BT’s UK Redundancy Plan Triggers Threat of Strike from Union
The Communications Workers Union (CWU) has threatened possible strike action against broadband and mobile giant BT after details of the operator’s plan to slash redundancy payments in half were leaked, which comes as many jobs are being lost due to the operator’s new office re-location strategy (closing many existing sites).
Sadly the BT Group has had a rough few years and as a result of that, as well as the need to invest £12bn into “full fibre” (FTTP) broadband (here) and to enhance other services, the operator has been busy restructuring itself and trying to cut cost (here).
Tensions around this peaked a few months ago after BT announced their intention to re-organise around a smaller number of regional offices, which will mean the closure of some existing sites. The result is that some staff, mostly office workers, were left with having to choose between travelling long distances to a new place of work or taking redundancy.
According to a leaked BT email seen by iNews, the operator has now informed 106,000 staff of planned changes to their redundancy terms. “It is proposing a cap on payments of up to 12 months of salary, a 50 per cent cut for thousands of workers who are currently entitled to up to 24 months,” said the article.
In response the CWU, which this week held a national day of action for BT workers to show their solidarity, has threatened to table an industrial ballot, which could result in possible strike action.
Andy Kerr, CWU Deputy General Secretary, said:
“Today shows we are united. Today is a message of solidarity from the CWU to BT, from every part of our organisation, in every part of the UK. BT need to listen to our message!
Only if we stay united and stick together and stand together can we force BT to another direction. This is the first national day of action – and it won’t be the last. We’ll be ramping up further pressure on BT as the weeks and months go by.”
A Spokesperson for BT Group said:
“We have at least seven different severance arrangements that vary by manager or team member. To address issues of fairness and consistency, we’re proposing a single, competitive set of terms that will apply equally to all UK-based employees in BT, Plusnet, EE and Openreach.
We are starting a consultation process to move to a fair and consistent approach for all colleagues. At the moment, no decisions have been made.”
Once again BT finds itself between a rock and a hard place, with few good options open to it. At the same time the idea of holding strike action at a major national broadband and phone provider, during the global COVID-19 pandemic, seems likely to divide opinions. Hopefully a solution can be found before the growing anger simmers over into something uglier.
Mark is a professional technology writer, IT consultant and computer engineer from Dorset (England), he also founded ISPreview in 1999 and enjoys analysing the latest telecoms and broadband developments. Find me on X (Twitter), Mastodon, Facebook and Linkedin.
« Court Clears £800m Sale of OneWeb’s LEO Broadband Satellites
Latest UK ISP News
- FTTP (5557)
- BT (3523)
- Politics (2545)
- Openreach (2307)
- Business (2272)
- Building Digital UK (2248)
- FTTC (2049)
- Mobile Broadband (1981)
- Statistics (1791)
- 4G (1673)
- Virgin Media (1628)
- Ofcom Regulation (1470)
- Fibre Optic (1398)
- Wireless Internet (1395)
- FTTH (1382)
It is a terrible thing loosing a stable job. So I do have a lot of sympathy for those affected particularly in these strange times.
12 months is, as these things go, pretty generous.
24 months borders on the unbelievable in this day and age. I had to read it twice.
TBH I’m not sure CWU are going to get much public sympathy going on strike over this.
Now the lid is off this there will be investor pressure to sort this and any other Spanish practices that are still under the bonnet.
There is always another angle on this that it is a put up argument to make BT look an unattractive target by exposing the degree of mess that needs cleaning up and the union opposition to the clean up. Just a thought.
I must admit I thought 24m terms had already gone. Its quite insane in the modern world…
BT have to change this. They might as well just take the pain now. I’m doubtful strikes will succeed in the present climate…
Strikes will almost certainly be an own goal by CWU.
Most people would see it as defending the indefensible.
These are tough times and for those caught up in, sadly, huge swathes of redundancies on much less generous terms in other industries this won’t go down well.
One rule for us on the shop floor another for the golden hello/goodbye with their generous sign on bonus just for turning up on their first day, then the fabulous severance pay and lottery winning pot of pension contributions.
Sorry the guys and girls on 24 month redundancy packages get my sympathy, that’s what was offered contractually, to then move the goalposts is morally wrong.
Multi billion pound company doing this to staff is a joke. where is the loyalty to the staff that have been there 10,20,30 years..
Are you having a laugh? This type of thing goes to show what is wrong with modern trade unions – where is the balance, or reflection on the real world. Even at a 12 months cap it’s significantly higher than just about any comparable company. Most (like the company i work) is just statutory, so you get next to nothing. I’ve worked for a company (that ironicaly used to perform some of “the office” work for BT) and after 20 years i’d get £8,500 – that’s not even 3 months! I think the statutory amount is a bit of a joke, however 24 months is also a totally ridiculous amount to be paying in this day and age.
The Boss of BT, Mr Jansen, who made about £30 million after Worldpay was acquired by Vantiv, its American rival, will earn a basic salary of £1.1 million. He will be entitled to an annual bonus of as much as 240 per cent of his salary, long-term share awards worth four times his base pay and a pension top-up of £165,000.
SOURCE, The Times
> £1.1 million …
That’s almost Gary Lineker money!
Even 12 months is fundamentally obscene. Statutory is the standard here, plenty of people being made redundant with 1 week or 2 weeks payment (capped at ~500/wk) or none at all if less than 2 years.
For a BT employee on 40kpa to get only 40k not a 80k redundancy payment.. give me strength. The unions would be storing a total own goal here.
Do you know how many BT employees are on 40k a year? Not as many as you think. The bread and butter people are on low 20 odd.
Also this ‘deal’ allows ‘up to 12 months’. So you get made redundant and have worked there 60 years your worth is a year’s salary (capped to a weekly amount). You have to have worked there 2 years to even qualify for this redundancy and having done so you’d get 2 months. Anything over 30k is taxed (government regs)
It might seem ‘obscene’but a LOT of these people have given their whole entire lives to this company and joined because of a benefits package, and to move goalposts in such a manner is quite awful.
It’s not like they’re working at B&M Bargains for Christ’s sake.
Also side note; while the article states ‘nothing has been decided yet’ a video distributed to all staff from the head of HR basically made it clear this was happening like it or not.
24 months is absurd. I didnt even know it was that. Most engineers get 3-6month voluntary with at limit 9 but this is to be fought tooth and nail i know of 2 that got 9 months.
Compulsory i would imagine 12 is fine.
As much as i sympathise with anyone having this threat of redundancy or stress and worry of what this all causes for them and i do truly sympathise with them, i can say they dont have much support from the engineerimg teams my way.
Where was these people when our terms got changed and goal posts constantly moved on us. I been on 13 years and in that time i have had changes to my contract between Openreach /BT at the time made on my behalf by the union for…
*mandatory saturdays shift 1 a month
*mandarory late shift (which after 3-4 years they got rid of) but is still there if they want to reintroduce it.
*changes to terms of voluntary redundancy.
*ipop performance measure, which put untold stress on engineers who just wanted to do ther right thing (suicides even happened).
*trackers being installed and monitored by overzealous managers who was targeted to put people on performance plans just because.
*work location reorganised several times with no say yourself on where you would go and just up your start of day commitment to compansate for the changes they make).
*Contractal (manadatory) overtime being introduced and now being misused for managements failure
*changes to your roster with few weeks notice so holiday planning can be painful.
*pay your own parking fines now unless you get authorisation.
*new processes which slow you down (tetra, guarding pcp, fire regulation cabling, pole testing changes mean more hoist required) to name some and no increase in task time to do them.
*massive increase in new recruit churn due to such poor and narrow minded mangenment with stats a priorty not the person.
*loss of free shares as part of our benefit (although we are getting a one or return to this)
And more
These terms was not in my original contract but have been slipped in and signed by a sleeping union over the years.
The new guys on the 2020 contracts have evern worst terms and pay and have skilled based pay. Which surprise surprise they arent being skilled up due to constant high work stacks or no longer a need for the skill in your working area as have enough of that skill there… so no payrise for you, all of which again the union allowed to even be a thing.
Most of the new guys i meet are planning an escape and are completely demoralised after only 18months. So these “we employed 3000 more engineers” how many actually stayed? this numbers will shock you!
My point is these have been introduced and dispite pleas for help and calls for the union to do something they went vastly ignored and only done things 2-3 years later saying how wrong it is. Now the engineer teams will return the favour and ignore these #countmein pleas.
I was with openreach the last 10 years and would like to second your comments. I used to think where does this end ? The answer is it doesn’t end working for a company that has a share price. I now work for local government and couldn’t be happier. NHS, police, fire brigade all have telecoms related positions. Openreich and all it’s metrics gave me real transferable skills, don’t be afraid to look elsewhere.
I’m not sure where the 24 month redundancy payments have been? I left 6 years ago, most payments at that time ranged from 3 months to 12 months. Very few people were given an option. Most were expected to re locate. Therefore compulsory redundancy payments were rare.
I left without any redundancy after 36 years service at the age of 56. The company had made it increasingly difficult to sustain the ridiculous work loads. I was no exception, so I would suggest that BT have saved countless amounts of money by forcing people out with either very poor redundancy payments or none at all.
I’m guessing you left under voluntary redundancy terms rather than the compulsory terms that are being proposed here.
Fed up with people’s jealous remarks if someone else has something better than them.
If your contractual employment was agreed you have up to 24 months then that is so. Too many employers trying to renegade on agreed signed contracts.
If it was the employee trying to break a 50% financial cut to employer they would soon sue the employee.
I’m not affected as don’t work for BT or know anyone, and I’m not a socialist. I just think too many contracts get broken by companies or made up and the normal unrich person gets shafted.
So the people carping about generous terms can get stuffed in my view. It’s a race to the bottom otherwise. The employer created and agreed those terms. If they want to offer a one off payment in return for signing a new different contract conditions, that’s different for example or to new employees.
Well that’s fine they can have their payoff and have no job.
They’re already being made redundant so there’s not much of a downside to pushing for what their contract says they’re owed.
My old boss would be rubbing his hands with glee at this point, as soon as they walked out the door all those on strike would have been told. Tough, you have breeched your contract of employment, if want back in the door its now not 12 months but Statutory only, sign here or don’t come back.
Employment law may have changed since then and so not an option, but BT must know that all those in the retained offices will sign the new contracts.
BT, a large pension fund with a small tech company attached.
As always I think this needs to be taken in context. BT (inc OR) only offers redundancy where it needs to. Various schemes have been used over the years some bordering on the insane but they are far more tempered and focused now. There was a specific generation that benefited throughout their GPO/PT/BT career and into retirement (most people know one) but they should not be used to stereo type everyone else that has come through since. Terms and conditions have changed many times over the years.
Like most companies somewhere within the employment contracts will be the clauses regarding moving to other locations and getting either a relocation allowance or limited x year fare subsidies. Unlike other employers PT/BT has followed primarily a no redundancy policy and compared with other private sector would be considered a very good employer.
The CWU issue here is that BT is now seeking to change agreements that are less than 2 years old. The 24 months applies to certain grades with over 27 years service and are linked to previous agreements on cessation of pension rights.
The wider issue is that as BT closed its Area and District offices many took up residence in Exchange/TSVC buildings and many have already relocated multiple times previously what was supposed to defined “hubs” for their function.
The issue for BT is that they have created anomalies between previous agreements and closing certain locations now means staff that currently work together are being offered different terms simply because of their particular career progression and current grade.
My view is that the unions need to consider the long term implications to BT and the overall fairness. The long term viability/market share will impact their members future employment and pension. BT subsidiaries or divisions need significant overhaul and it is only now some are finally getting the investment they needed. The technology has changed, the market has changed and BT locations (office and equipment) has to change with it. However in return BT needs to ensure they are not choosing inappropriate buildings (e.g difficult public transport linkages) or basing the moves simply on centralisation prejudices or seemingly “follow the boss” scenarios. People generally will except change if it is based on sound and understandable business reasons.
They will come to an agreement. The short term issue for BT is to encourage the targeted individuals, not prepared to move, to agree to the existing offers so they can progress.
BT have made ‘key workers’ on 40k compulsory redundant and sent their jobs to India where they pay 5k.
Now they want to rip up what they agreed to only 2 years ago (in a deal that decimated peoples pensions ) and make a whole lot more people compulsory redundant for far less money.
Union are right to stand up to them. There is no need for compulsory redundancies. BT has always laid off with voluntary schemes.
This is the only correct comment here.
I think what makes it more the anything is they cut new staff wages by almost 20 percent and then advice they are offering financial advice lessons on budgeting.
@Harry
Respectfully what they are offering new hires has nothing to do with this disagreement.
@FibreBubble
I’m interested to understand what changes 2 years ago have decimated peoples pensions?, I only ask as I have a deferred BT pension.
BT have never faced the level of competition they do now. What they did in the past is quite irrelevant.
It is good to see them grasping the nettle. The taxpayer and then their customers have been subsidising all of this and while I prefer to see everyone brought up rather than some down things like this, generosity of pensions, etc, were crazy.
I am especially mindful that we are on the line for pensions.
It’s a brave new world. Adapt or fail. BT haven’t been this close to failing since the bubble burst in 2000/1.
fibre bubble so which key workers were these – BT have made ‘key workers’ on 40k compulsory redundant and sent their jobs to India where they pay 5k.
As long as BT would be happy with customers deciding that the 24month contact they signed should be halved, then that would be fine, but I’m guessing they might not agree with that.
That’s a great analogy, when they agreed to the 24 month terms they should honour them.
The problem with ALL companies today is, they can enforce changes in contract terms with a “sign the new contract or leave” option and that’s perfectly acceptable behaviour now and can’t be appealed against. (As long as they pay their staff lip service with a “forgone conclusion” consultation process which ticks the boxes.)
Lots of companies operate in this way nowadays. The UK government should put a stop to this abhorrent practice.
@Buggerlugz
They simply have to give you 90 days notice of change of contract, they don’t need you to do anything including signing a new contract.
It’s not just staff being made redundant they are trying to do over.
I’ve a friend who is manager grade, if he was to apply and get a promotion he’d have to sign a new contract where he’d lose the extra week of leave he has gained through long service and his full pay if sick would reduce from 6 months to 3 months.
This is normal for many companies. They term it as “simplifying” and “alligning” entitlements.
Although, obviously if you were to take a higher responsibility job you would factor in these losses as a monetary value. If the pay rise and value you placed on the elements being lost doesn’t stack-up then you don’t take it.
At least with BT it sounds like this is known before a position is applied for. I took a new role and lost many things because it wasn’t called out in the contract at all directly just some weasel words hidden deep down in page 1000 about standard company T&C’s apply, but not actually telling you what they were.
Many of the comments here show that many in the UK are willing to put up with the country’s race to the bottom. I did 33 years at PO/BT and I am glad I got out when I did. I now work for a French telecoms company where the work ethos is as it was in BT before the bean counters took over. When stock exchange and accountants start dictating to the engineers, you know that the tech company is heading for deep trouble!
I’m not sure that 12 months redundancy pay is “the bottom”
I’d certainly agree though that the actuarial way in which BT was run to maximise profits and M&A activity at the expense of investment in the core printable but which is OR was a massive error.
Another issues is 12 months is only if you volunteer to go beforeca consultation ends, at which point BT will only pay statuatory.
So its a case of race out of the door for half of what they promised (paid for by slashing pensions) or they will give you just a weeks pay for decades for service.
The point of the relocation, pay protection and no compulsory redundancies was staff would embrace technology and change knowing their mortgages would get paid at the end of the month.
BT want to take tax payer money, shift jobs to India and keep peoples redundancy payments further depriving hmrc of tax revenue and uk plc and every local community of that wage being spent local.
So many here celebrating BT shitting on the UK, network funded by us tax payers, increasing prices, whilst handing over OUR money to premier league and diverting wages to foreign countries. Is this how we are going to make a success of Brecit or “level up” the uk by pulling jobs out of local towns and cities? Shame on BT and the jealous idiots clapping them.
one thing your not is a BT guy -, or if you are you clrealy have no understanding of the business — are you someonelse in disguise
I’m sorry BT being privatised sits so poorly with you.
Given they are, though, leveling the UK up isn’t really their problem.
Would you prefer they go back to how they used to be run and go bankrupt as their prices rise to fund it, they can’t secure funding to continue the FTTP build and Virgin Media, CityFibre, etc, take their lunch in the profitable areas leaving them the unprofitable ones?
I would rather BT didn’t end up needing a taxpayer bailout or being bought for a song by investors from outside the UK.
@fastman I understand just well. I mean if 10000 people have half their redundancy pulled, giving them less time to find a job during covid whilst the company makes billions sits well with you then I suggest you are either a manager looking forward to his bonus or a shareholder blinded by your own self serving arguments in the hope attacking the workforce will be the ticket to return to bt paying dividends.
@carlit
I have no issue with the company being privatised. My issue is a private company making billions, continually shafting it’s workforce and splashing hundreds of millions on vanity projects / football at the same time demanding state handouts to invest in the core of it’s business.
Those workers will be on the dole. More taxpayer money to subsidise the grand design of the people who crashed BT’s share price.
Also funny how they are not honouring their agreements to retrain and redeploy staff by forcing people out of the firm with redundancies whilst asking the govt. to fast track immigrant telecoms workers due to “shortage” of workers.
If the market is good enough for BT workers then let the market be good enough for the shareholders who can do fttp without 5 billion of taxpayer money.
@CarlT: “I would rather BT didn’t end up needing a taxpayer bailout or being bought for a song by investors from outside the UK.”
Would it really be that bad if BT went bankrupt? This could be a blessing in disguise, forcing the government to completely reform the whole telecoms framework setup. This country is hopelessly backwards, more than a decade behind of where it should be with fibre rollout, despite having wasted so much taxpayer’s money on BT which never had a need for this.
I am surprised that shareholders put up for such a long time with BT!
Change the record, GN. As a taxpayer I have far better things for the tax I pay to do than backfill billions in insanely generous pensions via the Crown Guarantee.
And yes, it would be bad. Whether you like it or not, and you don’t, Openreach are building at a phenomenal clip now, and bankruptcy of the parent may impede progress.
If we could post pictures on here I would post one of a doll and ask you to show me where BT touched you. Such animosity towards a company isn’t healthy.
BT Guy: BT aren’t obligated to deploy FTTP. If there’s no business case areas get to go without. From a selfish point of view I couldn’t care less, never had anything via BDUK or similar, but others’ mileage may vary.
Regarding football rights those are paid for via customer subscriptions and third party carriers. They aren’t taking money away from Openreach.
I’m afraid we come from very different political views. While I am far from right wing I’m evidently considerably on the right of you.
If workers don’t like it they know where the door is. Telecomms is an industry doing very well in the current climate. The job market in the industry seems buoyant, though the terms and conditions likely won’t be as good as BT’s, even post-shafting, and will require people trained to deal with fibre.
@carlit perhaps I am more to the right than you here… so many free market advocates seem to turn almost commie when it comes to state funds flooding into private firms to prop up failed management and keep (against bt managers best efforts) share prices up… yet hate the thought of workers having their contracts, essentially a business deal between a firm and an individual, being honoured.
If I was an investor in BT now I would be demanding a change in the board. If I was the govt I would be demanding investment in UK jobs prior to any more handouts.
Only a sociopath would cheer 10,000 families losing their incomes and the prospect of having half their redundancy ripped off whilst the state end up picking up the tab for the fallout of that; and then wax lyrical about supporting private investors failure to invest in their business. These people want the reward but make everyone else shoulder the risk and cost of their failures.
It isn’t a question of left or right.
BT is such a mismanaged basket case it is a simple question of right and wrong. This is wrong.
“BT is such a mismanaged basket case it is a simple question of right and wrong. This is wrong”
Well said! Some of the hardcore BT fans here fail to grasp the real issues with this company, and this country’s failed fibre broadband policy in general.
… And some people seem to purely frequent this site to post the same tired criticisms.
What a wonderfully constructive way to spend the one life you have, complaining at every opportunity about a telco.
BT Guy: why do you apparently work for a company you despise? Do you perhaps feel that other companies that may employ you wouldn’t pay the same, give the same terms and conditions, etc?
I don’t cheer people losing their jobs. My comment was specifically regarding the actual topic of the article. I know nothing of job losses within BT so am not going to comment.
Week per year pay..
It’s only months ago Openreach were handing out 2years severance packages to managers who were due to retire in Scotland where was the logic in that.They need to look at staffing as they have swamped the field with too many engineers who don’t have a clue what they are doing and that includes so called experienced engineers being very well paid.Hence the reason it would be a resounding NO vote for strike.
The 24 months may be generous, but this was the quid pro quo the company agreed with the workers to close the defined benefit pension. That’s why the workers are so annoyed about this.
Part of the grand plan is to get oldies to jump before the changes come in , heard of 65 year olds getting 2 years redundancy this year ..crazy..
Even so these are the most skilled and knowledable staff …noting fibre’s been around for nearly 40 years and Ethernet almost 30 years…its not a new thing..
The workforce 2020 staff are on far worse pay and terms with lpoor promotion prospects to the point retaining staff is a challenge.Computer says no is the knickname for the Openreach annual leave portal.Hear of young engineers with families having to accept bulk of thier leave at the end of the financial year -March.. then theres a storm and leave is cancelled..some are ex Army and they need to be to put up with it.
BT is offshoring technical work to India to save money and bringing “skills gap “ staff over here whenever they can and yes its an ongoing disaster due to staff turnover and some dubious qualifications …a mistake new managment in BT makes every 5 years.
Despite this the company functions and is profitable.
To get rid of my husband after 33 years they are playing dirty tricks with his diabetes.Ignored disability passport and are now trying to discredit his right to driving licence.He will be driven out the door.Is he just natural waste!!!!!!!!