue the point any further, despite Royal Mail, the PEC and the CWU all agreeing with my non-professional opinion, but some of you are in for a massive shock if this deal isn’t voted in.

Can you show us where RM and the CWU have stated that sick pay terms don’t make up part of our contracts?

I’ve shown my evidence that it is included

Another poster has checked his contract and told you that there’s no clause to change the terms without agreement

So why don’t you just show us your evidence to the contrary?

I’ve never had a problem being proven wrong on here - it’s how you learn

Acca I’m not going to argue with you any more, as I will just be accused of scaremongering and full of ‘doom and gloom’, but see Martin Walsh’s first post in this thread. You can choose to not believe him for, reasons, but I choose to listen and respect his posts on here, as he is more qualified than either of us on such matters.

viewtopic.php?f=87&t=109838

Hopefully the deal is voted in and it will all be moot, but in the event of a no we will find out with certainty which of us is correct.

[Acca Dacca]

Ok Lou, I’ll leave it to Martin now to explain that one then thank you for showing your working ( although Martin still doesn’t state that sick isn’t part of our contract which was your argument )

So for Martin, how were/are RM going to change our contracts without agreement and without giving us a new contract leading to fire and rehire?