Annualised hours poll

[Hyrrokkin]

Even the CWU could not bend over and agree to annualised hours...it would be a disgrace and an end to them as a union.
This is a big moment for the CWU...there is a lot of distrust,anger and apathy towards the CWU among it's members.

[Pharox]

Maybe I have interpreted it all wrong.....

A) Rushed in revisions have made duties unmanageable, so there would not be that much of a saving, any 'summer' time would then be used to compete these duties in the contracted hours?

B) I don't see how much time posties can save during the 'summer' time, since we have had these spy in our pockets, all this extra stuff we do (collection, scanning, photos etc) we don't rush around, cut corners etc, just to finished a few mins early, plus if you get back early, you get sent out with some lapsing that others don't have time to take.

At most, from my view, is that RM can only save up to an hour per day, at best. That's 5hr per work, assuming that the mail volume for that week is below the model week traffic. FT would drop to say 32hr week in the summer, and then 42hr during the winter months. But most days before and after summer months, will not allow hardly any savings to be pushed to the winter months. For me personally, the only day that I finish early, I mean between 10 - 20 mins early is the odd Monday and Tues.

But that are so many variables with his brainwave, without knowing the exact idea what RM want, it's hard to work out how it will affect us.

[pieoftheday]

So Si and the guys are floating the suggestion of annualised hours

Simon Says

I don't know whether annualised ours is the right phrase for what it is that we are proposing to do, what we're actually thinking about, and look, it's for the negotiation team, we'd love to have The CWU's point of view as well, but what we're thinking about is how can we give everybody a regular income every month, accepting that off peak, you'll work less hours per day, but on peak, you'll be working more hours a day.

It should release more time for holidays during off peak time, it should allow everybody to plan their income on a more regular basis, and it also means that we'll need less temporary workers during the peak we feel, so we can have more of the core team delivering them brilliant quality and productivity, which they actually do best.

Let's ensure the CWU have a good idea of the workforce's thoughts on the subject at least from our small corner.

Yay or nay?

Is there a definition of annualised hrs?

[Chitchat]

Il do it for a 50% pay rise and not a penny less!

[pieoftheday]

Just googled annualised hours, it's a no from me

[pieoftheday]

Maybe I have interpreted it all wrong.....

A) Rushed in revisions have made duties unmanageable, so there would not be that much of a saving, any 'summer' time would then be used to compete these duties in the contracted hours?

B) I don't see how much time posties can save during the 'summer' time, since we have had these spy in our pockets, all this extra stuff we do (collection, scanning, photos etc) we don't rush around, cut corners etc, just to finished a few mins early, plus if you get back early, you get sent out with some lapsing that others don't have time to take.

At most, from my view, is that RM can only save up to an hour per day, at best. That's 5hr per work, assuming that the mail volume for that week is below the model week traffic. FT would drop to say 32hr week in the summer, and then 42hr during the winter months. But most days before and after summer months, will not allow hardly any savings to be pushed to the winter months. For me personally, the only day that I finish early, I mean between 10 - 20 mins early is the odd Monday and Tues.

But that are so many variables with his brainwave, without knowing the exact idea what RM want, it's hard to work out how it will affect us.

Yup that makes sense, I occasionally finish a bit early on a Monday but that's about it. I wonder if they've been looking a data from those knob heads that give an hour or so of their own time every morning and run round to finish early?

[mjd24]

This isn't annualised hours he's talking about, it's changing your contracts so that you're a salaried worker - so you're no longer paid based on hours but on a monthly salaried basis and you're expected to complete your work in however long it takes.

Sounds good right? Wrong

It sounds fine for off peak periods, where you could get your work done in 4 hours then f**k off home.

But peak periods? you'd be expected to work 10-12 hour days to get your work done - and there'd be no overtime, you'd have your salaried amount and that's it, no matter how long it takes to get the work done.

No wonder RM are eager for it - they'd cut their OT budget completely, they'd be able to tell agency workers to get to f**k, and they'd be able to work the current workforce to the bone until they quit and they can bring in the new starters on shitty minimum wage contracts.

Id want at least £45’000 a year and then i might consider agreeing to that.

[pieoftheday]

If we go salaried or whatever they want to call we'll be well shafted n no mistake

[pieoftheday]

Imagine been on a salaried wage when your DO Introduced those stupid recent revisions, they have you working till 8pm

[TopperGas]

This isn't annualised hours he's talking about, it's changing your contracts so that you're a salaried worker - so you're no longer paid based on hours but on a monthly salaried basis and you're expected to complete your work in however long it takes.

Sounds good right? Wrong

It sounds fine for off peak periods, where you could get your work done in 4 hours then f**k off home.

But peak periods? you'd be expected to work 10-12 hour days to get your work done - and there'd be no overtime, you'd have your salaried amount and that's it, no matter how long it takes to get the work done.

No wonder RM are eager for it - they'd cut their OT budget completely, they'd be able to tell agency workers to get to f**k, and they'd be able to work the current workforce to the bone until they quit and they can bring in the new starters on shitty minimum wage contracts.

I can't see how any UK based business can make staff work over their agreed daily/weekly hours w/o paying them overtime for the additional hours worked, unless they've managed to "bank" a massive amount of hours during the summer months, which does seem unlikely. In my DO at present only Monday's and Tuesday's are quiet days so we could probably "bank" a couple of hours a week, not sure those two hours are then going to save RM a great deal of money during the winter months?

[Whinealot]

I think this plan to salary our pay will really cost every one of us dear, as pointed out in peak times there will be an expectation to complete regardless of time taken to complete. On the flip side you can bet everything that’s holy the management will want tidying up, and other work done before you will be able to knock off. In quick conclusion they will use it all to their advantage and we will get very little “benefit” at all in quieter times.

[mjd24]

Its not going to happen.

[Woody Guthrie]

I think this plan to salary our pay will really cost every one of us dear,

It's a huge leap to go from what he said to the idea of salaried pay.

He talks about regular monthly income, I already have that and I'm not salaried or even monthly paid.

What I suspect he means is that you would continue to be paid a full-time basic wage throughout the year despite perhaps working 30hrs "off peak" and 40hrs "on peak".

It's still a bag of nonsense but nothing like the crazy speculation that's going on here.

[britwrit]

Like everyone else has said, this is an unworkable scare tactic.

The CWU should include some of those in their "demands." Let's have a 20 percent pay rise, no strings, and ten weeks of holiday a year.

[Minischoles]

This isn't annualised hours he's talking about, it's changing your contracts so that you're a salaried worker - so you're no longer paid based on hours but on a monthly salaried basis and you're expected to complete your work in however long it takes.

Sounds good right? Wrong

It sounds fine for off peak periods, where you could get your work done in 4 hours then f**k off home.

But peak periods? you'd be expected to work 10-12 hour days to get your work done - and there'd be no overtime, you'd have your salaried amount and that's it, no matter how long it takes to get the work done.

No wonder RM are eager for it - they'd cut their OT budget completely, they'd be able to tell agency workers to get to f**k, and they'd be able to work the current workforce to the bone until they quit and they can bring in the new starters on shitty minimum wage contracts.

I can't see how any UK based business can make staff work over their agreed daily/weekly hours w/o paying them overtime for the additional hours worked, unless they've managed to "bank" a massive amount of hours during the summer months, which does seem unlikely. In my DO at present only Monday's and Tuesday's are quiet days so we could probably "bank" a couple of hours a week, not sure those two hours are then going to save RM a great deal of money during the winter months?

Honestly? they'd probably put the salaried hours at something way over what your current hours are, so even come winter if you work 10 hour days you'd still not hit the overtime limit.

Maybe even combine it with the OT rate being reduced even more (something like 50p p/h more) so even if you somehow exceed those salaried hours, you'll make f**k all more.

There's a whole host of ways to f**k around with salaried positions, just ask any middle manager in RM, any deputy head or headteacher, hell ask any IT worker or bank intern - it's only at the very top that salaried positions are better, at the lower end they're absolutely used to shaft workers.