Visibility of the ballot paper envelope.

[fishtank]

It was quite clear we have to except the result

No.
We have to live with the result.
That's different.

[tommyrep]

Another thread to remind me of just how many total muppets actually work for this company, like I even needed one.

[postslippete]

The only things I would say is

1. The copy of the agreement should have been sent out to members the minute it was drafted to give people the chance to digest it and put forward relevant questions at the gate meetings.

2. Ballot papers should be sent out on their own to avoid any confusion.

3. It would still have been a Yes vote.

Thats interesting because we had several of these gate meetings when the CWU wasn't happy with Royal Mails 1st proposal (the one which 89.1% voted for) and yet when the Union and RM had actually agreed to everything, there were no gate meetings at all!!

Instead the CWU had their own agenda by touring the UK getting word out to their top reps brainwashing them about the holy grail of the agreement and didn't involve us.

[gb93]

Think the vote should be made null & void.
Deliberate attempt to skew the vote we have RM & the union bang to rights on this.

Please explain how it was a deliberate attempt to skew the vote. I don't think it was but I do like to understand others opinions

I think it was more a deliberate attempt at sarcasm.

You beat me to my answer fish.
I often think you understand me better than the wife

[TrueBlueTerrier]

[Lounge Lizard]

I have now found a large, 230x323mm, white envelope in the top left corner of which is printed the "ELECTORAL REFORM SERVICES" name, 18x12mm, and "CONTAINS IMPORTANT INFORMATION", 56x2mm, both of which total less than the size of a normal small postage stamp and take up a mere 0.0044% of the front of the envelope.
I have just opened it and found a ballot paper and Business Reply envelope.
So can anyone be surprised at a low turnout with this ballot, the validity of which must be in question ?

[borgpicard]

Funny how on the industrial action ballot the was a 71 % return, but on the actual deal vote only 55% ! something very fishy methinks. so much so I have no confidence in this union, and am considering stopping my fee.

[borgpicard]

I have now found a large, 230x323mm, white envelope in the top left corner of which is printed the "ELECTORAL REFORM SERVICES" name, 18x12mm, and "CONTAINS IMPORTANT INFORMATION", 56x2mm, both of which total less than the size of a normal small postage stamp and take up a mere 0.0044% of the front of the envelope.
I have just opened it and found a ballot paper and Business Reply envelope.
So can anyone be surprised at a low turnout with this ballot, the validity of which must be in question ?

, totally agree

[Lincox]

The only things I would say is

1. The copy of the agreement should have been sent out to members the minute it was drafted to give people the chance to digest it and put forward relevant questions at the gate meetings.

2. Ballot papers should be sent out on their own to avoid any confusion.

3. It would still have been a Yes vote.

Thats interesting because we had several of these gate meetings when the CWU wasn't happy with Royal Mails 1st proposal (the one which 89.1% voted for) and yet when the Union and RM had actually agreed to everything, there were no gate meetings at all!!

Instead the CWU had their own agenda by touring the UK getting word out to their top reps brainwashing them about the holy grail of the agreement and didn't involve us.

This is again the big problem with this Union. If you looked at all of the filming from these tours, the idea was that the local reps were to go back and hold gate meetings in order to answer questions and relay the YES message back to their local members. How many actually did this and gave those who were undecided or against the agreement, the chance to express their opinions. I would imagine very few, and in SPDOs nil.

[Decky Boy]

I was told today by our DOM that the envelope containing the ballot paper to vote for or against the agreement was not noticeably marked as being so. Therefore some posties didn't realise they had received the ballot paper or they assumed the envelope contained 'junk mail'. Union rep also mentioned the envelope wasn't that clearly marked.
I realise we should always open an envelope but sometimes you might just assume it is of no interest. Anyone else have a similar experience with the ballot paper mailing ??

Give it a Rest pal...

[Lounge Lizard]

I was told today by our DOM that the envelope containing the ballot paper to vote for or against the agreement was not noticeably marked as being so. Therefore some posties didn't realise they had received the ballot paper or they assumed the envelope contained 'junk mail'. Union rep also mentioned the envelope wasn't that clearly marked.
I realise we should always open an envelope but sometimes you might just assume it is of no interest. Anyone else have a similar experience with the ballot paper mailing ??

Give it a Rest pal...

- why ?

[k979aaa]

I just surprised we did not have to fill it in under WORK TIME LEARNING with the manager telling us how to vote!

[gosickwithstress]

[postman_jack]

Electoral reform services are an independent company who deal with end to end ballots in the UK. Same company were used for the strike ballot and previous CWU ballots. If you are blaming the design of the envelope then you are really clutching at straws. If individual can’t be bothered to open all mail they receive then that’s their problem. Not the CWU, RM or the ERS.

[greengiant]

Electoral reform services are an independent company who deal with end to end ballots in the UK. Same company were used for the strike ballot and previous CWU ballots. If you are blaming the design of the envelope then you are really clutching at straws. If individual can’t be bothered to open all mail they receive then that’s their problem. Not the CWU, RM or the ERS.

Unless the Electoral Reform Services were in a tin foil underpants conspiracy with Royal Mail, to ensure that not everyone voted?