HQ ACO ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT DELAYS IN PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
The HQ ACO Accounts Dept is currently unable to pay any remuneration claims due to a technical problem between the HQ ACO and HMRC IT systems. This latest problem, resolution of which is being pursued as the highest priority task by the HQ ACO IT Dept, compounds the existing backlog for payment of claims that has previously been advised. The backlog currently stands at approximately 8 weeks and all claims for remuneration will be processed in strict order of receipt when the payment process resumes. HQ ACO is pursuing all available avenues to resolve this situation at the earliest opportunity including submission of approval for overtime working, secondment of staff from other depts and recruitment to fill vacant posts; however, none of these are ‘quick fixes’ and it will be at least Christmas before the backlog is significantly reduced.
Despite previous attempts to explain the situation, the Accounts Dept continues to receive a large amount of telephone calls and e-mails from individual claimants demanding priority of payment. These calls and e-mails do nothing to speed up any individual claims and only compound delays whilst staff respond to them rather than process the backlog. In addition, some of the calls are deeply unpleasant and cause significant stress for the staff involved, who are in no way to blame for the backlog and are not able to resolve things any more quickly than they already are. Accordingly, to enable staff to work as efficiently as possible I have today directed that all telephones in the Accounts Dept are to be turned off until further notice and any e-mails concerning payment of claims are to be deleted without action.
Once the ongoing technical issue has been resolved we will endeavour to clear the backlog of claims as quickly as possible but there will continue to be significant delays for the near future. Work is in hand to investigate the possibility of a more efficient and hopefully automated payment system but this is still some way off. I can only apologise and ask that individual claimants show patience; whilst I acknowledge the frustration that is quite clearly being expressed there is no alternative other than to work through the problem over time.
Lets hope that those that need the money from their ATC Duties get it ASAP.
Particularly with Christmas looming on the horizon, which is a time of year I know many of my fellow officers and SNCOs use a good chunk of their ATC monies to spoil their families.
Obviously the civil servants’ pay is handled via a completely different system than the remuneration to volunteer staff. Such a comparison is meaningless.
I can almost hear “it’s only the ATC being affected” being said in hushed voices.
I know it’s a bit radical but why not issue cheques and HQAC can catch up with the admin stuff later on. Suggesting that an 8 week backlog has to be accepted is about the most stupid and insulting things I have ever heard. Only a senior officer would have the gall to say this and get away with it. If you were told at work it’ll be 8 weeks at least before you get paid and told effectively to suck it in, there would be an insurrection. Just as well they don’t manage people in the real world, that attitude would not be tolerated.
We have become too reliant on things being done electronically and as soon as we lose the electronic stuff, everything stops. The fact that no one at HQAC has got the wits to do a little bit of lateral thinking, does not bode well.
Yes, but of course it’s only “extra pocket money” for us volunteers isn’t it.
Nobody finds themselves in such financial circumstances these days where they require that remuneration to offset the time taken away from work; nor is anyone actually forced to rely on their ATC pay as part of their standard income.
It’s no wonder that a 2 month backlog isn’t considered high priority.
:unsure:
Whilst it is annoying and in some places will be devastating, I can only sympathise with the accounts team. They’ve had a team member die on them. There was the recruitment freeze. They’ve been forced to use a new system which doesn’t work, and they are still having to take calls from grumpy and probably rude people demanding payment.
8 weeks is a long time, and would be unacceptable in paid employment. But we’re not in paid employment, and we should be grateful we get anything back at all!
Would you be happy at work if they said your expenses won’t be paid for 8 weeks, which is closer to what this is?
Sorry, but people leave or die in all workplaces and you may not get a replacement. Also things change all the time but you just get on with it. A hard line maybe but many, if not all, of us have experienced those circumstances in the workplace and while you may get an easier time for a little while, you are expected to carry on business as usual.
Well… Employment Tribunals seem to think we (well VRT at least) are “employed” (I cant comment on SNCOs).
Despite the re-labelling as “renumeration”, its pay, always has been always will be.
However, the state of affairs is not the fault of admin staff in accounts and it is clearly not acceptable for people to be rude (there are other ways of raising grievances you know…)
[quote=“glass half empty 2” post=12996]Would you be happy at work if they said your expenses won’t be paid for 8 weeks, which is closer to what this is?
Sorry, but people leave or die in all workplaces and you may not get a replacement. Also things change all the time but you just get on with it. A hard line maybe but many, if not all, of us have experienced those circumstances in the workplace and while you may get an easier time for a little while, you are expected to carry on business as usual.[/quote]
Comparing the two is ridiculous. At work, is your accounts assistant doing the payroll for 10000 people by themselves, using a system that doesn’t work and has been forced upon them from above whilst fielding calls from people who are angry at something outside of their controlling demanding their right to payment?
At work, I sign a contract that states when I will get paid and how much. I expect payment, not “renumeration” in a timely manner in return for the work I do. Within the ACO, I apply for “renumeration” for certain things because I can, not because I’ve incurred any great expense, and not in return for the work I do. I’ve never signed something telling me when/how often I’ll be “renumerated”, and whilst I would miss it if it were not there it isn’t the be all and end all for me.
I think some people need to remember that “renumeration” is a bonus, not a right. We are very lucky to have it where other youth organisations don’t, and people need to calm down. Why get stressed and angry about something you can’t do anything about?
[quote=“Perry Mason” post=12997]Well… Employment Tribunals seem to think we (well VRT at least) are “employed” (I cant comment on SNCOs).
Despite the re-labelling as “renumeration”, its pay, always has been always will be.
However, the state of affairs is not the fault of admin staff in accounts and it is clearly not acceptable for people to be rude (there are other ways of raising grievances you know…)[/quote]
Perry, for what it’s worth I would tend to agree that we are “employed” but I’m no legal man like you! Have you got any examples of VR(T) status being challenged in tribunals?
I have a family so use my paid holidays with them, I am fortunate enough to have an understanding employer which allows me extra time off work to attend annual camps, but it’s unpaid. So any delay is definitely felt in our household.
Last week I have just been payed for a weeks camp that I done back in June!
I feel sorry for you all missing out, but as a CI I get nothing back and have given numerous days this FY that for those in uniform would warrant a pay claim.
Getting some pay is a nice thing and a bonus, but I do not stop doing things because I am not able to make a claim.
Those of you who take unpaid leave for annual camps, is a separate entity entirely.
While I agree, it costs, sometimes, in excess of £70 to and individual in uniform to attend a camp on PAID duty. This is for PAYD food in the mess and the final mess bill.
For a CI, there should be no food costs and no mess bill. While this doe snot mean there is no cost for camps for CIs, there are no compulsory costs.
I’m still owed for summer camp. One of my officers has now been paid so I am hoping mine is not far off…
It is no doubt not the fault of the pay office, and I’ve not rung them to moan (though I did ping an email to CCF branch). However, it is yet again a case of them wanting to ‘professionalise the VR(T)’, to quote the former Comdt AC, while at the same time behaving in a very unprofessional way themselves.
However, I have to say it’s no worse than WESTMINSTER/JPA pay, which the CCFRN has just switched to because it works so well for the ACF/CCF(A) (bangs head on wall)
I think some people need to remember that “renumeration” is a bonus, not a right. We are very lucky to have it where other youth organisations don’t, and people need to calm down. Why get stressed and angry about something you can’t do anything about?[/quote]
But I don’t know of any other youth organisation that expects, nay, demands as much from its volunteers…
[quote=“juliet mike” post=13003]While I agree, it costs, sometimes, in excess of £70 to and individual in uniform to attend a camp on PAID duty. This is for PAYD food in the mess and the final mess bill.
For a CI, there should be no food costs and no mess bill. While this doe snot mean there is no cost for camps for CIs, there are no compulsory costs.[/quote]
Only if you claim pay. If you don’t then you don’t pay, just like CIs