Contractual Change

Baldytyke88

redped said:

I definitely agree - the fact the employer is moving it two days per month shows that they are trying to help their staff, rather than enforcing a 10-day jump in pay dates in one go.

I have paid union subs for over 10 years, so anything that undermines the union is a negative.

Having read their FAQ, we are saving them £600,000 and we are being offered nothing in return.

After a quick Google, I can put a letter of objection in, which will mean that I do not accept their new contract.

If they think it's easy, maybe they will want to save another £600,000 and move the pay date another 10 days next year.

I object to this change.

Inbetweeners

Baldytyke88 said:

redped said:

I definitely agree - the fact the employer is moving it two days per month shows that they are trying to help their staff, rather than enforcing a 10-day jump in pay dates in one go.

I have paid union subs for over 10 years, so anything that undermines the union is a negative.

Having read their FAQ, we are saving them £600,000 and we are being offered nothing in return.

After a quick Google, I can put a letter of objection in, which will mean that I do not accept their new contract.

If they think it's easy, maybe they will want to save another £600,000 and move the pay date another 10 days next year.

I object to this change.

It's not saving them £600,000 at your expense though. Where on earth does this notion cone from that you are working 10 days for free.

There are good and bad unions and some that are just spoiling for a fight. Personally I think some unions aren't capable of running a bath. 

Ayr_Rage

If they are saving that amount of money it might just be that it is also protecting your employment in these hard times.

redped

Baldytyke88 said:

redped said:

I definitely agree - the fact the employer is moving it two days per month shows that they are trying to help their staff, rather than enforcing a 10-day jump in pay dates in one go.

I have paid union subs for over 10 years, so anything that undermines the union is a negative.

Having read their FAQ, we are saving them £600,000 and we are being offered nothing in return.

After a quick Google, I can put a letter of objection in, which will mean that I do not accept their new contract.

If they think it's easy, maybe they will want to save another £600,000 and move the pay date another 10 days next year.

I object to this change.

So what exactly do you think you're losing by agreeing to this change?  You'll still be paid for every day you work, and by objecting to a change which won't cost you anything financially it may have a negative impact at a later date if your employer needs to make job cuts.

Sometimes it's better to fight the battles you know you can win, and this doesn't look to be one of them.

k12479

Baldytyke88 said:

I would perhaps work 2 weeks and then be paid for the month, or perhaps I worked a month before being paid. How does it normally work?

Now they are asking us to work a further 10 days with payout, I think it's wrong.

People get paid for work they've done. Mostly, for the private sector at least, this would be towards the end of the month. How is it 'right' that you get paid for work you haven't done yet?

Baldytyke88 said:

What is the point of a contract if it can be broken without consequences?

Contracts, especially long running ones, cannot set things in stone forever, there has to be room to adapt for practical, legal, etc. reasons. Would you object to pay rises, flexible working/home-working, shared parental leave, etc. that benefit you but alter your contract?

Besides, there are consequences. Swathes of employees will object and leave. The council will then backtrack and beg for you all to return. Or not.

Baldytyke88 said:

Having read their FAQ, we are saving them £600,000 and we are being offered nothing in return.

As already mentioned, you aren't saving them anything. Tax payers have been paying you for work in advance, which has been to their cost and to your benefit. You might be getting something in return - keeping your jobs, for an alternative to these savings could be cuts elsewhere.

la531983

What a bizarre thread. Ive been paid on the 30th for about a decade, essentially in arrears, not sure why this is an issue.

NCC1701-A

Baldytyke88 said:

redped said:

I definitely agree - the fact the employer is moving it two days per month shows that they are trying to help their staff, rather than enforcing a 10-day jump in pay dates in one go.

I have paid union subs for over 10 years, so anything that undermines the union is a negative.

Having read their FAQ, we are saving them £600,000 and we are being offered nothing in return.

After a quick Google, I can put a letter of objection in, which will mean that I do not accept their new contract.

If they think it's easy, maybe they will want to save another £600,000 and move the pay date another 10 days next year.

I object to this change.

What services can the council offer instead with that £600,000?  

Have you not noticed the amount of cuts being planned up & down the country as well as the number of councils being placed into administration?  https://www.newstatesman.com/spotlight/economic-growth/regional-development/2024/01/council-bankruptcy-tracker-local-government-authorities-finances

LightFlare

some contractural changes are worth fighting- others aren’t.

Since this proposed change I would judge as being “reasonable” would make this not worth fighting.

If you do not accept the change, you will in effect t be without a valid contract and therefor without a job (potentially)

Surely it’s good that they are saving 600k or would you rather they cut staffing levels instead.

swingaloo

What do all the other staff think? Are they all stamping their feet and refusing to accept this very minor change or are they just getting on with things.

Hoenir

LightFlare said:

Surely it’s good that they are saving 600k or would you rather they cut staffing levels instead.

That's the key.  Ultimately head count reduction is one of few options available to cut operational costs. No one like to such actions.  As it inflicts pain on someone (and their families) at a personal level. There's no magic money trees. Just really tough decisions. As to how to use the available funds in the best way possible.