EBS building soc workers want annual Xmas bonus

Make love not war

Avatarr wrote: »

I'm not going to take people on faith swearing up and down that they have a legal contract which is not being honoured when their trade union is not suing on their behalf. If it was open and shut, they would be.

Listen, regardless of what the contract says, management in EBS have pulled a stroke. Plain and simple. Instead of calling them moans/ cry-babies and other emotive names, they should be supported as its just another example of the tiers there are in Irish society, where people at the top will always be protected. Direct your anger at them not the employees[/Quote]

That's the point I'm trying to make thanks

We've all been had again and look at us turning on each other!

TheZohanS

Make love not war wrote: »

Listen, regardless of what the contract says, management in EBS have pulled a stroke. Plain and simple. Instead of calling them moans/ cry-babies and other emotive names, they should be supported as its just another example of the tiers there are in Irish society, where people at the top will always be protected. Direct your anger at them not the employees

That's the point I'm trying to make thanks

We've all been had again and look at us turning on each other!

"regardless of what the contract says", and there we have it folks.

Snakeblood

Make love not war wrote: »

Yeah but your taking the managements word they haven't produce anything but of course they're management and the government they must be telling the truth.

With regards to the suing you should read previous comments. We are looking at this our problem is the minister for finance has legal control over our contracts. So to be honest I don't think we'll get anywhere but I don't think we'll back down to easily.

How do you mean he has legal control? The reason stupid bonuses were paid in the past to failed upper echelon guys from failed businesses was because he didn't control the contracts, he inherited them.

Also, I'm not taking management's word, I'm using Occam's razor. If you were legally entitled to the money, and denied it, you'd be suing. You aren't, so either there's something else which has not been announced to the media, or there isn't, and you simply aren't automatically entitled to the money as salary or bonus, it's optional for the management (although it has been paid every year in the past).

Make love not war

Snakeblood wrote: »

Make love not war wrote: »

Yeah but your taking the managements word they haven't produce anything but of course they're management and the government they must be telling the truth.

With regards to the suing you should read previous comments. We are looking at this our problem is the minister for finance has legal control over our contracts. So to be honest I don't think we'll get anywhere but I don't think we'll back down to easily.

How do you mean he has legal control? The reason stupid bonuses were paid in the past to failed upper echelon guys from failed businesses was because he didn't control the contracts, he inherited them.

Also, I'm not taking management's word, I'm using Occam's razor. If you were legally entitled to the money, and denied it, you'd be suing. You aren't, so either there's something else which has not been announced to the media, or there isn't, and you simply aren't automatically entitled to the money as salary or bonus, it's optional for the management (although it has been paid every year in the past).

Read up on it. The credit institutions stabilisation act 2010 makes any legal action pointless.
But as I said before a few times now we are looking at it legally so stop saying we aren't!!!

Avatarr

"regardless of what the contract says", and there we have it folks.[/Quote]

First up I don't work in EBS, I could have been clearer with my last post, whether it's called a bonus or a 13 month salary division, is immaterial. If i join a company on day 1 with the understanding that my overall salary package is going to be X plus an end of year top up, That gets factored into the total salary figure. These people may have looked for more money from day 1 if they knew this payment would be pulled.

For one minute can those who are being critical of EBS workers:
1 put yourself in their shoes and
2 consider, would your opinion change if they were not bank employees

Snakeblood

Make love not war wrote: »

Read up on it. The credit institutions stabilisation act 2010 makes any legal action pointless.
But as I said before a few times now we are looking at it legally so stop saying we aren't!!!

Ok, I await the judgement. What'll you do if it goes against you?

Make love not war

TheZohan wrote: »

Make love not war wrote: »

Listen, regardless of what the contract says, management in EBS have pulled a stroke. Plain and simple. Instead of calling them moans/ cry-babies and other emotive names, they should be supported as its just another example of the tiers there are in Irish society, where people at the top will always be protected. Direct your anger at them not the employees

That's the point I'm trying to make thanks

We've all been had again and look at us turning on each other!

"regardless of what the contract says", and there we have it folks.

Hahaha good one!!!!
Your such a **** stirrer.

Make love not war

Snakeblood wrote: »

Make love not war wrote: »

Read up on it. The credit institutions stabilisation act 2010 makes any legal action pointless.
But as I said before a few times now we are looking at it legally so stop saying we aren't!!!

Ok, I await the judgement. What'll you do if it goes against you?

I've no idea!!!! We'll be along time waiting on it anyway.

It has really opened my eyes about what they can do to us in a second.
I've no faith in this system at all so I'm not holding my breath but Im hoping people will start to wake up not for us but for themselves at what's going on and stop excepting that this is how it is.

Freddie59

Make love not war wrote: »

And if your willing to except that thats fine but don't get annoyed at people who aren't.

I'm not "accepting it" as you put it. I am pointing out the harsh economic realities of the situation.

Make love not war wrote: »

I'm sorry but this whole reality bites is not good enough to me.

WTF?

Galtee

Make love not war wrote: »

I've no idea!!!! We'll be along time waiting on it anyway.

It has really opened my eyes about what they can do to us in a second.
I've no faith in this system at all so I'm not holding my breath but Im hoping people will start to wake up not for us but for themselves at what's going on and stop excepting that this is how it is.

Apologies if this sounds harsh but it seems to me that you're actually starting to believe your own hype.

Freddie59

Avatarr wrote: »

First up I don't work in EBS, I could have been clearer with my last post, whether it's called a bonus or a 13 month salary division, is immaterial. If i join a company on day 1 with the understanding that my overall salary package is going to be X plus an end of year top up, That gets factored into the total salary figure. These people may have looked for more money from day 1 if they knew this payment would be pulled.

For one minute can those who are being critical of EBS workers:
1 put yourself in their shoes and
2 consider, would your opinion change if they were not bank employees

1. I have been there. And saw my fellow workers made redundant, with pay cuts and pay freezes. And were not propped up by the taxpayer. A "bonus" was the furthest thing from our minds.

2. NO. No private failed bankrupt entity should be propped up in this manner. it is undemocratic and immoral. Why are ALL failed companies not propped up if so?

Make love not war

Galtee wrote: »

Make love not war wrote: »

I've no idea!!!! We'll be along time waiting on it anyway.

It has really opened my eyes about what they can do to us in a second.
I've no faith in this system at all so I'm not holding my breath but Im hoping people will start to wake up not for us but for themselves at what's going on and stop excepting that this is how it is.

Apologies if this sounds harsh but it seems to me that you're actually starting to believe your own hype.

Not harsh at all.

Make love not war

Freddie59 wrote: »

Make love not war wrote: »

And if your willing to except that thats fine but don't get annoyed at people who aren't.

I'm not "accepting it" as you put it. I am pointing out the harsh economic realities of the situation.

Make love not war wrote: »

I'm sorry but this whole reality bites is not good enough to me.

WTF?[/Quote


I'm lost don't know if I was referring to your quote or someone else here. Couldn't be arsed going through them all again.

I do get your point though.

Avatarr

2. NO. No private failed bankrupt entity should be propped up in this manner. it is undemocratic and immoral. Why are ALL failed companies not propped up if so?[/Quote]

I understand where you are coming from, BUT, is it the EBS employees fault the banks are propped up. Why punish/blame them for the failings of government policy and regulation.

It's about time "WE" the workers stuck together.

MagicSean

Snakeblood wrote: »

I'm not going to take people on faith swearing up and down that they have a legal contract which is not being honoured when their trade union is not suing on their behalf. If it was open and shut, they would be.

Freddie59 wrote: »

1. I have been there. And saw my fellow workers made redundant, with pay cuts and pay freezes. And were not propped up by the taxpayer. A "bonus" was the furthest thing from our minds.

2. NO. No private failed bankrupt entity should be propped up in this manner. it is undemocratic and immoral. Why are ALL failed companies not propped up if so?

The company isn't bankrupt. It should be but it isn't. So that argument is ridiculous.

Even if the company was bankrupt it doesn't mean they can decide which parts of a contract or employment law they wish to comply with and which they would like to ignore.

Anyone who says they should be happy to have a job and live with it is a moron. Might as well look to legalise indentured servitude and abolish employment law. The rules on employment are there for a good reason.

The fact that management have all received this extra payment and then claim it is a bonus for the lower people is outrageous.

The guy at the counter did not ruin this country. The guys at the top did. Have the balls to direct your anger at the right place.

Frank Black

Make love not war wrote: »

I've no idea!!!! We'll be along time waiting on it anyway.

It has really opened my eyes about what they can do to us in a second.
I've no faith in this system at all so I'm not holding my breath but Im hoping people will start to wake up not for us but for themselves at what's going on and stop excepting that this is how it is.

I do have sympathy for your plight Make Love not War, but many of us have been awake to this for over three years now - as posted previously we lost our Christmas bonus in 2008, salary reductions in 2009, 2010, 2011 - you may not feel lucky, but compared to some, including former collegues of mine who are still out of work - you are.

Snakeblood

MagicSean wrote: »

The company isn't bankrupt. It should be but it isn't. So that argument is ridiculous.

Even if the company was bankrupt it doesn't mean they can decide which parts of a contract or employment law they wish to comply with and which they would like to ignore.

Anyone who says they should be happy to have a job and live with it is a moron. Might as well look to legalise indentured servitude and abolish employment law. The rules on employment are there for a good reason.

The fact that management have all received this extra payment and then claim it is a bonus for the lower people is outrageous.

The guy at the counter did not ruin this country. The guys at the top did. Have the balls to direct your anger at the right place.

Your point about the contract is exactly what I've been saying. The company isn't allowed decide what parts of the contract it can break. THe issue is that it is not paying the bonus and that implies to me that they don't have to. But then, it'll go to court and this will be decided. I could be wrong.

It's certainly outrageous, and management shouldn't have gotten it. I don't think because they did, lower level people should.

Freddie59

MagicSean wrote: »

The company isn't bankrupt. It should be but it isn't. So that argument is ridiculous.

OK - let's call it insolvent, failed, whatever. It is fcuked. Plain and simple.

MagicSean wrote: »

Anyone who says they should be happy to have a job and live with it is a moron. Might as well look to legalise indentured servitude and abolish employment law. The rules on employment are there for a good reason.

Even more moronic is the inability to recognise the desperate nature of a situation. And advising people to pursue a forlorn hope:rolleyes: And indeed be thankful they're not on the dole. That type of BS 1970s union attitude is hard to believe really.

MagicSean wrote: »

The fact that management have all received this extra payment and then claim it is a bonus for the lower people is outrageous.

Retract the payment from management. Problem solved.

MagicSean wrote: »

The guy at the counter did not ruin this country. The guys at the top did. Have the balls to direct your anger at the right place.

The company that employed him/her did. Cold economic fact. All of these companies, be they foreign or Irish, back a losing horse called the property market. And now want their stake back. I'll be fcuked if I'm going to stand around and watch my tax Euros paying a fcuking BONUS to these people. Be they management or staff.

Freddie59

Avatarr wrote: »

2. NO. No private failed bankrupt entity should be propped up in this manner. it is undemocratic and immoral. Why are ALL failed companies not propped up if so?

I understand where you are coming from, BUT, is it the EBS employees fault the banks are propped up. Why punish/blame them for the failings of government policy and regulation.

It's about time "WE" the workers stuck together.[/QUOTE]

But you're missing the point. Stick together for what? The EBS is finished. Kaput. Done. You cannot positively discriminate in their favour at any cost.

Make love not war

Snakeblood wrote: »

MagicSean wrote: »

The company isn't bankrupt. It should be but it isn't. So that argument is ridiculous.

Even if the company was bankrupt it doesn't mean they can decide which parts of a contract or employment law they wish to comply with and which they would like to ignore.

Anyone who says they should be happy to have a job and live with it is a moron. Might as well look to legalise indentured servitude and abolish employment law. The rules on employment are there for a good reason.

The fact that management have all received this extra payment and then claim it is a bonus for the lower people is outrageous.

The guy at the counter did not ruin this country. The guys at the top did. Have the balls to direct your anger at the right place.

Your point about the contract is exactly what I've been saying. The company isn't allowed decide what parts of the contract it can break. THe issue is that it is not paying the bonus and that implies to me that they don't have to. But then, it'll go to court and this will be decided. I could be wrong.

It's certainly outrageous, and management shouldn't have gotten it. I don't think because they did, lower level people should.

The company didn't decide what parts it can break the dpartment of finance did and still can.
Our contracts mean nothing since the new act came in last year.

Snakeblood

Make love not war wrote: »

The company didn't decide what parts it can break the dpartment of finance did and still can.
Our contracts mean nothing since the new act came in last year.

Can you point out the bit in the act you are referring to?

Freddie59

Make love not war wrote: »

Our contracts mean nothing since the new act came in last year.

Ergo you have no case.

Make love not war

black francis wrote: »

Make love not war wrote: »

I've no idea!!!! We'll be along time waiting on it anyway.

It has really opened my eyes about what they can do to us in a second.
I've no faith in this system at all so I'm not holding my breath but Im hoping people will start to wake up not for us but for themselves at what's going on and stop excepting that this is how it is.

I do have sympathy for your plight Make Love not War, but many of us have been awake to this for over three years now - as posted previously we lost our Christmas bonus in 2008, salary reductions in 2009, 2010, 2011 - you may not feel lucky, but compared to some, including former collegues of mine who are still out of work - you are.

Totally understand my family and friends are in the same boat and have been for years.

Make love not war

Freddie59 wrote: »

Make love not war wrote: »

Our contracts mean nothing since the new act came in last year.

Ergo you have no case.

Doesn't mean we're not gonna fight it.

Avatarr

But you're missing the point. Stick together for what? The EBS is finished. Kaput. Done. You cannot positively discriminate in their favour at any cost.[/Quote]

It not about EBS, it's about how these people are being treated. Maybe you are right and we should tell them they are alone and society does not care, but don't be surprised if next week there's a story about how a factory worker, farmers, teachers e.t.c are getting a raw deal. When we isolate groups, any group, it's make it easy for government and other vested interests to continue to exploit us all for the minority to prosper.

Make love not war

Snakeblood wrote: »

Make love not war wrote: »

The company didn't decide what parts it can break the dpartment of finance did and still can.
Our contracts mean nothing since the new act came in last year.

Can you point out the bit in the act you are referring to?[/Quote

Haha no I can't have you seen the size of it. This I what we're being told by the department of finance obviously solicitors will look into this and understand it a bit more.
This act was literally brought in over night.

Snakeblood

Make love not war wrote: »

Snakeblood wrote: »

Can you point out the bit in the act you are referring to?

Haha no I can't have you seen the size of it. This I what we're being told by the department of finance obviously solicitors will look into this and understand it a bit more.
This act was literally brought in over night.

Actually, I started reading it a few minutes ago. I thought it would be helpful for the discussion. I've found nothing one way or the other yet, and now I'm getting bored.

Make love not war

Snakeblood wrote: »

Make love not war wrote: »

Snakeblood wrote: »

Can you point out the bit in the act you are referring to?

Haha no I can't have you seen the size of it. This I what we're being told by the department of finance obviously solicitors will look into this and understand it a bit more.
This act was literally brought in over night.

Actually, I started reading it a few minutes ago. I thought it would be helpful for the discussion. I've found nothing one way or the other yet, and now I'm getting bored.

I had a quick look at it myself try page 23 24 and 25. I think it says something about it there but its all legal jargon I don't understand it

Snakeblood

Make love not war wrote: »

I had a quick look at it myself try page 23 24 and 25. I think it says something about it there but its all legal jargon I don't understand it

Ok, on that basis I think you might as well have the money. :cool:

Make love not war

Snakeblood wrote: »

Make love not war wrote: »

I had a quick look at it myself try page 23 24 and 25. I think it says something about it there but its all legal jargon I don't understand it

Ok, on that basis I think you might as well have the money. :cool:

Haha thanks

lynchie

Make love not war wrote: »

I had a quick look at it myself try page 23 24 and 25. I think it says something about it there but its all legal jargon I don't understand it

Sections 23-25 deal with allowing the minister to remove employees / directors etc or change directors remunerations.

The only thing I found in the act that makes any reference to payments to employees or officers is section 51 which allows the minister to stop bonus payments.

The way I see it:
- Your contract makes reference to a bonus payment -> minister can stop it using the new act.
- Your contract states you are paid via 13 monthly payments with the 13th payment made in December -> Nothing minister can do and a case under the Payment of wages act could be made against the employer.

Make love not war

lynchie wrote: »

Make love not war wrote: »

I had a quick look at it myself try page 23 24 and 25. I think it says something about it there but its all legal jargon I don't understand it

Sections 23-25 deal with allowing the minister to remove employees / directors etc or change directors remunerations.

The only thing I found in the act that makes any reference to payments to employees or officers is section 51 which allows the minister to stop bonus payments.

The way I see it:
- Your contract makes reference to a bonus payment -> minister can stop it using the new act.
- Your contract states you are paid via 13 monthly payments with the 13th payment made in December -> Nothing minister can do and a case under the Payment of wages act could be made against the employer.

Well fair play to you
But page 25 section 24 determines remuneration of directors and officers.
I dont understand it all myself but is an officer an employee????

Freddie59

Avatarr wrote: »

It not about EBS, it's about how these people are being treated. Maybe you are right and we should tell them they are alone and society does not care, but don't be surprised if next week there's a story about how a factory worker, farmers, teachers e.t.c are getting a raw deal. When we isolate groups, any group, it's make it easy for government and other vested interests to continue to exploit us all for the minority to prosper.

It's not about caring. It's about economic realities. Something this country isn't very good at.

Avatarr

It's not about caring. It's about economic realities. Something this country isn't very good at.[/Quote]

Agreed, but let's direct our anger at the perpetrators and not the little people who are just trying to make a living for themselfs and their families.

I hope they strike hard and I hope they get their money, I don't see their managers doing the right thing and giving up their payment, the same way I don't see ex ministers offering to give up any of their rolls Royce pensions. It's all inter connected and so are we as Irish citizens regardless of where we work, if we work, or who we work for.

SO GOOD ON YE EBS EMPLOYEES, GIVE THEM HELL

Ray Palmer

Freddie59 wrote: »

It's not about caring. It's about economic realities. Something this country isn't very good at.

If you want to give somebody a pay cut you have to go through the proper chanels and not make up a claim it is a "bonus" when it is not.

There is one argument to reduce their wages, fine.

The other more importnat issue is that the company is reducing wages and claim it is a bonus when it is not.

Under the last point you have to see the fact managers were able to avoid this salary cut.

If you want to reduce wages fine you just have to do it fairly and openly.

123collie

Hi, does anyone happen to know if you have to pass a picket line to get to an EBS.
Im not affiliated to any side here - but I think its ridiculous that normal tax payers have to provide the cash that the staff are looking for. I don't think anyone who gets 3k a month as a monthly salary is that badly paid. But I need access to my money but don't want to cross the picket line.

Avatarr

123collie wrote: »

Hi, does anyone happen to know if you have to pass a picket line to get to an EBS.
Im not affiliated to any side here - but I think its ridiculous that normal tax payers have to provide the cash that the staff are looking for. I don't think anyone who gets 3k a month as a monthly salary is that badly paid. But I need access to my money but don't want to cross the picket line.

Hey what do you mean by normal tax payers?

EBS employees pay taxes as well.

Freddie59

Ray Palmer wrote: »

If you want to give somebody a pay cut you have to go through the proper chanels and not make up a claim it is a "bonus" when it is not.

There is one argument to reduce their wages, fine.

The other more importnat issue is that the company is reducing wages and claim it is a bonus when it is not.

Under the last point you have to see the fact managers were able to avoid this salary cut.

If you want to reduce wages fine you just have to do it fairly and openly.

Of course if this happened to any other company in the Private Sector it would have ceased trading immediately. But you are 100% right about management. Another Golden Circle in operation.

Make love not war

Freddie59 wrote: »

Avatarr wrote: »

It not about EBS, it's about how these people are being treated. Maybe you are right and we should tell them they are alone and society does not care, but don't be surprised if next week there's a story about how a factory worker, farmers, teachers e.t.c are getting a raw deal. When we isolate groups, any group, it's make it easy for government and other vested interests to continue to exploit us all for the minority to prosper.

It's not about caring. It's about economic realities. Something this country isn't very good at.

We know the economic realities but why don't managers take the hit here too??? My anger in this is because of fairness not one rule for managers and another for staff.
The country is in a state but yet the minister can approve these massive salaries and bonuses (which breach the pay cap) for these senior managers then cut our pay.

Freddie59

Avatarr wrote: »

Agreed, but let's direct our anger at the perpetrators and not the little people who are just trying to make a living for themselfs and their families.

I hope they strike hard and I hope they get their money, I don't see their managers doing the right thing and giving up their payment, the same way I don't see ex ministers offering to give up any of their rolls Royce pensions. It's all inter connected and so are we as Irish citizens regardless of where we work, if we work, or who we work for.

SO GOOD ON YE EBS EMPLOYEES, GIVE THEM HELL

At the expense of the rest of us - already battered and bruised financially?

sitstill

I was in EBS on Liffey Street today and there was no picket outside.

Freddie59

Make love not war wrote: »

We know the economic realities but why don't managers take the hit here too??? My anger in this is because of fairness not one rule for managers and another for staff.
The country is in a state but yet the minister can approve these massive salaries and bonuses (which breach the pay cap) for these senior managers then cut our pay.

I have said it several times - retract the money from management and problem solved. If the Government had a ball between them this is what would happen.

The example you quote above is why this country is in the State it's in.

Make love not war

123collie wrote: »

Hi, does anyone happen to know if you have to pass a picket line to get to an EBS.
Im not affiliated to any side here - but I think its ridiculous that normal tax payers have to provide the cash that the staff are looking for. I don't think anyone who gets 3k a month as a monthly salary is that badly paid. But I need access to my money but don't want to cross the picket line.

3k a mth I wish it was that!!!!!! More like 1500 net and I pay tax I'm a normal tax payer.
Anyway the strike was only 1 day in 2 branches in the country. So you won't have to pass any pickets.

pretty-in-pink

I agree with the above- there are very few of us on 3k a month of have been affected- 1500- 1800 net pay is the actual average. The christmas payment is just shy of a months pay, but is hugely taxed, so while they state its 1500 (for easiness sake), in reality, after tax, its more like 1000. I know my one is 1620 before tax, and I get around 1170 after tax.

You could have paid all of our monies twice over, at least, from managements monies. and thats not including the ceo or board.

Regarding the increasing demand to see our contracts....ummm no. That would be a dumb a$$ move. Would you post your contract on a public board?

I will quote the relevent part for you:

Salary:
Your salary is X per annum, payable on a monthly basis. The society operates a system of performance related pay for all new clerical staff, and your salary will be reviewed under prp on an annual basis.

Christmas Bonus:
You will be paid a bonus during december each year, on the basis of 1 weeks basic salary per 3 months or part thereof worked during the course of he year. If you leave the societys employmentbefore the due payment date of bonus in december, you will not be entitled to either a full or pro-rata bonus payment for that year.

Gainshare
Paid in march, based on company performance, between 0-3% of base salary


Now yes, it states its a bonus, however our full yearly package (as stated on any documents you need to provide for loans etc) incorperates this "bonus" as being part of it. The PRP and the Gainshare were clearly not pensionable, and were subject to performance etc, which we lost when the rest of the country lost them. Regarding the christmas payment- we were not told it wasn't pensionable. And when management were given the option to change the wording (or whatever way they went around it) we were not. We were told as close as the friday beforehand we were getting it still (as we had all been asing since july/august) and yet come tuesday afternoon they told us "no you're not". What they have done is a crappy, sneaky thing.

I appreciate the bits of support that have been shown, and while i understand why others are angry at the finacial industry (and hey, so are we), its really unfair to lash out at us. Be it here, in branches, or on the phone, (we've been called ba$tards, nazis, soulless, terrible human beings, sell outs etc) If you're that mad, come out from behind your keyboard, and march on the government, let them know you're mad at them and their proceedures, write to CEOs, follow the path of anger to its source- not the easiest target. And yes we know we are lucky to have jobs, but its precisely that whole attitude that leads to employers taking massive advantage of employees, and really we should all stick together. A lone stick will break easily, a bundle is strong.

TheZohanS

pretty-in-pink wrote: »

Salary:
Your salary is X per annum, payable on a monthly basis. The society operates a system of performance related pay for all new clerical staff, and your salary will be reviewed under prp on an annual basis.

Christmas Bonus:
You will be paid a bonus during december each year, on the basis of 1 weeks basic salary per 3 months or part thereof worked during the course of he year. If you leave the societys employmentbefore the due payment date of bonus in december, you will not be entitled to either a full or pro-rata bonus payment for that year.

So after your colleagues coming on here and telling lies it turns out that it WAS a bonus after all, just as the media had reported.

Thank you for your honesty.

The Waltzing Consumer

So it is a bonus after all?

How the hell do these unions and people get the nerve to say it is not a bonus when it clearly states it's a f**king bonus. :mad:

kenmc

I'm just wondering will anyone actually notice or care if the EBS goes on strike? Has it already happened even? Can't remember the last time I stepped foot inside a bank - sure they're only ever open when I'm at work anyway. With ATMs and internet banking, sure they could go on strike for weeks and most people would never notice!

pretty-in-pink

TheZohan wrote: »

So after your colleagues coming on here and telling lies it turns out that it WAS a bonus after all, just as the media had reported.

Thank you for your honesty.

Yes and no- it is put as a bonus in our contract, however its also classed as being a guaranteed part of our annual package. In so far as it states on our wage documentation we earn say 23k, split into 12 payments of 1800, and an extra pay in december of 1400. So they are classing it as both.

If they had stated it was not a certainty, or classed it as completely seperate from our annual package, i dont think we would be as upset. I for one wouldn't be. However, they have put it both ways to us, and they paid it to management but not us. One rule should be for everyone, not a them and us thing. And i know i'm not the only one who feels this way

I'm lucky enough that over the last couple of years i got used to living on a shoestring, and i dont have kids so its not as horrific a deal for me as it is for others. However i think its unfair what they have done, and they should pay this years, and reneogatite the contracts so they state what is actually happening, rather then what they feel like doing on the day.

That all aside, it has cemented my desire to leave and get another job. I stayed only for job stability, but since that is under threat, and now we are being jerked around i cannot see any real benefit in staying in a job that depresses me, puts me in a position where i get abused, and where i get clenching dread every single sunday at the idea i have to go back. I've cried over this, i've considered going on the dole, but i want to keep in continous employment, so that when i do buy a house i dont have a black hole to explain. If anyone has a nice retail, or admin role that is nothing to do with finance please hire me....so i can get back to being my happy self. And not my faking being ok but really im falling apart self. If i had known starting this job that it would end this way, i would never have taken it.

The Waltzing Consumer

pretty-in-pink wrote: »

I agree with the above- there are very few of us on 3k a month of have been affected- 1500- 1800 net pay is the actual average. The christmas payment is just shy of a months pay, but is hugely taxed, so while they state its 1500 (for easiness sake), in reality, after tax, its more like 1000. I know my one is 1620 before tax, and I get around 1170 after tax.

pretty-in-pink wrote: »

Yes and no- it is put as a bonus in our contract, however its also classed as being a guaranteed part of our annual package. In so far as it states on our wage documentation we earn say 23k, split into 12 payments of 1800, and an extra pay in december of 1400. So they are classing it as both.

Why are all the figures different?

It does not help when you are your colleagues lie about it being a bonus then throw around lots of different figures.

You blame management and higher ups, but you can't even settle on figures in your own posts, where is the honesty there?

Make love not war

pretty-in-pink wrote: »

TheZohan wrote: »

So after your colleagues coming on here and telling lies it turns out that it WAS a bonus after all, just as the media had reported.

Thank you for your honesty.

Yes and no- it is put as a bonus in our contract, however its also classed as being a guaranteed part of our annual package. In so far as it states on our wage documentation we earn say 23k, split into 12 payments of 1800, and an extra pay in december of 1400. So they are classing it as both.

If they had stated it was not a certainty, or classed it as completely seperate from our annual package, i dont think we would be as upset. I for one wouldn't be. However, they have put it both ways to us, and they paid it to management but not us. One rule should be for everyone, not a them and us thing. And i know i'm not the only one who feels this way

I'm lucky enough that over the last couple of years i got used to living on a shoestring, and i dont have kids so its not as horrific a deal for me as it is for others. However i think its unfair what they have done, and they should pay this years, and reneogatite the contracts so they state what is actually happening, rather then what they feel like doing on the day.

That all aside, it has cemented my desire to leave and get another job. I stayed only for job stability, but since that is under threat, and now we are being jerked around i cannot see any real benefit in staying in a job that depresses me, puts me in a position where i get abused, and where i get clenching dread every single sunday at the idea i have to go back. I've cried over this, i've considered going on the dole, but i want to keep in continous employment, so that when i do buy a house i dont have a black hole to explain. If anyone has a nice retail, or admin role that is nothing to do with finance please hire me....so i can get back to being my happy self. And not my faking being ok but really im falling apart self. If i had known starting this job that it would end this way, i would never have taken it.

I feel exactly the same!
No joke I'd honestly be better off on the dole but don't want the gap in my cv.
Although I'll definitely be contemplating it in the new year.