CWU London East Branch Latest News

Branches will know that the Union has been anxious to ensure that BT acted upon the Company Chairman's promise to "anticipate the legislation" which is due to come into effect in October 2006 and which will have the affect of removing BT's current normal retirement age (NRA) of 60. The Union's policy is that individuals who wish to work beyond the age of 60 should be allowed to do so; no one should be compelled to work beyond age 60; there should be no steps to compel individuals to defer the date, currently 60 in BTPS and BTRP, at which individuals are able to take their BT pension.

The Company has now written to the CWU and Connect to confirm that in anticipation of the legislative changes on the 1st October 2006, BT will offer the opportunity to those approaching age 60 to remain in employment with BT, subject to certain conditions. The Company has confirmed that it wishes to "align the aspirations of the individual and that of the business".

A copy of the Company's letter of the 3rd June 2005 is attached for the information of branches.

In essence, commencing in July of this year, BT has agreed where an employee is 59 years expresses a desire to remain in BT employment, the Company will make every effort to affect this. To ensure that resourcing opportunities remain for people in this category, BT will displace agency staff and, where necessary, cease any relevant recruitment. The Company will also make available a number of flexible working options which will include the opportunity to move to part-time working or to less demanding work.

Although the policy change is from July 2005, BT has also agreed that it will consider appeals from those due to leave BT`s employment on reaching age 60 during June.

Each individual, following their 59th birthday, will be offered a minuted discussion with an "appropriate independent manager e.g. Resource Lead or HR Business Partner, to ascertain their desires".

The Company has also indicated however that in areas where there is a reducing resource requirement, it will not be able to offer the opportunity to remain in employment and BT intends to put in place an appeals process where an individual has expressed a desire to remain in employment, but has not met the Company's criteria.

At this stage the Company statement raises a number of questions. There has been no discussion with the CWU on the issue of the Company's "criteria", nor has there been any discussion about the nature and structure of any appeals process. Similarly, it is not entirely clear how long an individual would be able to work beyond age of 60. The reference to "reducing resource requirement" is also problematic. These and other issues will be pursued with Company as a matter of urgency.

Although some elements of the Company's decision require urgent clarification, it is nonetheless an important step forward towards achieving the Union's policy. It is clear from the emerging results of the Union's retirement age survey that a large proportion of members would welcome the opportunity to work, on a voluntary basis, beyond age 60. The Union will make every effort to ensure that those who do wish to take advantage of this change in BT policy will be able to do so and the Union will provide the necessary support to achieve this.

Branches will know that there is a timetabled presentation by the T&FSE at TIC Conference on Tuesday 14th June on the survey results and the TIC will, in light of the Company`s letter, submit an emergency proposition for debate.

Further advice will be given to branches in due course but in the meantime it is essential that branches make every effort to ensure that members aged 59 and above are advised of this important change in BT's policy and are given the opportunity to express their preference in line with the arrangements indicated in the Company's letter. Co-operation of branches in making this LTB and the attachment as widely available to members as possible, would be greatly appreciated.

Yours sincerely

W McClory
Assistant Secretary

Return to top of page

Letter to Branches

Rounded Rectangle: For instant updates: http//:www.cwu.org email: info@cwu.org
150 The Broadway, Wimbledon, London, SW19 1RX Tel: 020 8971 7200 Fax: 020 8971 7300
General Secretary: Billy Hayes (www.billyhayes.co.uk)

No. 295/05

Ref IC/LEL CS.3

Date: 22 JUNE 2005

EMBARGOED UNTIL NOON – FRIDAY 24 JUNE 2005

TO ALL BRANCHES WITH MEMBERS IN BT

Dear Colleague,

FRS REVIEW

LTB 169/05 reported on the then developments in the FRS Review. Subsequent to the issue of that LTB, there has been a series of fairly intensive meetings on how to progress each of the outstanding issues. The most critical of these was achieving a significant step towards our aim of a fully team based scheme.

I am pleased to report that agreement has been reached between negotiators on a package of changes. Subject to endorsement by the Executive, a revised scheme will be trialled in the Thames Valley (Guildford SDT1 and Luton SDT8) and in BTNI.

I attach a copy of the final letter from BT (dated 6 June 2005) outlining the proposed changes. It will be seen that, from an original management position of no movement, we have secured a substantial change in the balance team and individual reward. The team element will be 60% and the individual element 40%. The team believes this is an irreversible step toward a fully team based scheme that will be fit for purpose in the new organisational structure.

In addition to the scheme changes, the team has secured backdated interim payments for Proactive people, people moved to Wholesale and those in the Scilly Isles.

Detailed modelling for the trials is ongoing with an aim of protecting or increasing bonus earnings for the vast amount of people in the trial areas. Examples of the new revised reward tables will be issued in due course.

The trials will run for 8-weeks commencing mid July, after which there will be a joint review. If it is jointly agreed that there are no significant issues, the Executive will then be invited to agree a timetable for roll-out and permanent revision of the FRS Agreement to encompass the changes.

Additionally, it is proposed to run a separate trial in South Yorkshire of rewarding RCR work on a points basis.

The final wording of the attached letter has been the subject of lengthy debate even during the week of Conference. It does, however, mark an important threshold in the development of FRS.

Further reports will be issued.

Yours sincerely,

IAN CUTHBERT

Assistant Secretary

Charlie McKay Tel: (020) 7356 4779

Employee Relations Director Email: charlie.mckay@bt.com

Mr I Cuthbert

CWU Assistant Secretary

150 The Broadway

Wimbledon

SW19 1RX

6 June 2005

Dear Mr Cuthbert

FRS REVIEW

Thank you for your letter of 7 April 2005 providing the CWU’s response to the proposals set out in our letter of 17 March 2005, on the way forward for FRS. In our subsequent discussions we have been able to clarify a number of the issues raised by the union’s negotiators and would want to move quickly now to a finalisation of our review of FRS. In our letter dated 17March we set out our proposals on all of the key areas that we have discussed during the course of this latest review. I have set out in the following paragraphs the position I believe we have reached.

1. Measures

It is our intention to integrate the various measure sets by establishing a common focus across all functional units that is based on the Customer (Promises), Volume / Visit Reduction (Access+/Fault Rate) and Efficiency improvement. The Team reward calculation for all functional units will be based on the performance against these three business objectives. The measures set that underpins the business objectives is set out in the table below.

	Customer	Volume / Visit Reduction	Efficiency
REACTIVE	Promises	Access+	Team Comps
PROACTIVE	Promises	Access+	Network Efficiency
CONTROLS	Promises	% Control Clears	Team Comps
HOIST	Promises	Access+	Team Comps
H&I	Promises	Fault Rate	Team Comps
	40%	30%	30%

2. Reactive Scheme.

As we have outlined in our meetings we still believe that individual contribution to the teams output is crucial in retaining the gains already achieved through FRS and securing the improvements in Team performance. However we have noted the CWU’s concerns regarding the perceived over emphasis on individual Output in our earlier proposal and have therefore revisited our proposals on the way in which Output will be rewarded within the scheme.

On the basis that the union is prepared to accept the need to retain a focus on individual performance we are prepared to revise the element of individual and team reward to 40% individual and 60% team.

The team-based element of the reactive scheme will be based on the principles outlined in section 1 above.

We are pleased that the CWU recognise the value of moving the Output measure to a rolling 4 week period as we firmly believe that this change overcomes the potential for a single day’s results to impact on an individual’s ability to achieve the required threshold.

During our recent meetings we have set out a series of proposals that we believe meet the requirements set out in Annex A of the Watford agreement and address many of the concerns raised in your letters of 29 March and 7 April 2005. A summary of our proposals are set out below:

Output points calculations used within the scheme will be based on a rolling 4 week period.

· Calculation of both the individual and team reward will be made weekly. This will address any variation in the length of the pay period.

· An individual’s contribution will be measured through a combination of the 4 week rolling output measure and individual quality. This ensures that the individual performance measures fully align with the team objectives of Customer, Volume Reduction and Efficiency.

· The basis of the quality measure will continue to be RR/ELF’s which are measured over a 28 day period. However rather than “recovering” reward for a high number of failures in a period we will look to reward individuals whose quality is consistently good. The mechanism for rewarding an individual for their quality performance will be points based in order that we can assess an individuals overall contribution against the measures that underpin the teams objectives.

· The performance threshold (output and quality) will be recalculated on a basis that will be jointly agreed. This level will reflect the current output performance distribution and the inclusion of quality points. During our meeting on 2^nd June we shared the detailed modelling of the Thames Valley data with you. As agreed we will send you under separate cover both a summary of the reward table structure and the output of the modelling that we have produced as a result of our discussions. We anticipate that the shift of Output to a 4 week rolling measure will ensure individuals can recover from a drop in results and will be less inclined to be de-motivated by the perceived inability to reach the required threshold.

· Those individuals who achieve the revised performance threshold will all receive the Team bonus which is based on the performance against the common objectives of Customer, Volume / Visit Reduction and Efficiency.

· Those individuals who fail to reach the performance threshold (output and quality) will receive a percentage of the team bonus. Based on our discussions on the 2^nd June it is our intention to have 3 tiers based on 85%, 40% and 20%. During any agreed Systems Trial of the revised proposals we will commit to reviewing all individuals who fail to achieve the full team reward in order to ensure that they are not disadvantaged by the scheme for carrying out specific roles/tasks.

· The individual performance calculation will ensure that an individual is not discouraged from taking annual leave or carrying out substitution and training. During periods of annual leave, Bank Holidays, substitution and training an individuals output points will be normalised based on the number of days they are at work during the rolling 4 week period. The normalised performance will then be used to assess the qualification for a team reward and the consistent performer bonus.

· The normalisation process described above will also be used for part time union officials and USR’s. This will ensure that any reward they receive is based on their individual performance whilst working in the queues.

· Where an individual is absent, due to sick leave, for the entire 4 week rolling period they will receive no bonus. In cases where an individual is off sick for part of the period we will reward points per hour at a level which will ensure that the individual qualifies as a minimum for the first band of the team reward. This will ensure that the individual will receive some team reward for the period that they have contributed to the team results and on their return to work has the opportunity to achieve a consistent performer reward. During periods of sick and annual leave the level of quality points rewarded in the individual performance calculation will be pro-rated based on the percentage of time at work.

· The performance over the 4 week rolling period, including any carried forward points from the previous period, will determine the precise level of reward made available to the individual.

· In addition to the Team reward an additional bonus will be made available to those individuals who consistently achieve a pre-determined level of individual performance. An individual’s performance will be assessed against both output and quality. Following the modelling work that we reviewed at our meeting on 2^nd June it is our intention to use a 4 tiered Consistent Performer structure. It should be stressed that the Consistent Performer element will only apply to Reactive and Hoist engineers.

· Where Proactive engineers carryout Reactive work their performance and reward will be pro-rated to reflect the amount of time spent on each work function i.e. they will be eligible for a pro-rated consistent performer reward for the period that they have worked on reactive queues.

The calculation of carried forward points for both rostered and worked rostered day off performance will continue to be made weekly.

· Arrangements for engineers who attend on a WRDO will remain unchanged. All WRDO performance will count towards the team results. Team Completion performance, which is currently based purely on rostered performance, will be adjusted as soon as possible to include WRDO attendance.

· Unless specifically referred to above, all other arrangements outlined in the agreed FRS Implementation Document remain valid, including sick leave due to an industrial injury, as set out in section 3.10 of the FRS agreement. We can also confirm that the processes outlined in Annex B of the FRS agreement on Raising Contributions remain in place.

3. Proactive.

Since our letter dated 17^th March we have made good progress on improving the robustness of Proactive booking practices. We have shown at our recent meetings slides that illustrate the improvements made in the booking practices over recent weeks. We continue to analyse the results on a weekly basis and work with the operational units to improve Proactive booking practice levels. It remains our intention to drive to improve the level of Proactive booking practices. To underline our determination to resolve this issue we have targeted the reduction of proactive mis-booking by including the objective within Investment Managers scorecards for 05/06. We also intend to set up a working party of engineers to help understand the underlying issues and ensure that the message is communicated at engineering level. We would welcome the CWU’s involvement and support in this area.

During our meeting on 5 and 24^th May we reviewed and discussed in some detail the Network Efficiency and Access+ measures. We agreed that we would provide further analysis on both these issues before we reach an agreement on the preferred approach.

The CWU have raised the issue of Proactive interim arrangements on a number of occasions and we are now in a position to clarify how we would propose to conclude this issue. As you know the reduction in the interim payments was agreed between us on the basis that there would be an increase in the level of proactive reward resulting from improvements in booking practice. This unfortunately did not materialise as quickly as we had anticipated and as a consequence little or no financial benefits have resulted from improvements in Proactive Efficiency performance. Nonetheless, we are prepared, in the interests of reaching an agreement, to agree to retrospective payments to those individuals who, through participation in FRS, have not achieved a level of payment that would meet our original interim agreement. Those individuals in receipt of more than £40 per week from all FRS sources will receive no retrospective payments.

The retrospective payments will be made on a two part basis with 50% paid as soon as possible via payroll and 50% paid after booking practices have been cleansed and the scheme is launched. It is anticipated that a robust proactive scheme can be launched, following a successful trial in BTNI and having made significant improvements in the level of proactive booking practice issues. Individuals will be notified of any payments due.

4. Coaches / Controls.

The Coaches and Control schemes will both be entirely based on team performance. The reward table will be adjusted accordingly.

As we mentioned at our meeting on 29^th April we do not believe that the availability of a differential payment for Coaches or Controls is applicable now that the structure of the team scheme is consistent across all functional units. Instead we intend to re-distribute the differential payment currently paid to Coaches across all of the reward tables.

We will ensure that individuals participating in a wholly team based scheme are not disadvantaged. The potential level of reward available to individuals participating in a fully

team based scheme i.e Proactive, Controls, Coaches is increased proportionately to reflect the fact that their scheme does not have a consistent performer element. The modelling work that we have completed and will share with you under separate cover illustrates that the difference between the anticipated reward from an 100% team based scheme is greater than the average reactive bonus by an amount that is in line with the existing differential.

Coaches will be categorised as either Reactive or Proactive. The Proactive and Reactive Coach schemes will both be purely team based and aligned with the measures set out on page 1 of this letter. It is proposed that a separate category is generated for Proactive Coaches, who will be rewarded based on performance of the Proactive measures.

5. Highlands & Islands / Scilly Isles.

Having received confirmation that the adoption of a common set of measures focussed on Customer, Volume/Visit Reduction and Efficiency is the correct approach we can now begin the development of a measures set for H&I and Scilly Isles, whilst we are developing and implementing these measures the engineers will continue to receive a reward in line with the existing interim arrangement calculations.

We have already made a commitment that the engineers on the Scilly Isles will receive a retrospective payment that is backdated to the time when the H&I interim arrangement payments were introduced. Action is being taken to calculate the amount due and we will ensure that the appropriate payment will be made in June 2005 salaries.

We have confirmed that subject to agreement on the overall package we will arrange to retrospectively process the payment of interim arrangements to the 10 engineers who transferred to Wholesale with effect from 1^st July 2004. The retrospective payments themselves will therefore cover the period between 5^th April 2004 and the 30^th June 2004.

6. Root Cause Repair.

Despite the changes we introduced to ensure individuals are not disadvantaged by carrying out Root Cause Repair we recognise there remain concerns over the treatment of this important work.

Recent analysis of almost 6300 Root Cause Repair jobs has been carried out. Based on this sample we believe that it would be appropriate, in order to fully integrate this work into any future scheme, that we should reward any RCR skilled job with the appropriate points value. Further work is required to calculate the correct point’s value but early indications are that it would be at least 17 points per job.

Given that the Project FINE trial, in South Yorks CST, is designed to fully test all the operational working practices and behaviours required to support a focus on fault rate reduction, including Root Cause Repair, we would like to trial the reward of RCR on a point’s basis in South Yorks in July at the latest. We also remain committed to jointly seeking a solution across the wider scheme.

Conclusion

The company is pleased that the CWU‘s negotiators have responded positively to us on so many of the important changes we have proposed. We have confirmed on a number of occasions and do so once again in this letter our full commitment to comply with the terms of

the FRS agreement. This includes the need to balance performance improvements with any shift in the balance between team and individual results.

Our commitment to an FRS scheme which fully aligns all functional units between common team objectives is a clear commitment to the fact that we are happy to consider further changes to the individual / team balance against the backdrop of our jointly agreed principles within Annex A and we recognise that the CWU negotiators support for our proposed new measures

move us forward. It is in all our interests to put in place arrangements that encourage better team working across BT, through the revised FRS arrangements we believe that we can jointly contribute to that objective.

We hope that the CWU will acknowledge along with Field Service, that the balance between individual and team reward is linked, as specified within Annex A, to the level of improvement achieved. We believe that the series of proposals we have outlined over recent weeks achieve this requirement and will enable us to move forward, in line with the principles in Annex A.

It is our intention to start a systems trial of the Reactive and Reactive Coaches scheme in part of the Thames Valley patch commencing in mid July. In parallel we will look to trial both the Reactive and Proactive schemes in BTNI. The trial in BTNI will test the movement of any individual between the two schemes and reflects the fact that BTNI are currently the most advanced in terms of Proactive booking practices.

In order to move to a 4 week rolling individual measure we must cease the existing FRS scheme in the trial patches. The output performance will be reported for 4 weeks before the first weeks reward can be calculated. We will therefore need to discuss and agree with the CWU the level of adjustment to be made to individuals who are currently participating in the existing FRS scheme. Following the calculation of the monthly payments we will carry out a review of the trial, with the CWU.

In order to test the revised arrangements and to meet pay cut off dates, we will need to carry out the trial over an 8 week period. For the first 3 weeks individuals will receive a payment that is based on the existing scheme arrangements. So therefore the FRS element of an individual’s salary will be based solely on the existing arrangements. For the following month’s salaries, in the trial sites, the FRS payments will be based on the revised arrangements

Providing we agree at the point of the review that no significant issues exist we will look to

extend implementation of the revised scheme to an agreed timeline. At this stage we will include in the implementation the wider rollout of the Reactive, Proactive, Hoist and Control schemes together with the revised H&I and Scilly Isles. Provided we are able to proceed through agreement to roll out I can confirm we will jointly enter into a full review of FRS early in 2006.

I believe the proposals set out above provide the basis that will enable us to jointly evolve towards a more team based scheme in line with the principles set out within Annex A of the Watford agreement.

Yours sincerely

Charlie McKay

Return to top of page