Paid below the National Minimum Wage!

[TopperGas]

Because you are not under the national minimum wage old contracts are on £14:56 and new contracts are on £13.07.

The minimum wage is £12.71.

The issue is that when an individual under the law has say 6% pension contributions, 1% pension booster ,or other salary sacrifice payments which reduce their pay before tax and national insurance are deducted and then work an attendance pattern which means they don’t 37 hours per week but 45 hours and some more than the law means they could be under the national minimum wage.

Our pay rise cost over £170 million pounds for 3% which will be an ongoing cost for future years. Royal Mail made £5 million pounds profit on a £9 billion turnover. They are forecasted to lost over £200 million this year even with USO deployment.

Do you really think that you would be better off without a union at this point ? Unless the government agree to a level playing field including a single status worker then there will not be a Royal Mail as we see it in 3 to 5 years.

Sorry your comments make no sense, either we are under the NMW or we're not, there's no grey area, the fact the hourly rate is above the NWM is irrelevant as once pension contributions are deducted we're clearly below the NMW and RM could potentially be fined for paying below the NMW.

No idea why you think we don't want a union we just want one which will.fight our corner not be out of by RM's bankruptcy nonsense as there's no way DK is going to simply write off the £B's he's paid for RM by putting it into Admin.

There seems no indications that Labour are going to upset Amazon and co by going down the single status worker route. When any MP's appear in the news critising postal delays they always blame RM not unfair competition from Amazon etc.

[loyalsnail]

It's to do with mistake from HMRC over working time in lieu to get your rota week off. They think that those extra hours take you below minimum wage, despite the fact that all full timers (regardless of rota) are actually all doing 37 hours a week. There was no under payment.

Basically everyone who got a pay out has been given free money from Royal Mail. In our office it ranges from a couple of hundred to around £4000. If you did more overtime, you got less money.

Everyone should have gotten the same amount as we are all on the same hourly rate (part time shifts should get something pro-rata). It's created an imbalance amongst the staff and we should be joining together to ensure that all full-timers (regardless of shift structure) get the same amount as the highest paid out person who got this money.

Not quite.

It's not a mistake, but it is related to rota weeks off. Rota workers work an AVERAGE of 37hrs per week (or however many hours their contract is), but work longer hours on each of the weeks their week off doesn't fall in, so they're working more hours than paid. HMRC doesn't care for averages, the regulations are written in a way that each week has to be looked at independent of the other weeks, therefore according to HMRC rota workers are being paid fewer hours than worked in five of their six rotation weeks, and if the stars align correctly that can take them below nmw.

Everyone should absolutely NOT get the same amount. It's a payment to ensure compliance, nothing more, nothing less.

But they work those hours to get the week off, so over the course of doing a 1 in 4 or 1 in 6 rota week, they work the same amount of hours as someone on a day off rota, on the same basic wage, so there is no difference. Compliance payment or not, the person on the frame next to you got paid a couple of grand for doing the same thing you do, but on a different rota structure. There is an imbalance, and it's not fair that week off staff are getting more than you, just to comply with HMRCs view of time in lieu working

Quite. That's essentially what Royal Mail are arguing, albeit they're arguing it's not fair they have to pay these lump sums on a technicality when each employee is paid above nmw as an hourly rate and is paid for each hour they perform.

As Martin said previously, it's a case of how HMRC are classifying Royal Mail employees which means these issues are arising. Change the classification and the problem goes away, but HMRC won't do that easily.

[BenacreNick]

Probably time to wrap this one up now to stop it going on and on, there's been some great explanations to read and digest. And we've all learned something new about the HMRC rules. It's great that an external verifier has been heavily involved too for accuracy purposes. If you’ve had a little win this time, great and we all know what duty patterns to vote for in the future.

[loyalsnail]

Because you are not under the national minimum wage old contracts are on £14:56 and new contracts are on £13.07.

The minimum wage is £12.71.

The issue is that when an individual under the law has say 6% pension contributions, 1% pension booster ,or other salary sacrifice payments which reduce their pay before tax and national insurance are deducted and then work an attendance pattern which means they don’t 37 hours per week but 45 hours and some more than the law means they could be under the national minimum wage.

Our pay rise cost over £170 million pounds for 3% which will be an ongoing cost for future years. Royal Mail made £5 million pounds profit on a £9 billion turnover. They are forecasted to lost over £200 million this year even with USO deployment.

Do you really think that you would be better off without a union at this point ? Unless the government agree to a level playing field including a single status worker then there will not be a Royal Mail as we see it in 3 to 5 years.

Sorry your comments make no sense, either we are under the NMW or we're not, there's no grey area, the fact the hourly rate is above the NWM is irrelevant as once pension contributions are deducted we're clearly below the NMW and RM could potentially be fined for paying below the NMW.

No idea why you think we don't want a union we just want one which will.fight our corner not be out of by RM's bankruptcy nonsense as there's no way DK is going to simply write off the £B's he's paid for RM by putting it into Admin.

There seems no indications that Labour are going to upset Amazon and co by going down the single status worker route. When any MP's appear in the news critising postal delays they always blame RM not unfair competition from Amazon etc.

It makes sense but, respectfully, it's difficult for the layman worker to understand.

Also there is loads of grey area, that's also part of the problem.

[Perseus]

What's in it for HMRC to change their ways?
Surely they will just be happy to get the tax on the extra payments ad infinitum?

I can understand why people are annoyed about this when others are getting their shift pattern (and therefore work/life balance) upheld, then getting an unexpected bonus for it. On the flip side, many offices without Wallys etc are getting their finish times on a Saturday potentially brought from 4:30pm to 4:15pm (yes, i'm aware that some on Wallys will have crap finish times too).

[Martin Walsh]

Toppergas if everyone worked 37 hours per week everyone’s hourly rate would be well above the £12.71 national minimum wage.

However to stop ruthless employers taking such things as tips or other issues into account the Government has issued the law to review any company who after any deductions for salary sacrifice against the hours which are worked weekly to be reviewed to see if they are receiving an hourly rate of £12.71 or more.

Royal Mail’s preferred option would be to cease any attendance pattern which worked a number of extra hours to get a week or weeks off.

The union has stopped this and therefore Royal Mail have decided to pay extra to avoid any potential breaches.

In short the only real breach is our members have opted to select an attendance pattern which means their hours worked potentially breached the national minimum wage.

What is the real problem is salary sacrifice is a benefit where people vouunter to use the tax benefit to opt for pension contributions, AVCs , my bundle items , POAL and this is not taken into account by the law. Equally if they simply defined Royal Mail’s as salary workers meaning they balance their hours over a period of weeks or months they would be exempt from the law and no payments would be needed.

[Martin Walsh]

By the way Middlesbough football club were fined by the HMRC for breaching the national minimum wage for giving their employees a free season ticket under salary sacrifice, so you can see the problem.

[Perseus]

Does delivery supplement get taken into consideration for hourly rate? i.e. basic pay, plus shift allowance then divide by 37 for FT?

[A2B]

This seems a total farce MW has now posted most staff will only get £100 or so and only staff due to get>£500 are due to receive letters.

We've got posties in our DO who've got in excess of a £1,000 but others only £200 even though they work similar hours, there seems no logic to the payments, it's like lucky dip what payment you get.

The fact they won't show the breakdown of how they reached that figure doesn't help.

I "think" the key is what Salary Sacrifice they had coming out of their wages, larger deduction the more money being refunded?

Nope

What is the real problem is salary sacrifice is a benefit where people vouunter to use the tax benefit to opt for pension contributions, AVCs , my bundle items , POAL and this is not taken into account by the law. Equally if they simply defined Royal Mail’s as salary workers meaning they balance their hours over a period of weeks or months they would be exempt from the law and no payments would be needed.

[Martin Walsh]

No supplements, allowances or overtime are not counted. The HMRC audited Angard and said that due to the complexity of Royal Mails wage variances and the hours individuals worked each week they could not be defined as salaried workers.

Therefore the calculation for any individual is under the law is that the wage after salary sacrifice ( even those amounts which are voluntary) divided by the hours they have worked in the week or month if they monthly paid. Above £12.71 is ok below results in a payment.

[Perseus]

I know some members that pay fairly high % into an AVC which would easily take them under £12.71 when it's basic wage only (what's left of it after pension AVC's etc) divided by 37. Are they likely to be contacted in due course?

[Martin Walsh]

It will depend on their circumstances and the hours/ attendance pattern.

This is why Royal Mail stopped POAL ( purchase of annual leave)for the majority and took on the payments of my bundle items to reduce the risk.

The real issue is an AVC is a voluntary benefit and should not under the law mean they recieve a payment. Obviously the law is the issue in some of these cases.

[Perseus]

All the shift patterns are your basic rotating days off with very minimal averaging out over periods of 4 or 6 weeks.
We have people nearing retirement that put huge amounts into AVC's.

[goldy2007]

It will depend on their circumstances and the hours/ attendance pattern.

This is why Royal Mail stopped POAL ( purchase of annual leave)for the majority and took on the payments of my bundle items to reduce the risk.

The real issue is an AVC is a voluntary benefit and should not under the law mean they recieve a payment. Obviously the law is the issue in some of these cases.

Late this

So is the 1 in 6 soon to be 2 in 5

Is that still an option going forward or just rolling day off

[Martin Walsh]

Strange do you think someone who opts to hire a car , pay for a bike to work scheme, a train season ticket 6% pension contributions and 1% booster and works a Wallington or other improved attendance should be entitled to a higher payment then someone who works37 hours on every week.

The law needs to reflect that most Royal Mail attendance patterns balance their hours over a number of weeks not a single week.

If this was the case these extra payments ( that is what they are ) would not be needed. No one is being paid less than the national minimum wage over the course of a Wally circle.