Agreement between Cwu and royal mail

[TooManyLoops]

Some customer collects are small with a post box near.

I collected a 2nd class letter today, I can see the postbox down the street from their doorstep. SMH

[buchanpeter]

I voted NO as the deal looked terrible with sick pay being scrutinised. Yes it needed to be changed because 1% of the workforce were taking the P by not actually being sick and thought to themselves by taking a lazy day or even week, but don't let the 99% being punished.

The union told us to vote 'YES' as they hit a brick wall by trying to resolve an issue that lasted for up to six months. If anybody remembers that the dispute started in August just in time for the CEO to mention that we losing a million pounds a day and to top it off buying shares within the company.

What annoys me about the whole thing from striking, the dispute, the agreement is that it could of been dealt better. What I mean by that is leading up to Xmas we should of been striking for 3 or 4 days straight, none of this one day here and one day there nonsense. I know they were thinking about the part timers being hit hard financially but there was a financial help if needed.

We still had a live strike ballot that 90% plus folk voted to go on strike again and that was live until April (I think). I think the Union gave up as there wasn't anything more to give from the business and they weren't budging.

This will probably happen again with the next agreement that the business will not move on the pay (probably 2%) will want even more from us for as little pay as possible.

We are all moving closer to minimum wage and if this happens being a 2% rise you will probably see more people leave as there will be better jobs with better pay than us.

I did the maths on this a few days ago.
Comparing what we get paid now, compared to what we were 15 years ago we're about 11% (£3000) down this year.
With the minimum wage shooting up again in April we're gonna be down 18% (£5000) compared to what we were. (Legacy Contracts)
New contracts will be basicaly on minimum wage in April. Down 40% (£9400) from 15 years ago. (This doesn't include the deduction in breaks).
We're gonna need a massive payrise in April for the union members to start trusting the union again after the last pay deal.
Only way we'll get a big pay deal is with the reduction of the USO.
Other ways of increasing our hourly rate is a reduction to 35 hours a week. Which would be the equivalent to 5.67% pay rise.

[Perseus]

I'm not sure anyone would welcome a reduction in hours worked in lieu of money in their pocket.

[buchanpeter]

I'm not sure anyone would welcome a reduction in hours worked in lieu of money in their pocket.

We had the reduction down to 37 hours already.
The idea for "Strive for 35" was that royal mail was bringing in lots of automation.
Which was reducing indoor work.
This would have added more work to outdoor in order to fill hours. Larger duties(Which everyone has anyways)
Union agreed that the human body can only take so much physical activity.
So instead they reduced the time for full time workers.
That was the idea at the time anyways.
All this has been scrapped by royal mail.
In one of their latest WTL videos they were showing a new way of scanning and bagging packets.
Where you scan them at the bench and directly place them in the bag instead of putting them at the top of the frame. (An add-on for delivery 2.0)
One of the managers in the video said this will reduce indoor work and increase outdoor work.

[world class male]

I know we like to use this forum to sound off, we all do it, but i think the dog-s**t deal thing is done to death. I hate it but the majority voted it in, it sucks, but hey its a democracy we live in so what do you do.
It's the past and it ain't going to change anytime soon, as for what's going to happen next deal? Who knows, will Dan the man be in charge by then, will they plead poverty again, will we really give a feck by then as our will is broken by RM.
All this is just guesswork, let's see what actually comes our way first then discuss it.

i mostly agree, what's done is done and just get on with it,
but i can see it now, this time next year when we are still awaiting our 25/26 pay rise over 6 months into the year, the union will champion a huge 4% pay rise backdated with a massive lump sum backdated even when minimum wage raises 6.7%
they will site RM's forecast wasn't has good as predicted but have already agreed a 2.7% raise for 26/27 so they don't have to do feck all for yet another 2 years giving us the 6.7%
sad thing is most fall for it

[Perseus]

Of course, the worker always ends up paying with more work in less time. Don't think there will ever be an example where people are given less work along with less hours to do it in.

[world class male]

Of course, the worker always ends up paying with more work in less time. Don't think there will ever be an example where people are given less work along with less hours to do it in.

but the FT rate raised when dropping from 39 to 38 then 38 to 37 meant very little extra cash in their pockets, yet their workload remained exactly the same and then grew, all for a for a few pennies more,
i'd sooner have kept at 39hrs and got an extra 2hrs pay
it's all in the mindset, if you know you do 37hrs then that's the max some will work out of principal, if their mindset is 39hrs they will do the extra 2hrs without even thinking about it, take note when the seasonal variations start again soon

[ted_e_bear]

Of course, the worker always ends up paying with more work in less time. Don't think there will ever be an example where people are given less work along with less hours to do it in.

but the FT rate raised when dropping from 39 to 38 then 38 to 37 meant very little extra cash in their pockets, yet their workload remained exactly the same and then grew, all for a for a few pennies more,
i'd sooner have kept at 39hrs and got an extra 2hrs pay
it's all in the mindset, if you know you do 37hrs then that's the max some will work out of principal, if their mindset is 39hrs they will do the extra 2hrs without even thinking about it, take note when the seasonal variations start again soon

Yeah I remember that well, the CWU thought that if the working week was reduced then RM would have to introduce more duties to accommodate the fact that the same amount of work still needed to be done, oh wait........

[world class male]

Of course, the worker always ends up paying with more work in less time. Don't think there will ever be an example where people are given less work along with less hours to do it in.

but the FT rate raised when dropping from 39 to 38 then 38 to 37 meant very little extra cash in their pockets, yet their workload remained exactly the same and then grew, all for a for a few pennies more,
i'd sooner have kept at 39hrs and got an extra 2hrs pay
it's all in the mindset, if you know you do 37hrs then that's the max some will work out of principal, if their mindset is 39hrs they will do the extra 2hrs without even thinking about it, take note when the seasonal variations start again soon

Yeah I remember that well, the CWU thought that if the working week was reduced then RM would have to introduce more duties to accommodate the fact that the same amount of work still needed to be done, oh wait........

it was the CWU who pushed the SWW, not sure if RM were even thinking about it, the union jumped on the european bandwagon where our french/german etc workers were on shorter shifts, the difference is that the don't have as many tea breaks as the british

[buchanpeter]

Its unlikely Royal Mail will do any more for the shorter working week.
Think they wanted the full time new contracts on 40 hour weeks.
CWU are currently suggesting packets and parcels only on saturday's.
Half the staff on that day working to give more Saturdays off.
That would be about a 12th of the work force off on that day.
That alone could fund a 10% payrise.
10% payrise would be about £265,000,000
The USO change "could" save up to £45,000,000.
I'd say royal mail could afford it.
They've bumped up the letters prices by about 24%.

[Mick100]

I voted NO as the deal looked terrible with sick pay being scrutinised. Yes it needed to be changed because 1% of the workforce were taking the P by not actually being sick and thought to themselves by taking a lazy day or even week, but don't let the 99% being punished.

The union told us to vote 'YES' as they hit a brick wall by trying to resolve an issue that lasted for up to six months. If anybody remembers that the dispute started in August just in time for the CEO to mention that we losing a million pounds a day and to top it off buying shares within the company.

What annoys me about the whole thing from striking, the dispute, the agreement is that it could of been dealt better. What I mean by that is leading up to Xmas we should of been striking for 3 or 4 days straight, none of this one day here and one day there nonsense. I know they were thinking about the part timers being hit hard financially but there was a financial help if needed.

We still had a live strike ballot that 90% plus folk voted to go on strike again and that was live until April (I think). I think the Union gave up as there wasn't anything more to give from the business and they weren't budging.

This will probably happen again with the next agreement that the business will not move on the pay (probably 2%) will want even more from us for as little pay as possible.

We are all moving closer to minimum wage and if this happens being a 2% rise you will probably see more people leave as there will be better jobs with better pay than us.

I did the maths on this a few days ago.
Comparing what we get paid now, compared to what we were 15 years ago we're about 11% (£3000) down this year.
With the minimum wage shooting up again in April we're gonna be down 18% (£5000) compared to what we were. (Legacy Contracts)
New contracts will be basicaly on minimum wage in April. Down 40% (£9400) from 15 years ago. (This doesn't include the deduction in breaks).
We're gonna need a massive payrise in April for the union members to start trusting the union again after the last pay deal.
Only way we'll get a big pay deal is with the reduction of the USO.
Other ways of increasing our hourly rate is a reduction to 35 hours a week. Which would be the equivalent to 5.67% pay rise.

That isn’t going to happen when new people coming in have 40 hour week contracts

[miles_peters]

What I hate is...

A RM pay rise always comes with strings attached, i.e extra work

Its never a pay rise just for all the hard work you have done and do.

[Barnacle]

I voted NO as the deal looked terrible with sick pay being scrutinised. Yes it needed to be changed because 1% of the workforce were taking the P by not actually being sick and thought to themselves by taking a lazy day or even week, but don't let the 99% being punished.

The union told us to vote 'YES' as they hit a brick wall by trying to resolve an issue that lasted for up to six months. If anybody remembers that the dispute started in August just in time for the CEO to mention that we losing a million pounds a day and to top it off buying shares within the company.

What annoys me about the whole thing from striking, the dispute, the agreement is that it could of been dealt better. What I mean by that is leading up to Xmas we should of been striking for 3 or 4 days straight, none of this one day here and one day there nonsense. I know they were thinking about the part timers being hit hard financially but there was a financial help if needed.

We still had a live strike ballot that 90% plus folk voted to go on strike again and that was live until April (I think). I think the Union gave up as there wasn't anything more to give from the business and they weren't budging.

This will probably happen again with the next agreement that the business will not move on the pay (probably 2%) will want even more from us for as little pay as possible.

We are all moving closer to minimum wage and if this happens being a 2% rise you will probably see more people leave as there will be better jobs with better pay than us.

I did the maths on this a few days ago.
Comparing what we get paid now, compared to what we were 15 years ago we're about 11% (£3000) down this year.
With the minimum wage shooting up again in April we're gonna be down 18% (£5000) compared to what we were. (Legacy Contracts)
New contracts will be basicaly on minimum wage in April. Down 40% (£9400) from 15 years ago. (This doesn't include the deduction in breaks).
We're gonna need a massive payrise in April for the union members to start trusting the union again after the last pay deal.
Only way we'll get a big pay deal is with the reduction of the USO.
Other ways of increasing our hourly rate is a reduction to 35 hours a week. Which would be the equivalent to 5.67% pay rise.

That isn’t going to happen when new people coming in have 40 hour week contracts

Just like to add to this that the 40hr new contract offering is not across the board. Not one of our numerous new starts since 2023 is on that- ours are all on 30 hours, that includes DPR new starts.

[kazardaimenu]

Should just give us a pay rise to keep pace with RPI and their own price increases. Also I would support a reduction in working hours in lieu of a big rise. The work will be there most of the time for those who want it.

[Playmail]

Paid breaks going will be part of the pay deal watch this space