RPI+ pay offer made by Resources

Letter from BECTU to BBC Resources management: BBC Resources Pay Claim 2006

18 January 2006

In light of the fact that the settlement date is 1st April I am writing to set our thoughts about pay for 2006.

In framing this year's claim BECTU is mindful of the current uncertainty regarding future prospects for Resources Ltd because of both the VfM process and the increasingly competitive demands of the industry. BECTU seeks to consolidate its members' financial position going forward and to ensure as a consequence that their pension provision has a healthy foundation.

To realise those aspirations, BECTU proposes three elements to the claim;

1. The pay claim and any subsequent increase should apply to everyone working for Resources Ltd. To be explicit this includes those on SFS contracts and Trainees.
2. Any funding set aside, or likely to be set aside, for the payment of bonuses should be included in the sum available for a general pay increase.
3. All Operational Trainees should be engaged, from day one, on standard terms and conditions. The claim is for a rise commensurate with the award given to the highest–paid director in 2005.

Any pay rise would be applied to all flat rate and T-related payments including night payments, Christmas Day and New Year payments, WOODs, the floors and roofs of the salary bands and any other salary-related payments. We would not expect any change in the hours for which night payments are made.

We would also seek the continuation of the arrangements agreed at ACAS covering the redeployment of staff in the event of redundancies to ensure the fullest protection for our members if that circumstance should arise.

I look forward to hearing from you with a date for a meeting in order for my colleagues and myself to put forward the arguments in support of this claim.

Luke Crawley
Supervisory Official

Letter from BBC Resources management to BECTU: BBC Resources Pay Settlement 2006

26 January 2006

Thank you for your letter of January 18th 2006 setting out BECTU's position regarding the 2006 pay settlement.

In advance of us meeting on February 1st 2006, I will take this opportunity to set out the current trading background before setting out our response to the elements of the proposal.

Context

The facilities market in which we operate continues to be tough with difficult trading conditions. These difficulties will continue into the next financial year and are presenting numerous challenges for each of the 3 main businesses within the company.

We shared detail with the ESPG Branch in December at a company level liaison meeting to illustrate some of the current challenges the businesses are dealing with. For example the effects we are forecasting through declining BBC work following the impact of 'Value for Money'; the impact on pricing through tendering processes on work in OBs; the impact of the creative desktop strategy on Post Production and the implications on future capacity as a result of needing to remedy the asbestos disturbance situation in Studios to name but four.

In view of this, the maximum we are able to offer by way of an increase this year is an inflation settlement. On current figures, this would be in the region of 2.2% (based on December 2005 RPI). This general revision rate is offered to recognise that the staff have continued to make a contribution to the business and should therefore not suffer by receiving a less than RPI increase. We believe we can continue to fund such an increase by further controlling our costs and introducing efficiencies into working practices where there is scope for change.

I will now respond to the individual elements of your proposals.

1. Collective Group

Staff engaged on SFS arrangements will continue to be treated on an individual basis outside of the collective framework on pay bargaining only. We will continue to review in discussion with individual groups the level of days needed to support anticipated business activity across the year.

All other collective rights remain unchanged.

Trainees have always had their Year 1 and Year 2 fixed salary rates increased in line with the standard increase. This will continue to be the case this year.

2. Bonus Funding

We have always said that when the company delivers strong financial performance, we want staff to share in that success. On occasion, in previous years, we have been able to demonstrate that by way of paying a one-off company wide bonus.

It is our intention to continue with the principle of this arrangement, in line with common commercial practice. If we achieve a good year, then we will make funds available to support the payment of a non-consolidated 'all staff' bonus. If we do not deliver the financial targets required, then there will be no funds available to support the payment of such a bonus.

In responding to your proposal to make such funds available as part of the general settlement budget; this option would significantly increase employment costs and will reduce our ability to compete for work in our highly competitive markets. In pursuing this option, BECTU would have to accept that in lean years, we would need to consider a RPI Minus settlement which we anticipate would be unacceptable to you.

However, for this financial year (i.e. April 2005 – March 2006), current forecasts show that we are some way off meeting our targets so the point is academic. There will be no funds available to pay a non-consolidated 'all staff' bonus for this year.

3. Terms & Condition for Operational Trainees

As part of last year's settlement, the agreement was that the Branch were going to put forward a proposal on their thoughts for dealing with this issue in Autumn 2005. We have not seen any proposals on this matter.

Our position remains the same: the trainee scheme is designed to enable new talent to be brought into the business at an affordable level. The current remuneration arrangements along with the expenditure we make on supporting training and development activities over the 2 years of the scheme is generous.

The agreement we have with you on placing trainees into fully operational roles upon graduation is still in place. Current trainees who are in their final months of the traineeship will move onto standard terms and conditions in due course.

We have not recruited any trainees during 2005 and have no plans to recruit trainees in 2006.

4. Overall Percentage Increase

You claim that the general settlement for April 2006 should be in line with the award made to the highest paid director. I can confirm that in August 2005, the highest paid director was awarded a 3.4% increase, which was in fact, 0.1% lower than the settlement reached for the company in April 2005 (based on RPI at December 2004 of 3.5%).

In following the same principle, inflation in December was running at 2.2% and therefore an overall settlement of 2.1% would then be in order for this year. However we assume that this principle will not be acceptable to you so we are prepared to offer 2.2% as a general settlement.

The settlement increase would be applied to:-

• All current salary ranges
• London Weighting
• All associated payments such as Unpredictability Allowances, Night Pay, Overtime, WOODs payments and other allowances
• Year 1 Trainee salary levels
• Year 2 Trainee salary levels
• Minimum Entry Point salary level
• Christmas Day and Boxing Day payments.

I can also confirm that we currently have no intention of revising the hours for which night pay is applicable.

5. ACAS Agreement

On checking previous settlement details, I should note that the last time this arrangement was extended was in April 2003 with an expiry date of March 31st 2005. As there was no further extension agreed as part of last year's pay settlement, this feature has, in fact, expired.

However, as a gesture of goodwill, we are prepared to consider extending the arrangement agreed in the 1998 ACAS Enabling Agreement whereby, in situations where selection criteria are applied, people facing compulsory redundancy have five months, from the date on which they receive notification of their selection for redundancy to seek retraining and redeployment opportunities. We propose to extend this arrangement until March 31st 2007.

We are disappointed that the claim was not submitted before Christmas, as in previous years, although we understand why this is. If we enter into protracted discussions over these matters, then there is a real danger that for the first time since moving to devolved bargaining, we will not be able to guarantee that any settlement we finally arrive at will be in place for April. We will, of course, back-date any eventual agreement to April but feel it is important to note this point at this stage.

We are due to meet on February 1st 2006 at 11.00am. Arrangements for time off for the local representatives have also been made.

This letter has also been sent to Mike Smallwood at Amicus.

Kate Horton
HR Partner