Sick Parcelforce couriers charged up to £250 if they can't find cover

[onewheeldave]

For anyone who wishes to end Parcel force making their self-employed workers pay £250 per day when they are too ill to work, here's the 38degrees online petition-

 

https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/campaigns/template-petition-clone-5a6b43a6-8b0e-44c6-96f9-659670514614?utm_campaign=PBO49NxE9K&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=member

 

I believe they're sending it to M&S and John Lewis as they make extensive use of Parcelforce, and the hope is that a huge 'NO' from the public will convince them to put pressure on Parcelforce to end this abusive practice.

[cgksheff]

For anyone who wishes to end Parcel force making their self-employed workers pay £250 per day when they are too ill to work, here's the 38degrees online petition-

 

https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/campaigns/template-petition-clone-5a6b43a6-8b0e-44c6-96f9-659670514614?utm_campaign=PBO49NxE9K&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=member

 

I believe they're sending it to M&S and John Lewis as they make extensive use of Parcelforce, and the hope is that a huge 'NO' from the public will convince them to put pressure on Parcelforce to end this abusive practice.

 

That is a badly worded, untrue and misleading petition.

It is not worthy of subscription.

 

"Right now, drivers for the delivery company Parcelforce have to pay £250 every time they call in sick. They say this is to cover the costs of finding a replacement driver, but it’s more than a day’s pay."

 

If you want to do anything, you should campaign against the practice of using Owner Drivers instead of permanent employees.

Unfortunately, the Owner Drivers that make good money out of their work would not be happy with you for doing so.

[ECCOnoob]

Well said. I think we can safely assume by the way that self-employed workers engaged by Parcel Force are not getting £250 a day, that would equate to £65k per year! They ought to get a union involved and then in the run up to Christmas drop a very short notice boycott on Parcel Force and demand a change to the contract.

 

Its average earnings between £45k - £70k according to the recruitment pages - so not far off.

 

https://jobs.royalmailgroup.com/PFW/job/Ipswich-Parcelforce-Self-Employed-Owner-Driver-Ipswich-IP/337307801/

 

As others have tried to say before being shouted down, they are contracting themselves to provide a service. They are their own responsibility and just like anyone else who operates a business, if they fail to provide that service they need to either provide a replacement or compensate their client for the losses.

 

The whole merits of people being allegedly "forced" into self employment is an entirely different issue. At the moment these people ARE self employed and they ARE signing up to provide services within the terms of contract.

 

A summary of the contract is here:

http://www.royalmailgroup.com/sites/default/files/SF_owner_driver_scheme_overview.pdf

 

From a quick scan, based on the average number of drops/collections the base rate alone would be around £120 earnings each day (that's not including the top up payments for early/priority deliveries each day). So £600 each 5 day week just on base payments alone.

 

How many sick days are these people having a year?

 

---------- Post added 12-03-2017 at 12:57 ----------

 

Oh and just for the record, shall we compare to the driver employees who may well get the benefits of holiday and sick pay but who only average a base rate each week of £290.

 

How hard done by are these self employed drivers exactly?

Edited March 12, 2017 by ECCOnoob

[onewheeldave]

That is a badly worded, untrue and misleading petition.

It is not worthy of subscription.

Nevertheless, it's the petition that triggered me initiating this thread, and, it's currently being signed by what appears to be one new person every second.

 

As for being 'badly worded'- maybe it's not composed of the kind of legal gibbareese that so appeals to those so bought in to the system that they want every challenge to the status quo to go through several 'steering group/committees', be composed by a team of expensive lawyers and take 5 years to complete so everyone's forgotten what the point was

 

Because it's directed towards M&S/John Lewis, and all it needs to do is make it clear to them that a huge number of people (potential customers and therefore potential boycotters) are very much opposed to parcel force (effectively) charging £250 for each day off sick.

If you want to do anything....

I am doing something- I'm happy with what I'm doing. I don't need your advice as to what I should do, because, if you haven't noticed, I disagree with you.

[Bob Arctor]

I am doing something- I'm happy with what I'm doing. I don't need your advice as to what I should do, because, if you haven't noticed, I disagree with you.

 

Better brace yourself for some CAPITAL LETTERS then

[cgksheff]

Nevertheless, it's the petition that triggered me initiating this thread, and, it's currently being signed by what appears to be one new person every second.

 

As for being 'badly worded'- maybe it's not composed of the kind of legal gibbareese that so appeals to those so bought in to the system that they want every challenge to the status quo to go through several 'steering group/committees', be composed by a team of expensive lawyers and take 5 years to complete so everyone's forgotten what the point was

 

Because it's directed towards M&S/John Lewis, and all it needs to do is make it clear to them that a huge number of people (potential customers and therefore potential boycotters) are very much opposed to parcel force (effectively) charging £250 for each day off sick.

I am doing something- I'm happy with what I'm doing. I don't need your advice as to what I should do, because, if you haven't noticed, I disagree with you.

 

Disagree as much as you like, but when you post tosh, it is still ... tosh.

 

Your favoured petition is based upon a lie.

[Obelix]

No-one is disputing that there's a contract between parcel force and their self employed workers specifying that the worker has to pay £250 when they can't cover their round due to illness.

 

Yes- to get their job, the worker has had to sign a document stating that if they are sick, they must pay £250: increasingly this is what workers are having to do if they want to stay off benefits.

 

As we rush ever closer to the point where abstract corporations become the dominant life form on this planet, leaving human beings as nothing other than disposable cogs serving the systems they created initially to serve them; we have a small window of opportunity to open our eyes, see the insanity of where we're heading, and commit to saying 'no' to grossly unfair working practices like the above.

 

Rise above the bleatings of the apologists and recognise the fundamental issue here, which is that employees are, to keep their jobs, being forced to pay £250 for every day that they are too ill to work:mad:

 

We are not "apologists" for opposing you and it is both insulting and unhelpful to resort to such name calling as well as characterising debate as "bleating"

They are not being forced to. Is anyone holding a gun to their head? Have they kidnapped their first born? No. So please quit the melodrama. These people choose to take a contract that pays them a good deal more than regular employees do (at least three times) and they accept the consequnces of that increased earning potential.

You might think it wrong. The law doesnt though and it's a fair contract struck with understanding on both side. Such general contracts amongst professionals has been around for centuries and so have penalties for non performance of duties. You have no case shown so far in any way apart from your outrage. So can you put the outrage aside and actually point out what is wrong and inequitable?

[onewheeldave]

We are not "apologists" for opposing you

True. You're apologists for defending a corrupt business practice.

 

and it is both insulting and unhelpful to resort to such name calling as well as characterising debate as "bleating"

It's not an insult, it's a description.

They are not being forced to. Is anyone holding a gun to their head? Have they kidnapped their first born?

Forcing does not require guns to heads or kidnappings of offspring. These workers live in a world of scarce jobs and many are couriers because they have no other options. Do you think they enjoy having to pay £250 when they have a migraine. No, of course not. Why do they sign the contract requiring them to pay £250 when they have a migraine? Because otherwise, they don't get the job.

 

---------- Post added 12-03-2017 at 23:16 ----------

 

Petition-

https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/campaigns/template-petition-clone-5a6b43a6-8b0e-44c6-96f9-659670514614?utm_campaign=PBO49NxE9K&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=member

Currently 71,110 people have signed.

[ECCOnoob]

True. You're apologists for defending a corrupt business practice.

 

 

It's not an insult, it's a description.

Forcing does not require guns to heads or kidnappings of offspring. These workers live in a world of scarce jobs and many are couriers because they have no other options. Do you think they enjoy having to pay £250 when they have a migraine. No, of course not. Why do they sign the contract requiring them to pay £250 when they have a migraine? Because otherwise, they don't get the job.

 

---------- Post added 12-03-2017 at 23:16 ----------

 

Petition-

https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/campaigns/template-petition-clone-5a6b43a6-8b0e-44c6-96f9-659670514614?utm_campaign=PBO49NxE9K&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=member

Currently 71,110 people have signed.

 

Are you being deliberately obtuse.

 

What corrupt business practice are you talking about?

 

Its a contract between company and self employed contractor to provide a service. If they fail to deliver on that service they have a legal obligation within the terms of said contact to provide cover to fulfill the duty or pay compensation monies to their customer for failure to provide it.

 

I dont enjoy losing billable hours when I have a day off either. I dont enjoy having to pay out agency staff to cover when we are not able to fulfil our work demands. Hey guess what, I dont enjoy paying any outgoings from my company profits and in turn my take home income BUT its the costs of running a business.

 

That's what these people are doing. Running a self employed business. Why are you finding this so hard to understand.

 

Boo hoo. Life is tough. The job market is difficult. YES, it is for everyone. What makes these people so special?

 

Despite what the stupid and misleading petition says these people are NOT parcelforce staff. They are self employed contractors. They reap the huge benefits of having that status and have no right to start moaning when they have to pay out the expenditure and take the responsibilities of doing so.

 

What would people like you prefer. How about Parcelforce scrap this entirely, employ everyone and give them £7.50 a hour eh? Im sure they would be delighted at losing their opportunity to earn more than double each week. Hmmmm.

Edited March 12, 2017 by ECCOnoob

[onewheeldave]

That's what these people are doing. Running a self employed business. Why are you finding this so hard to understand.

I don't find it difficult to understand- I'm self employed myself.

Boo hoo. Life is tough. The job market is difficult. YES, it is for everyone. What makes these people so special?

Life's not quite so tough for those who have jobs which not only don't fine them £250 for being sick, but actually pay them while they're unable to work due to illness.

Despite what the stupid and misleading petition says these people are NOT parcelforce staff. They are self employed contractors.

 

Self employed and working for parcel force. Self employed people not working for parcel force tend not to have to stump up £250 when they are ill.(or, to get their work, sign a contract stating that they have to pay £250 when they are ill). I certainly don't.

 

---------- Post added 12-03-2017 at 23:35 ----------

 

What would people like you prefer. How about Parcelforce scrap this entirely, employ everyone and give them £7.50 a hour eh? Im sure they would be delighted at losing their opportunity to earn more than double each week. Hmmmm.

I'd prefer that Parcelforce cease to charge their self employed workers £250 when they are ill.