News:

Welcome to V.L.H

Main Menu
Welcome to verylittlehelps. Please login or sign up.

28-03-24, 08:13PM

Login with username, password and session length
Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 38,119
  • Total Topics: 630
  • Online today: 325
  • Online ever: 1,436
  • (24-01-24, 01:01AM)
Users Online

Double Time on Sunday... uh oh

Started by sufRu, 14-01-16, 08:51PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Loki

When all else fails, madness is the emergency exit.

BANDERSNATCH


bugsbunny

Morriss999 I  don't give a damn about the other 85% of staff. I don't see them backing me especially the non contracted staff who are getting a pay out. I am fighting for myself and the other contracted double timers. who are long serving staff, and losing a lot of money. how would you feel if you had to do the same job the same hours for less pay? The other 85% of staff can look after themselves and when they want my backing in the future I will remind them of this.

BANDERSNATCH

Bugsbunny . I take it then that you were loud in your protests at the terms the 85% were employed on when the contracts changed ?

Bleh

Quote from: bugsbunny on 28-02-16, 04:42PM
Morriss999 I  don't give a damn about the other 85% of staff. I don't see them backing me especially the non contracted staff who are getting a pay out. I am fighting for myself and the other contracted double timers. who are long serving staff, and losing a lot of money. how would you feel if you had to do the same job the same hours for less pay? The other 85% of staff can look after themselves and when they want my backing in the future I will remind them of this.
Makes me laugh admitting you don't care about changes to others contracts but expecting people to shout from the rooftops for changes that affect you, very hypocritical you didn't complain when new starter contracts entitled them to less than you yet still took the pay rises. It's times like this I wish there were no premiums at all.

Nomad

I've said it before a large number of current employees shouted long and loud on the issue of new employees being employed on less favourable T&C's/wages/premiums.  The same answer was always forthcoming that there was nothing that could be done as they were not as yet employees nor were they members of union.
Nomad ( Forum Admin )
It's better to be up in arms than down on your knees.

bugsbunny

I am not asking anyone to shout from the rooftops for me. I am quite capable of doing it myself. but other people are not, so as long as they don't want me to help them that's fine. I took my job on the contract I did, which was double time. People that took theirs after 1999 knew what terms they were getting, they did not have to take the job plenty of jobs out there. If they got rid of all premiums I wonder who would shout the loudest then! I wonder who would also work on a sunday  it certainly would not be me. maybe that's what they should do Bleh

BANDERSNATCH

Bugs Bunny , so you will not help anyone from the new contracts ? 85 % of the staff ? I can see you booted out for conduct soon then . No double time on the dole !

bugsbunny

cant see that at all Bandersnatch. why would I have to help the other 85% ?

instorebakery

All staff should stick together = end of!

This company is taking us all for a ride for all it's greedy mistakes and bad investments, we are having to pay for it all. Yet we squabble amongst ourselves and the top brass are smiling, they are loving it.

We are the guys on the floor. DEMAND talks with your union and get things working back in your favour. You are paying them to do a job, you pay them, they don't pay you!

mexicopete

Well said me little pork chop. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
The worlds me lobster

BANDERSNATCH

Quote from: bugsbunny on 28-02-16, 06:56PM
cant see that at all Bandersnatch. why would I have to help the other 85% ?
Ever heard of reasonable request ? With your attitude you will be asked to work with one of those 85 % one day and refuse from what you say . I take my hat off to any rep that gets you off that one ! If that is your dinosaur point of view maybe it's better you left .

Duracell

#737
Just as a point of interest.

The stated 85% - 15% split, Is this a true interpretation of the facts?

The company have said that the minority (15%) is a number of 50,000 staff.

If we try and do a calculation, the only way 50,000 is 15%, is if it is a percentage of total UK staff.
350,000 total gives a % around 15% as 50,000.

So if you exclude all that are NOT AFFECTED by this pay deal, Distribution, Banking, All Managers at All levels and any other area that is not "Retail", It isn't 85% -15% as suggested.
Of the Collective Bargaining group AFFECTED by the Deal its different its probably closer to 65% - 35%.

Now as far as union membership goes, how many of Number are Union members, so consider for a second if a ballot took place, with only Union members able to vote, what would the % split be then?

It would be interesting to see:
Of those affected by the "Deal".
% of union members who see a cut in premiums and take home pay.
% of members who only stand to gain by a 3.1% rise.

Beause it isn't 15% - 85% FOR SURE.

Probably another reason for the call to give up the vote, Union Votes unlikely to see a substantial majority decision!
My Opinion is exactly that, Mine.  Based on my view of what I know , see and what I would do.
"Being a rep doesn't make a person right anymore than not being a rep makes a person wrong " 

Duracell.

Nomad

Can we all calm down a little, please.  I have a sense that bugsbunny is referring to 'helping' with T&C battles rather than helping with the work in store.
Nomad ( Forum Admin )
It's better to be up in arms than down on your knees.

BANDERSNATCH

Good point Nomad . I will assume that is the case. :thumbup:

optout

bugsbunny

There are many who are unaffected by the current bullshist who do care about those that are affected and would like in anyway to help. However, coordination is the key, and whilst we fight against each other there can be no coordination. :thumbup:

Miss Piggy

'All staff should stick together = end of!

This company is taking us all for a ride for all it's greedy mistakes and bad investments, we are having to pay for it all. Yet we squabble amongst ourselves and the top brass are smiling, they are loving it.

We are the guys on the floor. DEMAND talks with your union and get things working back in your favour. You are paying them to do a job, you pay them, they don't pay you!'


Totally agree :thumbup:


Duracell

Given your figures, could derecognition of USDAW be a possible goer :question:
I AM NOT A REP, BUT......

Duracell

I think you have more chance of P Clarke getting his old job back.

Even I couldn't imagine the spin that would be put against such a proposal.
My Opinion is exactly that, Mine.  Based on my view of what I know , see and what I would do.
"Being a rep doesn't make a person right anymore than not being a rep makes a person wrong " 

Duracell.

optout

#742
Have you read the link elsewhere on here provided by Beverly, my reading of it gives me a half-a-hope. :question:

What do you see, when you look at it. :question:

What major or minor hurdles do you see, for at-least getting some form of initiative off the ground. Even if it is just a shot-accross-the-bow :question: :thumbup:

ps I was thinking along the lines of membership of the Union if the Union membership of the shopworkers excluding those unaffected is below 50%. what thinks you :question: :thumbup:

OR, even if the total of Union members across Tesco is less than 50%
I AM NOT A REP, BUT......

Duracell

I see a % of retail staff unhappy.
What % are union members is unknown.

Does recognition %'s have to be across all staff or just "a particular group".
How would the actual %'s be realised in the effort to de-recognise the union?
Would there need to be another union in the sidelines to avoid claims against the effort to de-recognise as depriving a right to representation?

Wikipedia has USDAW total membership @ 433,000 members. How many of them are tied to a TESDAW Agreement?

They have members with other retailers/distribution/service industry, so even if you said 1/3 of its members are tied to a TESDAW agreement that is roughly 144,000, which is less than 50% of the company's 350,000 staff.

Ball park figures based on what is available, but I dare closer to reality than any spinned version.



My Opinion is exactly that, Mine.  Based on my view of what I know , see and what I would do.
"Being a rep doesn't make a person right anymore than not being a rep makes a person wrong " 

Duracell.

optout

Thank you for the info and you thoughts Duracell :thumbup:

In my view derecognition would not be the ultimate aim. The use of the derecognition procedure would serve as a means to an end, that end being at the conciliation stage. At the conciliation stage a proposal could be made, derecognition of the union or an end to the partnership. It is my guess that for its own survival (within tesco) USDAW would chose to end the partnership and we would get the union that we want, a union that ballots its members (for good or bad) on important issues. Yes I can see that during ballots there may still be low turn-outs, but at-least we will have been given the opportunity and can stop blaming our spineless union when things go wrong and start looking at ourselves.

Yes I realize that the above is unlikely but lets be honest we are all talk (and theorizing) and no action on here when it comes to the Partnership, so what harm is a little more talk (and theorizing) going to do. Although if i could see a clear route to the end explained earlier, I would pounce on it and take the fight to tesdaw (by myself) without hesitation, all I need is some confirmation from reliable and knowledgeable members of my peer group that I am not overlooking something obvious (which I have to admit is a trait/weakness of mine). :thumbup:
I AM NOT A REP, BUT......

the-vortex

Quote from: optout on 29-02-16, 05:02AM
... all I need is some confirmation from reliable and knowledgeable members of my peer group that I am not overlooking something obvious (which I have to admit is a trait/weakness of mine). :thumbup:

From the Colleague Handbook 2014.
QuoteFrom time to time, to reflect the needs of the business or changing legislation it may be necessary to replace, remove or make changes to Company policy and terms and conditions. We will consult with the Union should such changes need to be made but we reserve the right to make any such changes.
How obvious is that?
Loyalty is a one-way street!

optout

I was talking about derecognition of the union?????
I AM NOT A REP, BUT......

instorebakery

#747
Quote from: the-vortex on 29-02-16, 11:59PM
Quote from: optout on 29-02-16, 05:02AM
... all I need is some confirmation from reliable and knowledgeable members of my peer group that I am not overlooking something obvious (which I have to admit is a trait/weakness of mine). :thumbup:

From the Colleague Handbook 2014.
QuoteFrom time to time, to reflect the needs of the business or changing legislation it may be necessary to replace, remove or make changes to Company policy and terms and conditions. We will consult with the Union should such changes need to be made but we reserve the right to make any such changes.
How obvious is that?

How will company explain in court(if we take it that far) that they will change the T & C's for the needs of business or legislation?

Legislation = changes because of law.
Needs of business = the company would need to explain in court how it is "needs of the business", that an employee contract is to be changed.(because we want to make more money would not suffice!)


Equalizer87

They still have to remain within legal limits as to change of contracts etc. Once they step outside  this, it's a different  ball game.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"

Loki

Quote from: optout on 01-03-16, 12:03AM
I was talking about derecognition of the union?????

It's a headache and time consuming. That's all I'm saying.
When all else fails, madness is the emergency exit.

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk