News:

Welcome to V.L.H

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

29-03-24, 02:08PM

Login with username, password and session length
Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 38,129
  • Total Topics: 630
  • Online today: 471
  • Online ever: 1,436
  • (24-01-24, 01:01AM)
Users Online
Users: 4
Guests: 419
Total: 423

Double Time on Sunday... uh oh

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

Previous topic - Next topic

smithwally

Well that depends on to what degree you are prepared to compromise or whether you want double premium kept period.

So your outcomes could be:

You can ask for reinstatement of the premium in full

or

you could argue the lump sum payment is inadequate compensation for the future loss of earnings and the smaller pension that will result and ask for the lump sum to be increased

Or

you could ask for the double premium to be frozen at its current value until the one and a half timers catch up via the annual pay rises.

Or you could ask for extra permanent Sunday hours to make up for the shortfall if you are on a short Sunday shift.

Hope that helps

smithwally

If done as a collective grievance then you need to have a discussion with your affected colleagues as to what the majority view as an acceptable outcome.

My personal view is ask for double pay etc to be reinstated rather than offer compromises as Tesco can then try to negotiate you down.

Let Tesco come to you with a compromise first and then you can try negotiating upwards. But that is my personal negotiating style.....

optout

It helps a lot :thumbup:

If there were to be (as a simple example) 3 separate group grievances (one at each of 3 separate stores) and these grievances each had separate (different) demands/requests for their outcomes how could/would this be resolved.


In short , would it be better to coordinate many separate group grievances and maintain the same outcome request for all of them :question:

I AM NOT A REP, BUT......

Duracell

Smithwally, where such a grievance could trip up on a technicality wouldn't all of the concerned staff be then "out in the cold".
Whereas individual grievances can learn from each other, where one may fail on circumstance another can still continue maybe with greater credibility.

I see a collective greivance as less oppertunity and scope to succeed.
It will only take a few or even one good strong case to succeed for the whole thing to be halted and looked at, so in my view the more instances there are the more likelyhood of success.

To put it extremely what scenario carries more weight and chances of a success for the 50,000 staff adversley affected, 20 grievances of 2,500 each grievance or 50,000 grievances.

Also I would not ask for reinstatement of premium as this concedes the removal of it. View as Not gone, can't be removed until you agree to it you have not conceded to the change.
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

So we could/should not (using Duracell's reasoning) request an outcome as such, because the reason for the grievance doesn't exist? (or we would/should not be admitting to the existence of the reason)??  :question:
I AM NOT A REP, BUT......

Duracell

#780
Where some are facing losing 30% of their earning, how is that ever going to be acceptable to that individual, the principle I hold dear is that for the contract change to be binding it has to be agreed to by those named in the contract, so under what circumstance does the individual concede to a loss, if it is fair and applied to all? Spreading losses? No
No rise next year, no deal.

From the events unfolding in Ireland, there is some scope to reason There is no need for a loss or reduction, particularly as other groups within the company are not facing a loss but in fact stand to gain. The Bias doesn't stand scrutiny where the individual has no say.
Other areas of the business have had accepted increases 2016 without any losses to that group.

Optout, you sort of got what I meant,  to ask for something back acknowledges it has been removed, for it to be removed requires your agreement.



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

so is the time for grievance, when they (tesdaw) try to enforce this farce. :question:
I AM NOT A REP, BUT......

Duracell

How do you reject the lump sum payment?
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

Hey,

I'm asking the questions here, and my head is starting to hurt. ;) :thumbup:

what is the solution, (don't make me beat it out of you now) :question: :)

maybe those who are not getting lump sums, but did have the option of double time,  but then what is the financial loss, as has been said before, you can only be compensated for financial loss or for something that can be calculated as having a financial value. Where is the financial loss of somebody who didn't use the option that they had.

:question: :question: :question:
I AM NOT A REP, BUT......

Duracell

No I meant leaving a challenge until it's applied would invoke the need to reject the payment.

I think sooner is better than later
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.

smithwally

Quote from: optout on 08-03-16, 10:51PM
It helps a lot :thumbup:

If there were to be (as a simple example) 3 separate group grievances (one at each of 3 separate stores) and these grievances each had separate (different) demands/requests for their outcomes how could/would this be resolved.


In short , would it be better to coordinate many separate group grievances and maintain the same outcome request for all of them :question:

That is a very good question. All I can offer are the following observations rather than answers.

Tesco does have the option of applying individual contractual variations to individual staff contracts such as a bigger lump sum, or freezing of current rate of pay etc etc. This would be a difficult road for Tesco to go down in case other staff at other stores got to find out about it and they did not have the same variations offered to them.

So if enough people submitted similar grievances from different stores  but with different requested outcomes, I think given the content of the grievances it would have to go out of store to at least the Group Personnel Manager to deal with. The instore PM's are not really able to deal with these grievances themselves.

That GPM may well refer the grievance(s) to Tesco's own Legal Dept. At this point the GPM will have several grievances all dealing with the Sunday Premium issues

How does one achieve visibility of *every* single grievance being written and gain the grievance writer's co-operation in agreeing a common outcome?

If you have a grievance with say 30 people signing it in one store say, I think it would be harder for Tesco to ignore it and that they would realise that at least for that store they had a serious problem.

Redshoes

Quote from: optout on 08-03-16, 11:50PM
Hey,

I'm asking the questions here, and my head is starting to hurt. ;) :thumbup:

what is the solution, (don't make me beat it out of you now) :question: :)

maybe those who are not getting lump sums, but did have the option of double time,  but then what is the financial loss, as has been said before, you can only be compensated for financial loss or for something that can be calculated as having a financial value. Where is the financial loss of somebody who didn't use the option that they had.

:question: :question: :question:

It's simple. If you qualified for double time on Sunday's but never worked them there is nothing to compensate you for so you get nothing. I am one of these people. I did do the odd Sunday if needed but I prefer not not. Not worth the extra money as extra national insurance and tax did not make it worth while for me. I would rather not work six days a week for so little money.

smithwally

Quote from: Duracell on 08-03-16, 10:58PM
Smithwally, where such a grievance could trip up on a technicality wouldn't all of the concerned staff be then "out in the cold".
Whereas individual grievances can learn from each other, where one may fail on circumstance another can still continue maybe with greater credibility.

I see a collective greivance as less oppertunity and scope to succeed.
It will only take a few or even one good strong case to succeed for the whole thing to be halted and looked at, so in my view the more instances there are the more likelyhood of success.

To put it extremely what scenario carries more weight and chances of a success for the 50,000 staff adversley affected, 20 grievances of 2,500 each grievance or 50,000 grievances.

Also I would not ask for reinstatement of premium as this concedes the removal of it. View as Not gone, can't be removed until you agree to it you have not conceded to the change.

This is where by doing a good job on covering all of the legal issues, employment law, Union issues, collective group impacts, and reading the Tesco Grievance policy will be very helpful to your cause so that it does not trip on a technicality

One point that needs raising is that bear in mind that if the grievance fails, if you refuse the lump sum or refuse to work for 1.5x, Tesco does have the legal option of issuing you with notice of termination of contract and offer you re-engagement on the new contract.

At this point you will be forced to sign the new contract or to leave Tesco.

At this point it is worth reading http://www.acas.org.uk/media/pdf/8/6/Varying-a-contract-of-employment-accessible-version.pdf

as there is an important note on page 8 which states:

Important Note

Collective Consultation
If an employer decides to terminate the contracts and offer reengagement on different terms for 20 or more employees they are legally required to consult collectively with any recognised trade union or workforce representatives. The penalty at Employment Tribunal for not complying with this legal requirement is a Protective Award. Call the Acas Helpline for further advice.

It would suggest that if you have 20 or more people behind each individual store grievance, you have an extra layer of protection when it comes to July as Tesco are legally obliged to consult with USDAW.

It would only need 1 grievance at each store with a minimum of 20 people signing it to force Tesco to go back to the union...

smithwally

Quote from: Duracell on 08-03-16, 11:39PM
How do you reject the lump sum payment?

Rather than reject the lump sum, you would be better off calculating your loss of future earnings between July and when you retire and use that as a ball park figure.

Say for a 7.5hr Sunday shift, old pay rate is 7.39, new pay rate is 7.61

So old pay would be 7.5*  2 * 7.39 = 110.85, new pay is 7.5* 7.61 * 1.5 = 85.61

Weekly difference in sunday pay = £25.23

You will have to deduct the effect of the pay rise you get on the other shifts, but for now for the purposes of the illustration:

52 weeks in a year so thats 52 * 25.23 = 630.94 per year.

Lets say you are 45. You have 22 years left to work until retirement so thats 22 years at 630.94 = £13,880.62

Now that ignores the annual pay rises between now and your retirement so your future earnings loss is actually higher than the quoted figure

Plus you are paying less in the new DC pension scheme so you also get a smaller pension

Also your share sin success and annual bonus are reduced too

Now calculatre your lump sum bonus, thats 18 months which is 52 weeks plus 26 weeks = 78 weeks.

So lump sum is 78 x 25.23 = 1967.94.

Now see the argument for proving that the lump some is woefully inadequate?

Also Look up Saturday Premium, The deal offered then was a voluntary buyout of 3 years worth of the saturday premium so you can also argue that the sunday premium lump some does not follow past customs.... it should be at least 3 years worth too....

nightsboy

off current topic but still to do with premiums. if I were to leave my store in the next few months and move to distribution, would I keep my premiums???

Expressdude2016

#790
you would get what ever premiums on offer at time of transfer.you would not keep premiums you are on in store. but the premiums would still be based on your start date so if your start date entitled you to double time sunday you should get that

Mickymouse1962

Smithwally using your calculations over 18 months with 4 bank holidays  and 30 Sundays I would be owed £ 16700 before tax and insurance  cam of which takes it down to £12,500 or there abouts I am not holding my breath

Loki

#792
I cannot understand why this is still being discussed without anyone taking their "convictions" to a solicitor as previously suggested.

I realise that after already looking into this I have made my stance on this matter known, however, for those affected who do not agree, why have you not approached a solicitor? Until you do so its nothing other than "p**s and wind" not to mention wasting energy by barking up the wrong bloody tree.

When all else fails, madness is the emergency exit.

daftjoe

Well said Loki. We have it in hand at my store mate!!

Finally it would seem people are starting to realise just how much they may lose by these changes. Now is the time to get off your backside and do something...

Loki

Like I said, there are certain matters that some need to take to a solicitor otherwise it's "p**s and wind". Believe me, I've been through equally complexed situations such as this before and brick wall is a mild term to say the least.
When all else fails, madness is the emergency exit.

smithwally

Quote from: Loki on 09-03-16, 12:18PM
Like I said, there are certain matters that some need to take to a solicitor otherwise it's "p**s and wind". Believe me, I've been through equally complexed situations such as this before and brick wall is a mild term to say the least.

Loki, Can I ask a question then?

What is the best way forward to retain the double pay for Sundays and Bank Holidays from 3rd July onwards or to overturn/change the current pay deal?

Duracell

Quote from: Loki on 09-03-16, 11:49AM
I cannot understand why this is still being discussed without anyone taking their "convictions" to a solicitor as previously suggested.

I realise that after already looking into this I have made my stance on this matter known, however, for those affected who do not agree, why have you not approached a solicitor? Until you do so its nothing other than "p**s and wind" not to mention wasting energy by barking up the wrong bloody tree.

To be fair it is not essential that you do undestand, like you have said you have made your opinion clear, some may well have started proceedings to deal with their concerns, what do you expect to happen by you giving your opinion that there is Nothing to discuss so the topic ends?

It's a forum not the Loki Show.
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.

tumshie


instorebakery

#798
Quote from: Loki on 09-03-16, 11:49AM
I cannot understand why this is still being discussed without anyone taking their "convictions" to a solicitor as previously suggested.

I realise that after already looking into this I have made my stance on this matter known, however, for those affected who do not agree, why have you not approached a solicitor? Until you do so its nothing other than "p**s and wind" not to mention wasting energy by barking up the wrong bloody tree.



Why would one approach(and pay for) a solicitor before exhausting all other avenues?

I believe(correct me if I'm wrong) the correct policy when aggrieved about anything at Tesco is to exercise the grievance procedure, either as an individual or a collective body?

Resolution to the grievance =wouldn't it simply be to retain the status quo and to make no changes to the terms and conditions of my contract?

And if Tesco was to say that they will implement changes(based on collective/partnership agreements with USDAW), then wouldn't that be considered as no resolution sought for the employee(s) concerned, meaning they then exercise the next stage of the grievance policy(until all stages get exhausted and it then gets moved to a third party)?


smithwally

Piggy, you raise some good points.

Here are my points in return...

Not all staff are knowledgeable about union law, ACAS, employment law, contract law. You can only go so far doing targeted research via Google.

Also some staff may find doing their own research very extremely daunting and struggle

Also some staff: (a) they may have not raised one before or (b) be prone to making school boy errors or (c) not write the grievance well or (d) write points that are trivial or irrelevant to their grievance.

The value a solicitor would give to reviewing a proposed grievance before submitting is that you have:

robust arguments
That you have understood your research about unions, ACAS, employment law, contract law etc
and that your robust arguments do not compromise your position
and that there are no accidental technicalities in your grievance that cause it to fail.

As part of that solicitors service he/she can give you an informed legal opinion of where you stand. This will help you decide if further steps are required should the grievance's outcome be not to your desired outcome.

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk