4 years no pay rise. what action can employees take?

Southend1

AP007 wrote: »

'the union must have at least 10 per cent membership'

Couldn't think of 2.5 head office staff who would join a union to fight for a pay rise for someone else.

You don't get it either when I say a management accountant on £60k a year or an FD on £105k will not care that IT gets 1% or I got 0%

To have 10% of staff in a union in the one company wont happen where I have worked.

I'm not sure now if you're being deliberately obtuse or you genuinely don't understand. Sincere apologies if the latter but I'm not going to respond to any more of your posts on this subject (at least until you have read up a little on what we are discussing!) because I have other things to do!

AP007

Southend1 wrote: »

I'm not sure now if you're being deliberately obtuse or you genuinely don't understand. Sincere apologies if the latter but I'm not going to respond to any more of your posts on this subject (at least until you have read up a little on what we are discussing!) because I have other things to do!

no I don't understand and you are just saying 'read up' when you know everything about this but wont tell - wonder why?

Southend1

AP007 wrote: »

no I don't understand and you are just saying 'read up' when you know everything about this but wont tell - wonder why?

Because I have explained what I know to you before and it seemingly made no difference to your understanding of the matter. I could write the same things over and over or you could just go back to the other thread and read them again. Either way I don't think it will enhance your understanding. Looking at other sources that explain things differently (more clearly than I can maybe?) may help however.

Anyway I'm off to bed now so goodnight. :beer:

AP007

Southend1 wrote: »

Because I have explained what I know to you before and it seemingly made no difference to your understanding of the matter. I could write the same things over and over or you could just go back to the other thread and read them again. Either way I don't think it will enhance your understanding. Looking at other sources that explain things differently (more clearly than I can maybe?) may help however.

Anyway I'm off to bed now so goodnight. :beer:

all you have said is that a group of staff and union people meet the company to see if they can get everyone a pay rise.

I can tell you the reply from my company would have been 'there is the door' thanks for coming

There is no other way to put that.

Southend1

AP007 wrote: »

all you have said is that a group of staff and union people meet the company to see if they can get everyone a pay rise.

I can tell you the reply from my company would have been 'there is the door' thanks for coming

There is no other way to put that.

And a company that behaves like that towards it's staff would be a shining example of good industrial relations with happy, hard working staff and satisfied customers? Or maybe it would have high staff turnover, high sickness absence rates, dissatisfied staff and customers and lower profits?

The world isn't black and white, it's not necessarily a case of "can I have a pay rise?" "No" "ok no problem".

AP007

Southend1 wrote: »

And a company that behaves like that towards it's staff would be a shining example of good industrial relations with happy, hard working staff and satisfied customers? Or maybe it would have high staff turnover, high sickness absence rates, dissatisfied staff and customers and lower profits?

The world isn't black and white, it's not necessarily a case of "can I have a pay rise?" "No" "ok no problem".

No actually we had very happy customers, hard working staff, no one off sick really.

If we weren't hard working we wouldn't make any £!

Oh but it is black and white like that unless you have experienced it you do not know.

Southend1

AP007 wrote: »

No actually we had very happy customers, hard working staff, no one off sick really.

If we weren't hard working we wouldn't make any £!

Oh but it is black and white like that unless you have experienced it you do not know.

However you don't know what experience I have so you can't assume I don't know!

I have worked for companies who treat staff badly and reap what they sow in the bottom line. And vice versa.

I also have a degree in management (as well as some years experience as a manager with all the training that goes along with it) and I can tell you that a whole lot of time is spent on "human resource management" and employee relations, the first rule of which is NOT "treat your staff like crap because it will earn you a whole lot of money".

I don't doubt that your experience is valid. It may or may not be wider than mine. However the consensus among academics, HR professionals and trade unions would be that if employees have a good relationship with an organisation a whole range of outcomes will be more positive (turnover, absence, compensation payments, profits, customer satisfaction etc etc), generally speaking.

AP007

Southend1 wrote: »

However you don't know what experience I have so you can't assume I don't know!

I have worked for companies who treat staff badly and reap what they sow in the bottom line. And vice versa.

I also have a degree in management (as well as some years experience as a manager with all the training that goes along with it) and I can tell you that a whole lot of time is spent on "human resource management" and employee relations, the first rule of which is NOT "treat your staff like crap because it will earn you a whole lot of money".

I don't doubt that your experience is valid. It may or may not be wider than mine. However the consensus among academics, HR professionals and trade unions would be that if employees have a good relationship with an organisation a whole range of outcomes will be more positive (turnover, absence, compensation payments, profits, customer satisfaction etc etc), generally speaking.

You can not put turnover & profit down to staff relations nor sickness cause if you don't get paid you are LESS likely to call in sick cause you do not feel like it.

Turnover is what you take and profit is what you make. If you are a hotel if you are not fully booked you are probably going to lose £ and that's nothing to do with the staff its supply and demand.

Also customers in a business who do not see staff in an office as its say a restaurant have no idea if joe blogs is !!!!ed as he didn't get a pay rise.

No idea what a compensation payment is to do with anything or what it is to be fair in the workplace.

I have worked in accounts or over 20 years and have been at work (till I lost my job) for over 24 years and I have worked for over 8 companies all private and all who would never recognise a union and would tell staff 'if you don't like it leave' and 9/10 people would. That's how it is in real business where the company wants to make a big profit and keep it!

Southend1

AP007 wrote: »

You can not put turnover & profit down to staff relations nor sickness cause if you don't get paid you are LESS likely to call in sick cause you do not feel like it.

Turnover is what you take and profit is what you make. If you are a hotel if you are not fully booked you are probably going to lose £ and that's nothing to do with the staff its supply and demand.

Also customers in a business who do not see staff in an office as its say a restaurant have no idea if joe blogs is !!!!ed as he didn't get a pay rise.

No idea what a compensation payment is to do with anything or what it is to be fair in the workplace.

I have worked in accounts or over 20 years and have been at work (till I lost my job) for over 24 years and I have worked for over 8 companies all private and all who would never recognise a union and would tell staff 'if you don't like it leave' and 9/10 people would. That's how it is in real business where the company wants to make a big profit and keep it!

I respect your personal experience however your opinion, as I said, isn't supported by the general consensus of business leaders, academics, HR managers and TUs.

There is a very clear link between good employee relations and good financial performance.

In your example of the hotel, it's all well and good having great advertising campaigns and lots of bookings but if your staff are unreliable or not giving great service then customers will go elsewhere and your reputation will be poor.

Back office staff can be just as important to providing great customer service. Imagine if the !!!!ed off hotel customer was given a refund by the manager but the accounts clerk didn't pay it for six weeks for example.

Making a big profit isn't all about exploiting your staff (though a minority of managers as you rightly point out would disagree!). Think about john Lewis/waitrose. They have a reputation for excellent service and make huge profits. Even though they sell many identical products at higher prices than their competitors customers choose to shop there for the service. One of the main reasons is that the ownership structure of the company is such that their staff are well rewarded when the business is doing well and are generally treated extremely well by the company.

If a company understands the link between good employee relations and good business performance there is a strong incentive to engage with unions to foster such good practice.

AP007

No a hotel refund would be made at the front desk therefore not involving accounts at all just like a restaurant bill and shop. Refunds are not done by accounts.

At John Lewis/Waitrose you do not have to go out of your way to get the bonus as everyone gets it regardless of how well you work etc and its the same % because its a 'partnership'

You do not have to exploit anyone to make a profit and keep hold of it.

You obviously have no experience working in my field.