Contractual Change

Baldytyke88

swingaloo said:

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.

I don't think people know what to do, I drive a works vehicle and seldom see the majority of staff. I am coming towards retirement, and being treated like this makes me feel like they don't want workers like me.

Many people on here are making political points,

I did actually suggest a 5/10% cut to sick pay during austerity, but it's not my job to solve the councils budget problems.

Ayr_Rage

You're still getting paid for every minute you work and a 10 day change in pay day over five months is not a big deal.

redped

But HOW are you being treated badly?  As has been said by several people, YOU WILL NOT BE ANY WORSE OFF - you will still be paid for every day you work.

Inbetweeners

Baldytyke88 said:

swingaloo said:

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.

I did actually suggest a 5/10% cut to sick pay during austerity, but it's not my job to solve the councils budget problems.

I'm sure your beloved union would love that proposal.

Grumpy_chap

If I have read this correctly, it amounts to the OP being paid in arrears at the end of the month rather than being paid mid-month 50 in arrears and 50 in advance.  Paid in arrears at the end of the month is most common so far as I am aware.

There is probably no cost to individuals through this change, but possibly some inconvenience to reschedule direct debits.  The employer can make a relatively small saving of £600k (versus the annual budget) per year through better cashflow reducing interest costs to the organisation.

A win for the employer at no detriment to individuals.  Seems like a sound move.  Other than resistance to change, is the OP citing any other reason to oppose?

redped

Grumpy_chap said:

A win for the employer at no detriment to individuals.  Seems like a sound move.  Other than resistance to change, is the OP citing any other reason to oppose?

No reason has been given for opposing the change, despite being asked repeatedly, apart from:

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

Basically, the union doesn't like it (for reasons unknown), so therefore the OP doesn't like it - doesn't sound like the OP can think for himself on this issue.

Time2count

Baldytyke88 said:

Savvy_Sue said:

If you don't accept a contractual change, like this, your contract will end and you'll be jobless.

No employer is going to want to have multiple pay days just because some people don't like the change.

When you're paid on 16th, what pay period does that cover, and is that changing? If you're currently paid for a whole calendar month on 16th I can well understand why an employer would want to put that back to 26th. 

I started working for the council in 2007, so I don't recall any details of our pay date. I am sure all employers would like to make changes that save them money, but I have a contract that they want to break. What is the point of a contract if it can be broken without consequences?

Does your contract from 2007 state your annual salary? I bet it is not the same then as it is now. I also bet you don't object to that having changed over the years? I also bet there is a clause in there somewhere stating that certain changes can be made.
Honestly, ask someone in payroll/HR to explain the change to you and how it will affect your pay. Somehow you've got it into your head that you're losing out - you're NOT I assure you.

LightFlare

Perhaps the OP,the Union and the members could actually find out how the current pay period works before objecting to change.

Being paid in the middle of the month doesn’t “describe” the actual pay period.

Does Sep 16th pay cover:

a) Aug 16th to Sep 16th
b) Sep 16th to Oct 16th ( very unlikely)
c) Sep 1st to Sep 30th

Sounds as if the employer could be looking to shift from A to C

I honestly can’t understand the union objection and would seriously reconsider being a member of a body that can’t understand such a simple concept (especially if they have t even bothered to understand the current pay period)

From what the OP understands (thinks) - they get paid 2 weeks in arrears and 2 weeks in advance. This would be unusual and I can see why the employer is looking to change and can’t see any argument for it be unreasonable 

Baldytyke88

LightFlare said:

From what the OP understands (thinks) - they get paid 2 weeks in arrears and 2 weeks in advance. This would be unusual and I can see why the employer is looking to change and can’t see any argument for it be unreasonable 

I am not sure how it works.

This change means that people can no longer pay their bills on the 16th, but they will need to pay on the 26th.

This is not a big deal, but we have just received a pay ballot for strike action, which I am quite happy to accept.

Is it ok to pay all my bills 10 days later?

Inbetweeners

Baldytyke88 said:

LightFlare said:

From what the OP understands (thinks) - they get paid 2 weeks in arrears and 2 weeks in advance. This would be unusual and I can see why the employer is looking to change and can’t see any argument for it be unreasonable 

Is it ok to pay all my bills 10 days later?

Well yes, if you move the direct debit date.