City's influence over Conservatives laid bare by research into donations

[Glaucus]

A standard pay rise and a. Stand bonus. So everyone gets it regardless of how little work they actually do. Union pay rises are not the best, infect they are crap.
I would rather negotiate my own like many companies do, but because of the union there is no way I can do this. It also means I have to work harder as so many people are lazy slobs that don't work, but are protected by the union.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

A standard pay rise and a. Stand bonus. So everyone gets it regardless of how little work they actually do. Union pay rises are not the best, infect they are crap.

If they are crap they are dismissed, so they don't get any pay rise If someone is genuinely crap or not pulling their weight in HP it's easy to get rid of them due to a fair and robust disciplinary policy - one that the Union negotiated. It's in neither HP's or the Unions interest to have people that don't pull their weight. There are no slackers in HP (at least not my area - CEO's excepted). Oh, and there are still non-consolidated performance related bonuses.

They way I see it is if you're doing your job to the expected level then you at least deserve an inflation related payrise. If you exceed your performance targets then you should be inline for a performance related bonus.

a. Stand bonus

It's not a bonus - it's a one off compensation payment for moving the pay anniversary date from Aug 2010 to Feb 2011.

I would rather negotiate my own like many companies do, but because of the union there is no way I can do this. It also means I have to work harder as so many people are lazy slobs that don't work, but are protected by the union.

Quite difficult in HP as there is a pay cap in place for non union members. The best a non union member has so far managed to negotiate for them themselves this year is 0.9%. Not exactly a choice is it?

 

[Glaucus]

It really isn't at all easy or easier to get rid of them, it's a total nightmare and rarely happens. It is epidemic in the sector and the unions back and fight for these people every step of the way.

 

[Dolph]

I'd like to know too - it'd make my life easier!

Although it's quite easy in reality - I just dangle pay rises in front of their noses.

Normally, it involves the unionised staff ostracising or 'working to rule' where non-unionised staff are involved. (Very similar to the claims unions often make towards management). Further ideas can include infiltrating work councils and the like in non-unionised workplaces then refusing to involve themselves in work involving non-unionised staff and similar things...

Of course, in the eyes of many unions, it doesn't matter what happens to the scabs...

 

[Dolph]

Quite difficult in HP as there is a pay cap in place for non union members. The best a non union member has so far managed to negotiate for them themselves this year is 0.9%. Not exactly a choice is it?

Why is such discrimination illegal if union members are involved, but not the other way around?

 

[Deleted member 66701]

It really isn't at all easy or easier to get rid of them,

Yes it is.

it's a total nightmare

not if the company follows the process correctly.

and rarely happens.

I agree dismissal rarely happens but only because the disciplinary procedure has excellent corrective mechanisms in place, meaning those that start the disciplinary process eventually become productive employees again.

It is epidemic in the sector and the unions back and fight for these people every step of the way.

In my experience Unions fight to make sure processes are adhered to and applied fairly. If a process cannot fire someone incompetent despite suitable corrective action then that points to a poorly constructed disciplinary process, not an "awkward" union.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Why is such discrimination illegal if union members are involved, but not the other way around?

Unfair isn't it?

Maybe that's why we're getting a lot of new members recently

 

[Castiel]

It really isn't at all easy or easier to get rid of them, it's a total nightmare and rarely happens. It is epidemic in the sector and the unions back and fight for these people every step of the way.

We have no issues with disciplining and dismissing staff for poor performance, contract non compliance or any other issue for that matter. Pay rises are given to all staff across all grades under that of manager whether they are in the Union or not (I understand that may be different elsewhere) and whilst the Unions do the negotiations, staff benefit whether they are members or not.

The Union does defend it's members in disputes and disciplinaries as per their responsibilities, however that doesn't change our procedures or processes and all are treated equally and fairly.

Our main recognised Union?

The RMT. Probably the most militant Union there is.

 

[Glaucus]

Lol, go work on the rail way and then tell me. People who are lazy scroutes. Get better.

It's like you have read from a text book on how disciplinary, workplaces and unions work. Tpbut that is not the reality at all.

 

[Castiel]

Why is such discrimination illegal if union members are involved, but not the other way around?

It is unfair, but the responsibility of the company, not the Union.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Lol, go work on the rail way and then tell me. People who are lazy scroutes. Get better.

It's like you have read from a text book on how disciplinary, workplaces and unions work. Tpbut that is not the reality at all.

I think Castiel and I probably have more experience of the practical application of disciplinary procedures in a Unionised workplace than you do.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

It is unfair, but the responsibility of the company, not the Union.

+1

 

[Glaucus]

I think Castiel and I probably have more experience of the practical application of disciplinary procedures in a Unionised workplace than you do.

And you clearly have no dealings with RMT

 

[Dolph]

Yes it is.

not if the company follows the process correctly.

I agree dismissal rarely happens but only because the disciplinary procedure has excellent corrective mechanisms in place, meaning those that start the disciplinary process eventually become productive employees again.

In my experience Unions fight to make sure processes are adhered to and applied fairly. If a process cannot fire someone incompetent despite suitable corrective action then that points to a poorly constructed disciplinary process, not an "awkward" union.

I guess it depends on the definition of incompetent you are willing to agree on. For example, unions like the CWU seem to believe the definition of competent it 'on the payroll' and oppose any and all attempts to invoke disciplinary or capability proceedings against anyone, as well as advising all their members to file grievances against anyone who attempts any form of performance management or disciplinary to delay the process and tie up company resources...

I've said it before Amiga, just because you operate within a sane branch of a specific union (which is also known for having it's insane branches elsewhere), it doesn't follow that every union, or even every branch within a union, behaves in a sane and responsible manner.

 

[Dolph]

Unfair isn't it?

Maybe that's why we're getting a lot of new members recently

Discrimination based on union membership is supposed to be illegal. You'd be kicking up merry hell if it was the other way around...

The hypocrisy of the union movement never ceases to amaze me.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

I guess it depends on the definition of incompetent you are willing to agree on. For example, unions like the CWU seem to believe the definition of competent it 'on the payroll' and oppose any and all attempts to invoke disciplinary or capability proceedings against anyone, as well as advising all their members to file grievances against anyone who attempts any form of performance management or disciplinary to delay the process and tie up company resources...

I've said it before Amiga, just because you operate within a sane branch of a specific union (which is also known for having it's insane branches elsewhere), it doesn't follow that every union, or even every branch within a union, behaves in a sane and responsible manner.

And I've said it before - if the company has a robust, fair and clearly defined disciplinary procedure then what good will the grievances do?

 

[Castiel]

Lol, go work on the rail way and then tell me. People who are lazy scroutes. Get better.

It's like you have read from a text book on how disciplinary, workplaces and unions work. Tpbut that is not the reality at all.

I am a Director of Operations for a large Transport Company. We run several Train, Bus and Coach subsidiaries and deal with several Unions.

I understand exactly how procedures work, how Unions work and how the rules and procedures are applied with the companies I am responsible for.

While there are cases of bullying and indiscretion on the part of Unions with regard to local management and executives, equally we have had issues with the contrary position, in fact there are more cases that are referred to appeal where the local management have exceeded their authority or failed to follow our procedures and policies than that of the Unions or staff doing so.

The reality within the transport industry is not that of the London Underground or what you read in the tabloid press I'm afraid. The reality is quite the contrary.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Discrimination based on union membership is supposed to be illegal. You'd be kicking up merry hell if it was the other way around...

The hypocrisy of the union movement never ceases to amaze me.

Not hypocrisy at all. I think it's grossly unfair the company discriminates against non-union members. But what can I do about it? The only option is to sign them up because the company will not, and are under no obligation, to talk to us re: non-union members.

 

[kwerk]

Isn't the guardian bankrupt yet?

 

[Deleted member 66701]

While there are cases of bullying and indiscretion on the part of Unions with regard to local management and executives, equally we have had issues with the contrary position, in fact there are more cases that are referred to appeal where the local management have exceeded their authority or failed to follow our procedures and policies than that of the Unions or staff doing so.

Well said castiel. The reality is that there is the potential for ALL employees to overstep the mark - union member, non union member, union rep, manager, ceo et al - I'd say bullying and harassment is seen equally in all groupings. That's why you should have a fair, robust and clearly defined disciplinary policy.