London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East and have access to Premium Chat. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
"I read your posts and you enjoy talking as though you know your stuff when in fact you are completely clueless"
So I take it you know everything there is to know about Telecoms AbjectPerformer? Tell me, what's your background and experience that makes you say I'm clueless?
Everyone in here going on about ancient cwu views and workers.
Do any of you realise how ancient you sound saying ‘they’re lazy , go find another job if you don’t like it’
Really is a backward mentality.
Fleccy your comment at 11.28 today shows you clearly have no idea about Bt and openreach operations and you are correct you were completely guessing.
Your comment at 12.02 talked a good game again as though you have any idea about the financials. You don’t.
Basing your figures on 100,000 staff to then acknowledge there is an actual colossal difference in reality a lot less.
I read your posts and you enjoy talking as though you know your stuff when in fact you are completely clueless
"Fleccy - I keep telling you detail matters. The £1500 pay rise was only for “front line” workers"
Ok I'll concede that, around 58,000 frontline workers. I'm not going to bother finding out what managers, internal I.T. support staff, HR, Admin/billing staff, planners, etc received, but I'm willing to bet it was as good as the frontline worker pay award.
Fleccy - I keep telling you detail matters. The £1500 pay rise was only for “front line” workers…….
Hello fleccy, not working for BT, I think you have a tinted glasses view. I know a person who worked there 5 years back, enjoyed the work in Frames but said ancient. I think you know where I am going with this.
On age suppose an applicant 51 covering all the Frame basic proven BT skills got rejected before interview.
I did hear they were laying off older staff.
"58% of profit went to shareholders while only 5% went to a pay rise. Over 10 times more so who's being greedy. How much more do you need for God sake."
BT's FY22 total wage bill was £3.746 Billion, with total staff costs of £4.845 Billion. The pay increase was £1500 across the board, and approximately 104,000 staff worldwide, with 96,000 in the UK. Rounding to 100,000 staff, the wage increase amounts £150,000,000, with profit after tax of £1.274 Billion, so the wage increase amounts to 11.77% of FY22 after tax profits.
Can you explain where you get 5% from, since I don't see that. Your comparison in relation to the dividend looks well out too.
58% of profit went to shareholders while only 5% went to a pay rise. Over 10 times more so who's being greedy. How much more do you need for God sake.
"it appears that BT are taking on unskilled workers in bulk, is that to keep wages down and if you have no basic skills level (see Entry Level Frames ads) how many will subsequently be rejected, HR is a different concept to shop floor, how many trainers will all these need. 10 years a bit hopeful."
Much will depend on how BT structure their workforce, many will start out in trainee/apprentice grades which would probably suit the Government. As far as age discrimination, I'm not sure that applies to trainee roles.
BT would initially have to ensure the trainee's know how to find their way around the network, understanding labelling standards, use of databases, etc; Engineers on the access network would also likely learn to use OTDR's, splicers, and basic commissioning of ONT's/OLT's maybe.
The most skilled jobs are in the Network Operations Centre's (NOC's). where they Fault find and instruct Engineers on card changes to restore Service or Network Diversity. Most of the modern equipments are software managed, with remote diagnostics doing a reasonably good job of identifying a faulty card, but sometimes faults aren't obvious so there are tech support staff, who should know more, available through escalation processes.
I'd guess the young trainee's, just starting out, will have good opportunities for career progression if that's what they want. PSTN switch Engineers will have to re-train, retire, or take redundancy, as their jobs will cease to exist after 2025.
10 years is easily enough time to train/replace staff, as Field force jobs are mainly card changing these days. You need skilled Data Engineers for dealing with Enterprise customers, using Voip and other applications, but most of the new skill sets required are already out there, for all roles. At the end of all this, there's nothing new just more IP/Fibre/DWDM Network, with any old legacy network gone.
I haven't worked for BT, so I'm guessing all of the above.
fleecy, it appears that BT are taking on unskilled workers in bulk, is that to keep wages down and if you have no basic skills level (see Entry Level Frames ads) how many will subsequently be rejected, HR is a different concept to shop floor, how many trainers will all these need. 10 years a bit hopeful.
If they are only taking on youngsters will they come up against age discrimination laws. More Court cases.
BT still have a domination which was partly resolved with Openreach but will they still be broken up.
These over paid members of the board need to roll up their sleeves and negotiate with the unions. Get the mindset that the staff are also important. Strikes suit nobody. You have taken massive salaries while the shares fall. The easy option is to blame the staff. Take a look in the mirror.
The core network will be Router Switches, connected via DWDM, dealing with everything, so Voice, Video, and Data; Even the mobile network will be converged into the cloud. Obviously the transformation will mean a reduction in staff at all levels, with better paid jobs for the ones who adapt to the new required skill sets. I suspect BT are building up their core router network now, in preparation for PSTN switch off, and possibly training staff to ensure they have the required skills.
"Openreach/BT must be modernised, not just the bottom but middle manager, top managers and boss to see they are giving value for money."
That's what the move to FTTP/Cloud convergence is about. 10years from now BT will be a different business. All the PSTN and Copper will be gone, with the access network mainly consisting OLT's, ONT's, and the Fibres connecting them. The core newtwork will be Router S
Well you lot that was a mixed bag of opinions.
BT is an old establishment that probably needs reforms. They should entertain reasonable pay requests in present climate but the unions should also allow a review of jobs, pay and responsibilities. May sound like Thatcher days but Openreach/BT must be modernised, not just the bottom but middle manager, top managers and boss to see they are giving value for money. That is the way to keep skills sets in the company.
Roll up, roll up, get your dividends here. Only a few remaining at this price. Last orders please.
Just a few personal thoughts on industrial action. Employees have a legal right to take part in action if all the rules around it are followed. From a personal point, I was involved in the action back in 1987, at the time I was in my 20s. I did not spend any time on the picket line, like many of my coworkers we let the union do there thing talking to BT. That said there were some youngsters on the line, but not many, most were older, could be something to do with the young having other things to do. Those who talk about, that was the terms you accepted when taking the job, well what about the BT employees who accepted the terms of the BTPS only for the company to keep making changes in the 2000s and eventually closing it and moving staff into a new scheme with worsening benefits. Another thing to consider is those who are not members of a union, in this case CWU. They have had over 30 years accepting pay rises ,improvement in hours and many other benefits that the union engaged with BT to bring about. Those staff members have received the same gains for no effort, it could be said, they sat back and let someone else do the work for them. I sometimes wonder it they would have benefited as well if they had to do there own individual negotiations with BT. I have said several times over the last month or so that I hope BT and the CWU can get round the table and come to a compromise that is acceptable to all. Just a few things to think about…
Sorry AP it is you who are living in the world of milk and honey and the money tree.
The harsh reality is the employee accepted the terms and conditions and were clearly happy to. Staff attrition within companies can only be good for everyone, it's what they call a free market, those that offer better salaries, terms and conditions will attract the better staff, it's as simple as that. That is of course dependant on how good and driven the person wishing to earn more and develop their career is. There is far too much dependance by some to have everything handed to them without much effort on their part, the "easy option" as they say.
I believe in hard work and reward , there is more than one way of achieving that ,changing employers being one. I have been there ,done that and still have the tee shirt. If that is the wrong attitude then I'm less than ashamed. The jobs market has never been more competitive. It can therefore only be a case of an employee being ,
a) not being at a skill level to move at the current time,
b) happy with their current contract terms, or
c) cannot be bothered with the effort to change.
You sound like a man with real compassion
Finally removed from my Sky package, also Netflix.
Tony2119 ‘I’m alright jack’
If everyone in every job thought they had the luxury of striking the whole world would come to a ghastly, crashing halt. All most people see on the picket line are overweight middle aged men eating pastries, blaming others for their problems. They’d all be better off shedding some kegs, picking up some new skills if they need them & shopping themselves around to other employers if they are unhappy. Picket lines = loserville
Bt repeatedly say their pay rises are in line with industry, so if no one in industry pushes for pay rises , then Bt will continue to offer derisory increases and continue to claim they’re in line with industry.
See why it’s a race to the bottom now? Or still blinkered
Larrybling. Just because people aren’t on the picket line doesn’t mean they aren’t striking.
They are. I know for a fact they are not in work. The majority who have voted yes, have not attended work.
You say what you see, which is nothing like what is actually happening.
In response to jakeandelwood your attitude is wrong.
Saying if you don’t like it change your job is a very common and Ill informed response .
Firstly, if everyone in every industry had to change job instead of pushing for better wages, there would be no better wages to go to. Secondly this response is supportive of the race to the bottom of wages.
There are books completely devoted to the theory on wage deterioration , and it’s how you end up with 3rd world countries stuck in a rut. Supporting such an economic strategy where wage bargaining is bad, is how you end up with a poorer country over time , to the benefit of large corporations and their major shareholders.
Touching back on 3.9% that the Government allowed. I don't think it is quite right to say that there are no controls on prices. Utilities are price capped by Government. The 3.9% is at the bottom of current BT ads.
If strikers are complaining about pay this is adding to their weekly burden and I think will be struck out until family incomes improve.