Get this into your heads there will be no significant pay rise, only crumbs! Some 2%, 4%, 2% bs.. (6%) over 3 years....
The takeover consortium is heavily funded by loans and debt, they need to pay this back and generate profit meaning us at bottom will continue to get pittance!
Not forgetting to get ahead of game in parcels a lot of money needs investing, something that that £600m given to shareholders few years ago could have achieved!
The CWU has failed its members big time over the last 2 decades and they should be ashamed, they are no better than that Thompson clown..
You raise a great point in paragraph 2. This has totally gone under the radar by the media,MPs & again most importantly the CWU. It gets reported that The Sphincter is buying RM for approximately £4b, what isn’t being said is what you correctly pointed out & that is the buy out is funded by loans against the company. Lord Sphincter isn’t putting anymore money in than I am - just imagine what the interest repayments on that loan are. This means that every year this debt has to be serviced, the owners want a profit & running costs have to be met. To make all this add up there are going to be savage & unpleasant cuts!!!!
Think everyone assumes that he is funding this but out himself. Wrong!!!!
Even one of the journalists in the business friendly Daily Mail critically pointed this out several times, it seems nobody in the Govt/regulatory spheres was bothered. Better EP take on the debt rather than the Govt./taxpayer is the belief I suppose. It'll be EP's business to do what they want with.
Sorry but I think you misunderstood what was being said. It’s not a debt that the current RM have that EP are taking in (in fact it looks & sounds as if they’ll be handing it over in profit) but the fact that the money they’re buying the company with is borrowed against the company.
Anyone into football will know that this is the same thing that the Glazers did when “buying” Man Utd and look where that has landed them ever since. As I understand it it’s not the people as such buying the business but the in a weird way the business buying itself.
I would also expect that Sunday working is one of the items/areas of difference — something that I doubt can/will be removed, especially as Sunday ops look to be a big area of growth for the company and something that’s here to stay.
But i am hoping that Martin Walsh will, as requested, list the 14 points of difference between the two contracts, rather than just asserting there are 14 differences but with no further detail. Martin, can you please enlighten us?
Whilst we're waiting perhaps we could start to compile our own list, the aspects I can think of are :
Negatives
1. Lower rate of pay
2. No delivery supplement
3. No paid breaks
4. Monthly pay
5. Month's notice when leaving
6. Sunday working as part of contract
Positives
1. Overtime paid at 1.25 over 40 hours
2. 40 hour contracts can be offered
Can anyone think of the others ?
A good list, Ted. Although it is subjective, I personally would move the month’s notice down to positives though —it is a two-way thing, with the business needing to give the employee a month’s notice too.
Until Martin Walsh deigns us with a response, we will just have to take his word for it that there are 14 differences, 11 negative, 3 positive.
definite negative for me, split days off. Means people don't get work life balance as there is no way of organising a night out etc until your actual leave.
Maybe this varies locally. My days off are currently fixed as Monday and Tuesday and have been since starting. There is however an imminent move to rolling days off at our place so that people do Sundays on a rota, but the rest days will still stay together (Tues/Weds, Weds/Thurs, Thurs/Fri, Fri/Sat, then eventually the coveted Sat/Sun rest weekend!).
At my place I'm on a roling day off. 2 days off a week, 1 is sunday as a currently permanent feature...the other day is the roling day off. It's awful because having to do another Mon-Fri part time job to make ends meet.
inflation is 2.5%, so the union are after what? a 2.6% pay rise?
I don't think Royal Mail will mind too much about a 2.6% pay rise seeing as they put up stamp prices by 22% last year, have been purposefully understaffing us for years which has saved them millions and are likely going to get a USO change which will save them ~£450million.
Demand at least a 5% pay rise because of all of this. If Royal Mail get the go ahead for the USO change in ~June - then maybe they should include an additional % pay rise from June onwards with backpay to April 2025.
5% would just cover us losing the delivery supplement, should be getting at least 7.6%
1. The agreement with EP states that we will equalise new entrants pay , terms and conditions over an agreed period of time within a career path with a first step being applied within 3 months of a takeover.
Remember new entrants pay, terms and conditions were imposed. There are circa 21 thousand new entrants in position currently all will see their pay, terms and conditions improved.
There are 14 differences in their contract compared to a legacy one. 11 of them inferior and three better. We will be equalising them all over an agreed period of time.
The functional supplements will remain. They will not be lost.
The discussion we will have is every part of Royal Mail earn at least £11.40 per week in a functional supplement so should we consolidate this amount into basic pensionable pay.
can you confirm if the pay rise will beat inflation and the delivery supplement so at least a 7.6% rise? That’s going on what you said about the pay rise consolidating the delivery supplement.
1. The agreement with EP states that we will equalise new entrants pay , terms and conditions over an agreed period of time within a career path with a first step being applied within 3 months of a takeover.
Remember new entrants pay, terms and conditions were imposed. There are circa 21 thousand new entrants in position currently all will see their pay, terms and conditions improved.
There are 14 differences in their contract compared to a legacy one. 11 of them inferior and three better. We will be equalising them all over an agreed period of time.
The functional supplements will remain. They will not be lost.
The discussion we will have is every part of Royal Mail earn at least £11.40 per week in a functional supplement so should we consolidate this amount into basic pensionable pay.
can you confirm if the pay rise will beat inflation and the delivery supplement so at least a 7.6% rise? That’s going on what you said about the pay rise consolidating the delivery supplement.
Think it's more likely the lowest of the function supplements will be the one consolidated into basic pay
inflation is 2.5%, so the union are after what? a 2.6% pay rise?
I don't think Royal Mail will mind too much about a 2.6% pay rise seeing as they put up stamp prices by 22% last year, have been purposefully understaffing us for years which has saved them millions and are likely going to get a USO change which will save them ~£450million.
Demand at least a 5% pay rise because of all of this. If Royal Mail get the go ahead for the USO change in ~June - then maybe they should include an additional % pay rise from June onwards with backpay to April 2025.
5% would just cover us losing the delivery supplement, should be getting at least 7.6%
We're not losing the delivery supplement.
CWU are proposing it gets consolidated into basic pay.
inflation is 2.5%, so the union are after what? a 2.6% pay rise?
I don't think Royal Mail will mind too much about a 2.6% pay rise seeing as they put up stamp prices by 22% last year, have been purposefully understaffing us for years which has saved them millions and are likely going to get a USO change which will save them ~£450million.
Demand at least a 5% pay rise because of all of this. If Royal Mail get the go ahead for the USO change in ~June - then maybe they should include an additional % pay rise from June onwards with backpay to April 2025.
5% would just cover us losing the delivery supplement, should be getting at least 7.6%
We're not losing the delivery supplement.
CWU are proposing it gets consolidated into basic pay.
inflation is 2.5%, so the union are after what? a 2.6% pay rise?
I don't think Royal Mail will mind too much about a 2.6% pay rise seeing as they put up stamp prices by 22% last year, have been purposefully understaffing us for years which has saved them millions and are likely going to get a USO change which will save them ~£450million.
Demand at least a 5% pay rise because of all of this. If Royal Mail get the go ahead for the USO change in ~June - then maybe they should include an additional % pay rise from June onwards with backpay to April 2025.
5% would just cover us losing the delivery supplement, should be getting at least 7.6%
We're not losing the delivery supplement.
CWU are proposing it gets consolidated into basic pay.
That's the point he's making
Pay rises usually apply to basic pay and allowances, so whether the supplement is paid as a separate amount or included in basic pay is irrelevant.
But more pay will probably be pensionable.
inflation is 2.5%, so the union are after what? a 2.6% pay rise?
I don't think Royal Mail will mind too much about a 2.6% pay rise seeing as they put up stamp prices by 22% last year, have been purposefully understaffing us for years which has saved them millions and are likely going to get a USO change which will save them ~£450million.
Demand at least a 5% pay rise because of all of this. If Royal Mail get the go ahead for the USO change in ~June - then maybe they should include an additional % pay rise from June onwards with backpay to April 2025.
5% would just cover us losing the delivery supplement, should be getting at least 7.6%
We're not losing the delivery supplement.
CWU are proposing it gets consolidated into basic pay.
That's the point he's making
Pay rises usually apply to basic pay and allowances, so whether the supplement is paid as a separate amount or included in basic pay is irrelevant.
But more pay will probably be pensionable.
Yes, but the union would claim the headline figure regardless of whether the supplement is taken away.
I'm going with a 500 quid bung to give it up.
And the union will lap it up, so will people wanting a quick 350 quid after tax- enough for a weekend away.
I'm going with a 500 quid bung to give it up.
And the union will lap it up, so will people wanting a quick 350 quid after tax- enough for a weekend away.
4 months upfront in return for giving it up for good?
a) that's not what the union are proposing.
b) only a fool would choose an option like that.
Obviously I'm not saying that's a good thing.
The union have SAID they're trying to get it consolidated into pay.
Saying and doing are different things
They have form for recommending bungs instead.
And people do vote for it.
Just watch.
inflation is 2.5%, so the union are after what? a 2.6% pay rise?
I don't think Royal Mail will mind too much about a 2.6% pay rise seeing as they put up stamp prices by 22% last year, have been purposefully understaffing us for years which has saved them millions and are likely going to get a USO change which will save them ~£450million.
Demand at least a 5% pay rise because of all of this. If Royal Mail get the go ahead for the USO change in ~June - then maybe they should include an additional % pay rise from June onwards with backpay to April 2025.
5% would just cover us losing the delivery supplement, should be getting at least 7.6%
We're not losing the delivery supplement.
CWU are proposing it gets consolidated into basic pay.
That's the point he's making
If all staff are going to lose their function supplements, then everyone must be getting whatever the delivery one is added to their basic pay. If that isn't happening then you're going to have different functions on different pay rates.
inflation is 2.5%, so the union are after what? a 2.6% pay rise?
I don't think Royal Mail will mind too much about a 2.6% pay rise seeing as they put up stamp prices by 22% last year, have been purposefully understaffing us for years which has saved them millions and are likely going to get a USO change which will save them ~£450million.
Demand at least a 5% pay rise because of all of this. If Royal Mail get the go ahead for the USO change in ~June - then maybe they should include an additional % pay rise from June onwards with backpay to April 2025.
5% would just cover us losing the delivery supplement, should be getting at least 7.6%
We're not losing the delivery supplement.
CWU are proposing it gets consolidated into basic pay.
That's the point he's making
If all staff are going to lose their function supplements, then everyone must be getting whatever the delivery one is added to their basic pay. If that isn't happening then you're going to have different functions on different pay rates.
That's fine it's normal practice elsewhere for companies to have differing rates of pay dependant on the job for example a Sainsbury's shopping delivery driver gets more per hour than a shop assistant.
However for the 19 thousand new entrants which joined Royal Mail after 1st December 2022 we want a time line when they receive the supplement.
[/quote]
So what appears to be an extremely important question here, exactly when did these 19000 new joiners start joining, after Dec 2022 could mean that the entire cohort joined piecemeal since Dec 2022 or that they all joined in Oct 2024... or that it was spread out over the time period. It makes a difference what that timescale is.
Was that influx of 19000 new starters preceded by an exodus of 19000 new joiners, people reaching pension, people being sacked or people leaving due to company culture.
Why do I ask. It makes a massive difference why people leave, if the turn over is really quick it hints at a cultural problem within the company and overheads on recruitment could be reduced by fixing the issues and retaining employees. Just a thought ....
