London Dispute Update

[mailman71]

i would'nt trust royal mail to uphold any agreement,the union have to support the london workers or they will be get shafted and after that then they will start on the rest of the country.

[drb]

I am disappointed by attitudes on here to say the least.Thanfully some on this forum are not representative of the whole workforce. At conference branches gave their full support. Seems that the support displayed at conference was misplaced. Any dispute will be fully supported by myself and my branch. You have my word. I do realise that withdrawing ones labor is not taken lightly,hence our support.

[thelastpostie]

Colleagues, I get the impression that some people believe that Royal Mail won't resort to CR and that the Union HQ are using it a means to corral the membersip in to voting yes in a potential IA ballot in support of the "bolshie Londoners"?

Now I can fully understand the frustration with the BT2010 agreement, I thought it was a very bad deal and voted against it. I also understand the frustration with Union HQ, but the question i'd ask, is prospect of compulsory redundancy something you can live with because that the crux of the argument? All the other issues, valid as they are can be adressed down the line, but the wolf is at our door and we're talking about whether its gonna bite or lick us.

[pickaname]

I am disappointed by attitudes on here to say the least.Thanfully some on this forum are not representative of the whole workforce. At conference branches gave their full support. Seems that the support displayed at conference was misplaced. Any dispute will be fully supported by myself and my branch. You have my word. I do realise that withdrawing ones labor is not taken lightly,hence our support.

Our branch dont have a clue.

Last time they got some idiot from hq to come down and sell us they deal.
He was shouted down and laughed off. It was because of this our branch recommended no.
They didnt have a clue the membership were so anti and ill bet they dont have a clue now.
Our branch secretary doesnt even work for royal mail for gods sake!
Total piss take.

[pickaname]

Colleagues, I get the impression that some people believe that Royal Mail won't resort to CR and that the Union HQ are using it a means to corral the membersip in to voting yes in a potential IA ballot in support of the "bolshie Londoners"?

Now I can fully understand the frustration with the BT2010 agreement, I thought it was a very bad deal and voted against it. I also understand the frustration with Union HQ, but the question i'd ask, is prospect of compulsory redundancy something you can live with because that the crux of the argument? All the other issues, valid as they are can be adressed down the line, but the wolf is at our door and we're talking about whether its gonna bite or lick us.

What compulsory redundancies?

Rm have said there wont be any.

All i hear is dont trust them or they did this in the past. Well cwu screwed us and lied to us to so who do you believe?

[dvbuk55]

Compulsory redundancy - is it a real threat? is it a universal threat? has it been stated by RM that CR is now part of their business plan? has a figure been put on the numbers involved? is it part of the 2010 agreement?

[drb]

I wouldn't bet on it DV,hand on heart lets see if the "freemasons" stick to their word!

[drb]

Pickaname,fair enough you may have your comments warranted. However a separate thread on your issues with BTA would be welcome. Happy to debate.

[thelastpostie]

Colleagues, I get the impression that some people believe that Royal Mail won't resort to CR and that the Union HQ are using it a means to corral the membersip in to voting yes in a potential IA ballot in support of the "bolshie Londoners"?

Now I can fully understand the frustration with the BT2010 agreement, I thought it was a very bad deal and voted against it. I also understand the frustration with Union HQ, but the question i'd ask, is prospect of compulsory redundancy something you can live with because that the crux of the argument? All the other issues, valid as they are can be adressed down the line, but the wolf is at our door and we're talking about whether its gonna bite or lick us.

What compulsory redundancies?

Rm have said there wont be any.

All i hear is dont trust them or they did this in the past. Well cwu screwed us and lied to us to so who do you believe?

If all the vacancies are taken up, London will still have a considerable surplus, so the threat of CR is there . I also stated in a previous post that some people are being given no alternative other than take E/VR as what RM consider a reasonable job offer is something they just cannot do, tantamount to constructive dismissal.

So because RM say there wont be any you believe them?

As I staed earlier, I thought BT2010 was a bad deal and voted against it. Now you may have criticisms of Messrs Ward & Hayes, the assistant secretaries and the Postal Executive for the agreement they negotiated, some of which maybe valid. But if you ask me which side of the fence I stand on, its with the union and my colleages. Don't let whatever animosity you may have to BT2010 and Union HQ blind you to what the real issue is at hand.

[dvbuk55]

I wouldn't bet on it DV,hand on heart lets see if the "freemasons" stick to their word!

Which one are you betting on drb?

[fishtank]

drb...branch delegates are not the membership.
Some of them are out of touch with their membership.
Some of them say what their peers want to hear.
Some of them cannot deliver on their promises.
If a little reality disappoints you i'm sorry but refusing to face reality only puts the union and London members in more danger.
I am not saying that a positive ballot result is not possible but a hell of a lot of work will have to be done first by HQ,Division and Branch and at the moment they don't look to me to be up to the challenge.
That may change...let's hope so for all our sakes.

[drb]

Fishtank. I have been championing for "new blood" of reps to come through for years. Thankfully my ideas where put forward at conference via the education department. Yes Branches may not be representative of the membership,but we,(all of us) have to try and change this. Lets look for the future,educate and organise. Some old gits may not like this,but stuff em. They are over. Help me out here?

[thelastpostie]

Compulsory redundancy - is it a real threat? is it a universal threat? has it been stated by RM that CR is now part of their business plan? has a figure been put on the numbers involved? is it part of the 2010 agreement?

In the immediate term as for London concerned dvb yes, because RM's sum's just dont add up and they've yet to answer when these questions are put to them by our Div Reps. From what I hear, Gerry O'Rourke, Ops Director for London has refused to meet them.

Is it a universal threat? If they adopt the same approach in elsewhere, then yes.

[dvbuk55]

If all the vacancies are taken up, London will still have a considerable surplus, so the threat of CR is there . I also stated in a previous post that some people are being given no alternative other than take E/VR as what RM consider a reasonable job offer is something they just cannot do, tantamount to constructive dismissal

Well you see lastpostie if you do not have the work, you do not have enough VR volunteers, you have surplus workforce to the workload........your answer would be to go for a national ballot is it? London is not the only place where MCs have closed and people have been given Hobsons Choice, they too had to make a hard choice, VR, deliveries or extended travel time. Their choice did not extend to a ballot because the closures were agreed.

I come from an area who has a branch which is not in touch with the membership in any shape or form, they probably voted to support the motion at conference but they aren't going to be able to deliver. TBH I would be extremely surprised if any of them show up at our office. They are a lickspittle bunch who agree to anything that keeps their arses on a seat.

[fishtank]

Pickaname,fair enough you may have your comments warranted. However a separate thread on your issues with BTA would be welcome. Happy to debate.

No drb...because you won't engage delivery members around the country by separating the issues.
Rightly or wrongly if HQ take this line a ballot is doomed to failure because members out with London will just see it as their issues being sidelined....yet again.
Despite what some think the problems with the BTA revisions and CR's in London are directly related because Royal Mail are reneging on all parts of the agreement.
London will start to see that as the full weight of the revisions is brought to bear on them and if all of the issues are not resolved as one we will be back here in 6 months time having a similar debate again...this time over revisions.