Thank you Tony for that thoughtful and comprehensive breakdown of the agreed deal, and taking all circumstances on board, including the current deepening recession and interest rates going back up again, it's definitely a Yes from me.
The £900 is very handy too in these hard times, and I am most appreciative and grateful for all the hard work the CWU have put in for this less than perfect deal, in very trying and difficult conditions and negotiations.
Enjoy the 900, but save some for when your mail centre shuts down
The other point for seeking to reach an agreement on the revised approach to reviews and joint working groups is that now new entrants will be able to join the pension scheme after 1 years’ service, when previously RMGs policy had been a 5 year period. Therefore that gain means new entrants who opt in for the pension scheme will pay into the pension plan for 4 years they previously wouldn’t have been able to and furthermore means the business also will have to pay for an increased 4 year period which wasn’t part of their proposal.
Am I misreading this? I thought employers had a legal obligation to offer to enrol new employees into a workplace pension scheme. Who's telling lies here?
The other point for seeking to reach an agreement on the revised approach to reviews and joint working groups is that now new entrants will be able to join the pension scheme after 1 years’ service, when previously RMGs policy had been a 5 year period. Therefore that gain means new entrants who opt in for the pension scheme will pay into the pension plan for 4 years they previously wouldn’t have been able to and furthermore means the business also will have to pay for an increased 4 year period which wasn’t part of their proposal.
Am I misreading this? I thought employers had a legal obligation to offer to enrol new employees into a workplace pension scheme. Who's telling lies here?
Perhaps they're referring to youngsters and it's something to do with the time span between age
17 and 22 being 5 years. (22 being the age at which age it's compulsory to offer one).
RM job vacancy adverts used to state starting pay at age 17, then age 18+ (the current adverts no longer do!).
Joining a workplace pension
All employers must provide a workplace pension scheme. This is called ‘automatic enrolment’.
Your employer must automatically enrol you into a pension scheme and make contributions to your pension if all of the following apply:
you’re classed as a ‘worker’ you’re aged between 22 and State Pension age
you earn at least £10,000 per year
you usually (‘ordinarily’) work in the UK (read the detailed guidance if you’re not sure)
What is any agreement worth unless it specifies what actions can be legitimately enforced when the agreement is broken? And it will be broken. Where in the agreement are the financial penalties and adjudication process when RM break it? Without it I think it's worthless as an agreement binding both sides. Particularly with this company.
I don't think delivery is well paid. I am sick of hearing it's unskilled and that plenty of comparative or worse jobs pay less. I'm not grateful for minimum wage, plus a tiny bit. What a crock of s**t. Delivery is harder than many skilled roles I've held. It's heavy work, causes irreparable physical damage and is conducted in mainly intolerable weather in s**t shoes. You are surveilled every minute pretty much and if you're not killing yourself or working at stretch even with injuries or illness for almost every second you're on duty then you're told you're lazy. You have no leisure time after duty finishes because your cream crackered and working Saturdays is a remains a major inconvenience to work life balance, which isn't reflected in pay anymore. No way is it worth the hourly rate without IHR and current sick pay. And the lump sum should be paid right now as a no strings cost of living payment, although it's pretty worthless if your working on universal credit.
What is any agreement worth unless it specifies what actions can be legitimately enforced when the agreement is broken? And it will be broken. Where in the agreement are the financial penalties and adjudication process when RM break it? Without it I think it's worthless as an agreement binding both sides. Particularly with this company.
I don't think delivery is well paid. I am sick of hearing it's unskilled and that plenty of comparative or worse jobs pay less. I'm not grateful for minimum wage, plus a tiny bit. What a crock of s**t. Delivery is harder than many skilled roles I've held. It's heavy work, causes irreparable physical damage and is conducted in mainly intolerable weather in s**t shoes. You are surveilled every minute pretty much and if you're not killing yourself or working at stretch even with injuries or illness for almost every second you're on duty then you're told you're lazy. You have no leisure time after duty finishes because your cream crackered and working Saturdays is a remains a major inconvenience to work life balance, which isn't reflected in pay anymore. No way is it worth the hourly rate without IHR and current sick pay. And the lump sum should be paid right now as a no strings cost of living payment, although it's pretty worthless if your working on universal credit.
Don't know how to (quote your last paragraph) so why say it for people on uc.
It's not widely understood but my mate gets it for her family and her child. I asked her if she was happy with the lump sum and she explained that all it will do is mess up her government support..
Basically Universal Credit has completely replaced the old working families tax credit, which was really good at supporting children. UC calculated differently to WFTC and you now lose the money from one hand that you gained in the other.So if you're say a part time postie and a single parent, the months that any of these lump sums are paid means that you lose most or all your universal credit, so those people won't see any financial benefit in receiving it.