Sunday premium down to time and a quarter.

[JL]

It is promoted in our store posters are up next to clock machine. Our place should not get a green due to staff morale and issues people have had with the TMs. Think the TMs know what's going to happen and are bracing themselves for the backlash from our SM.  The way some TMs have been treating GAs over the last year has been abysmal and this should be recorded so the SM knows the bigger picture.

[bugsbunny]

Exactly the same in my store Greengrocer.

[Pedroximenez]

I'm thinking of opting out of Sunday's now and hopefully pick some hours up elsewhere,  I think the quarter hour premium will go in 2020. Does anyone know if I I did opt out would I need to pay back my £100 cushion payment ?

[Rad]

It is promoted in our store posters are up next to clock machine. Our place should not get a green due to staff morale and issues people have had with the TMs. Think the TMs know what's going to happen and are bracing themselves for the backlash from our SM.  The way some TMs have been treating GAs over the last year has been abysmal and this should be recorded so the SM knows the bigger picture.

Everyone is expecting a poor wmty result,so it will be taken into consideration at reviews etc.  There will be no backlash, no angry sms etc.

[Equalizer87]

That's all rubbish,  no angry SM'S facing the backlash over the premium? You are kidding,

[MachiavelliQ]

Yea, somehow i doubt i'll be better off in November considering i've lost about 85 quid. But Tosco seem to think i'll get it back somehow since i didnt get jack s*** for it.

[surlaroute]

Yea, somehow i doubt i'll be better off in November considering i've lost about 85 quid. But Tosco seem to think i'll get it back somehow since i didnt get jack s*** for it.

same here... not as much but, like, even if I put the evil tesco hat on and work it out their way, adding 3% to my post-July pay still leaves me under so I should've got a transition payment either way. In other words this whole thing is wrong on pretty much every level it can be lol

[claden]

When people are doing their calculations remember Tesco are using pre November 2017 pay increase so you have to look at what you earned in October 2017 then compare it to what you will earn in November 2018 after the final 3% increase. That's why there have been no pay outs.

[Nuisance]

They took the quarter Sunday we are now not getting minus the full pay increase 10.5%. After that they then took subtracted any holidays you had/sickness for the year 2016/17 and other things. Which is why so many of us who should have got a pay out but didn't. Even though on our Tesco it says none of that.

[his scots tie]

Yes Claden but how much more are they earning? I will be earning £1per month more in Nov 18 than in Nov 17, wont get a payout because of that,yet still have to have a five month pay cut of £45 per month.

[Duracell]

So £45 down for 5 months = £225. A comparative increase of £1 per month between Nov 17 and Nov 18.
That means it will be 225 months before you see no personal loss overall because for that time the extra £1 is compensating your previous loss, yet of course during this time you in reality you see no % award in comparison with other workers who only see an increase.
Am I understanding it correctly?

If so
I have to be honest I would be ashamed to be linked to any process that agreed to such a method.

[his scots tie]

Full time GA working 36.5 hours contracted to Sundays in Nov 18 will earn £1292.47 as opposed to £1291.22 in Nov 17 a difference of .£1.25 better of but in July for five months will lose £36.79. I am £45 down an earning an extra £1  per month Nov 18 than Nov 17.

[his scots tie]

The same GA will get £36.84 back in Novembers pay rise 5p more than what he is losing in july,£36.79, for 5 months.

[Loki]

So £45 down for 5 months = £225. A comparative increase of £1 per month between Nov 17 and Nov 18.
That means it will be 225 months before you see no personal loss overall because for that time the extra £1 is compensating your previous loss, yet of course during this time you in reality you see no % award in comparison with other workers who only see an increase.
Am I understanding it correctly?

If so
I have to be honest I would be ashamed to be linked to any process that agreed to such a method.

So on that basis, would you cease being a member?

[Duracell]

I thought retail had a formula or basic principle for working out monetary loss? Yet of course it will reflect on and compare the before and after earnings, so even though historically it's a principle agreed for imediate change with probably a Protecten period for monetary loss to then extend the transition from what was orginally accepted as imediate to a considerable period of time where during that time there is significant monetary loss is quite an abuse and stretch of the original principle.

Surely it has to be argued when the original principle of a before and after comparison was agreed the belief was the change would be imediate and not over a considerable amount of time than incurs un accounted monetary loss, the principle itself was agreed to capture ANY loss of earnings, to manipulate that principle to timeframes that Basicly ignore loss of earnings goes against the original principle agreement, doesn't it?

Surely now the "Partnership Agreements" Pay review process is changing or at least manipulating  established consultative principles. Although "The Partnership Agreement" and the Pay Review Process has great scope ( too much in the opinion of most) where it becomes so different to the original principles that staff believed they were agreeing to, then a call for an overall  Review is justified.

"The Partnership Agreement" and the Pay review process within thrives on and recognisises Moving with Modern times as a principle, yet it fails to recognise that it's effects on staff, is moving away from original  the principles and the needs of said staff.

So in simple terms Staff signed upto and agreed "The Partnership Agreement" for the principles of achieving A B and C, but it now has a X Y Z effect, infringing on principles and concepts that staff did not believe to be conceding to in the original mandate of Agreement, resulting in  " we didn't sign up for this".
Reason and Justification to review the process and at least bring it up to date and set some limitations to avoid manipulation of the original belief of consent, principles and overall ideology of purpose.

[Hammer10]

Is there anyone in charge of all the unions if so we should complain to them and ask them to look into why they are not doing what we used to pay for.

[Charlie Harper]

Just popped into my store to grab some bits. It was very busy, store's a total mess, shelves empty, no staff on the shop floor, some have opted out of Sunday since premium cut, whilst others are now not willing to sacrifice valuable family time for O.T. at time & a quarter.

It was never like this before premium cut.

Glad to see us staff aren't the only ones now losing out!!

[Hammer10]

It's a shame the toffs in their ivory towers will never get to hear or see it in plain sight as they enjoy there Sunday's off with their families.

[fatboy]

If the store was very busy then the customers can't be too bothered about the state of the place

[Nuisance]

After our pay rise in Nov our wage is getting frozen until 2020. Our Sunday time and a quarter is protected until then and then it will go to time. The only reason we will be getting a pay rise in 2020 is because minimum wage is going up to £10 an hour and we will have to go through all of this again. 

[his scots tie]

Who said our pay ia getting frozen till 2020 ? We will be getting another pay rise next year,premiums wont change again untill at least 2020.

[Nuisance]

The union in my store told all of us we are getting our pay froze until 2020. He could be wrong. I will check with him the next time I see him again.

[Duracell]

So £45 down for 5 months = £225. A comparative increase of £1 per month between Nov 17 and Nov 18.
That means it will be 225 months before you see no personal loss overall because for that time the extra £1 is compensating your previous loss, yet of course during this time you in reality you see no % award in comparison with other workers who only see an increase.
Am I understanding it correctly?

If so
I have to be honest I would be ashamed to be linked to any process that agreed to such a method.

So on that basis, would you cease being a member?

Sorry I missed this post and Question.

Unfortunately there is no simple answer.

If it were my negotiating group ... the answer would be yes, but AFTER I had done everything I could by any means I could to rectify the many issues involved.

If you are asking would I cease being a member on the basis of as things are, involved with a different negotiating group and process, that is still reasonably fair and constructive and still reliant on member approval (not rubbing it in you have asked my opinion which I am trying to explain) then the answer is no, I will not be ceasing to be a member, because to me such an action will only facilitate much of the same for our devision.
It may seem a selfish attitude but we still have the right to deny and appose, to currently leave the union being in that position, gives the ability to resist away, I'm a very big advocate of you in retail regaining this position having your indivual say, so it would be foolish for me to hand over my individual ability to resist by leaving the union and not having the X in the box whilst the opportunity still exists for us to do so.

Because there is no doubt in my mind ( my opinion and belief ) that ability to put an X in the box is going to be Crucial in the not to distant future. Resistance may been seen as futile but I don't think Anyone can argue, the difference between having a say and not having a say and the consequence of the later is blindingly obvious.

Whilst I do not agree with the underlying foundation of the current claim against the company, and believe equal value alone should not establish pay rates. I really do sincerely hope that the process does highlight your issues around the Partnership and don't get lost and overlooked because of the overall foundation of the claim.

Without going on and on, one of the things I find very odd, at a time when the focus and reasoning is the benefit of the majority, the ability to vote on the change of pay and condition seems on the face of it is limited to a minority, Distribution and Ireland, so in real terms in the present time with the current supported method of reasoning " The Partnership Agreement " and many process within it, disadvantage the MAJORITY in the context of having an individual say in Consultative issues.
So, Further Justification apart from others above by means of Modern thinking (Favouring the Majority), to review and at least ammend "The Partnership  Agreement to be fairer so at least the Majority are not disadvantaged when it comes to "The statutory right" to Democraticly agree or disagree to change.

[madness]

After our pay rise in Nov our wage is getting frozen until 2020. Our Sunday time and a quarter is protected until then and then it will go to time. The only reason we will be getting a pay rise in 2020 is because minimum wage is going up to £10 an hour and we will have to go through all of this again.

£9 per hour from 2020

[Nuisance]

After our pay rise in Nov our wage is getting frozen until 2020. Our Sunday time and a quarter is protected until then and then it will go to time. The only reason we will be getting a pay rise in 2020 is because minimum wage is going up to £10 an hour and we will have to go through all of this again.

£9 per hour from 2020

Sorry my bad