1 / 28

Pay and Bonus Offer - Consultative Ballot Prepared for: April 2012

Pay and Bonus Offer - Consultative Ballot Prepared for: April 2012. Contents. Background and objectives How the ballot was conducted Voter profile Results Awareness of proposals Attitude to pay Attitude to bonus Attitude to whole package Summary. 2. Context.

talia
Download Presentation

Pay and Bonus Offer - Consultative Ballot Prepared for: April 2012

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Pay and Bonus Offer - Consultative Ballot Prepared for: April 2012

  2. Contents • Background and objectives • How the ballot was conducted • Voter profile • Results • Awareness of proposals • Attitude to pay • Attitude to bonus • Attitude to whole package • Summary 2

  3. Context • Pay proposals were published on 6th December • 2.5% pay-pot for grade A-D; 2.0% for E-G • No increase in pay range for A-C; range for D-G increases by 2% • Very little reference to performance assessment; only market rate • Bonus dependent on performance assessment, announced in March • Grades A-C: 0-9.5% • Grade D: 0-19% • Grades E+: devolved to manager • Accord now seeking member guidance on negotiation of this offer 3

  4. How the ballot was conducted • 25,126 Accord members were eligible to vote in this ballot • 4,307 valid responses received; a turnout of 17%, lower than previous years, despite efforts to improve turnout • Approach • An introductory e-mail sent to all members with valid e-mail addresses to: • alert them to the upcoming consultation • ensure email addresses were correct • Members received either a letter (6,041) or e-mail (19,085) with voting instructions on accessing the secure ERS website using PINs to prevent abuse • Reminder e-mails sent by both Accord and ERS (latter targeted non-voters) • Accord also sent out a text reminder to non-voters • Fieldwork dates: 9th – 31st March; fieldwork delayed this year to assess opinion of full pay and bonus proposals 4

  5. Turnout higher among those receiving emails, particularly at work 5

  6. Voter profile: AB grades more likely to be female, part time and newer employees Base: all voters (4,307) 6

  7. Who voted

  8. Older, male members, more likely to vote Base: All members (25,126) and all voters (4,307) 8

  9. Longer serving members and those in Group Ops more likely to vote Base: All members (25,126) and all voters (4,307) 9

  10. Higher grades, full timers more likely to vote Base: All members (25,126) and all voters (4,307) 10

  11. % 74% of members are good/top performers; would have seen reflection in pay in previous years 30% of voters do not know which pay zone they are in; factor which will influence pay Q10: What was your most recent appraisal rating? Q9: Which pay zone are you in? Base: All voters (4,307) 11

  12. Awareness of proposals

  13. 87% of members understand the proposals and their implications Awareness lowest in retail (82%) and AB grades (80%) Base: All (4,307) 13

  14. Attitudes to pay

  15. In 2012 34% of voters said Account should sign an agreement to implement the bank’s pay proposals; lower than in 2011 (49%) Opposition to signing highest in retail (75%) and AB grades (80%) 2011 Q2 Taking everything into account should Accord sign an agreement to implement the bank’s pay proposals 2012 Q2 Do you think Accord should sign an agreement on the Bank’s pay proposals for 2012 Base: All voters (2012 4,307; 2011 7,085) 15

  16. Main reason for not wanting Accord to accept pay proposals is size of pay pot; no link to individual performance assessment Q3a Which of the following best describes your reasons? Base: those not wanting Accord to sign pay proposals (2,810) 16

  17. Issues affecting those on lower pay zones and grades Q3a Which of the following best describes your reasons? Base: those not wanting Accord to sign pay proposals (2,810) 17

  18. Issues affecting high performers and higher grades Q3a Which of the following best describes your reasons? Base: those not wanting Accord to sign pay proposals (2,810) 18

  19. Attitudes to bonus

  20. 44% of members say bonus is less than expected Opinion divided as to whether bonus is fair Base: All voters (4,307) 20

  21. Who thinks bonus is less than expected and not fair Base: All voters (4,307) 21

  22. Main reason given for thinking bonus is unfair is that it does not reflect individual’s performance in 2011 Q6a Which of the following best describes your reasons? Base: those saying bonus not fair (2,165) 22

  23. Reasons for thinking bonus unfair Q3a Which of the following best describes your reasons? Base: those not wanting Accord to sign pay proposals (2,810) 23

  24. Attitudes to total package

  25. 38% say total package poor in current economic climate; particularly high among AB grades Those more likely to say poor: AB grades (51%), over max pay zone (43%), developing performer (48%),part time (46%), 61+ yrs (56%) Q7 Base: all voters (4,307) 25

  26. Summary

  27. Summary • Turnout lower for this ballot than in previous years • 65% opposed to Accord signing pay agreement; higher than last year. Retailand AB grades most opposed • Size of pay pot main reason for being opposed (57%); followed by no link to individual performance assessment (52%) • 50% say bonus not fair; 44% say it’s less than expected. A,B andC grades and retail/wholesale less positive about bonus • Individual’s performance not reflected in bonus main reason for saying bonus not fair (particularly higher grades). C grade more likely to say bonus unfair because bonus payable is too low compared to higher grades • 38% say total package is poor even in current economic climate, particularly among AB grades 27

  28. Contact Details Project Director Cynthia Pinto Director and Head of Research Direct line: 020 8829 8409 Switchboard: 020 8365 8909 Cynthia.Pinto@electoralreform.co.uk Project Manager Tim Robinson Research Executive Direct line: 020 8829 8412 Switchboard: 020 8365 8909 Tim.Robinson@electoralreform.co.uk This report has been written to meet the requirements of ISO 20252, the International Standard for Market Research.

More Related