RM FIRST REVIEW TOMORROW

[krussel]

all what you have said is no doing of the union but of the management

Sounds like you have been brain-washed, or have other k9s left you with just a thumb ?

Apparently the CWU agrees with the company that modernisation is necessary. Can anyone summarise what changes the union and the company both agree are necessary ? What common ground do they have ?

C'mon ACAS !!

They actually agree on many changes but there is a problem.

The CWU accept modernization and the need to change with the very real possibility of job losses. They accept new technologies such as frame sequenced mech letters. Also agreed is the need for a certain amount of flexibility in the way we work. However they want to see these changes introduced with joint agreement and within the structure laid out in the 2007 agreement. (ie; agree one stage at a time)

Royal Mail also want change but feel they can simply introduce it without discussion or agreement by executive action and use bulling and intimidation (like threatening to stop your salary). So there is your problem its not so much WHAT Royal Mail want to change but the way they have gone about it.

[dvbuk55]

all what you have said is no doing of the union but of the management

Sounds like you have been brain-washed, or have other k9s left you with just a thumb ?

Apparently the CWU agrees with the company that modernisation is necessary. Can anyone summarise what changes the union and the company both agree are necessary ? What common ground do they have ?

C'mon ACAS !!

It's more likely going to be ache ass by the time they've fiinished.

[peejay14]

Royal Mail also want change but feel they can simply introduce it without discussion or agreement by executive action and use bulling and intimidation (like threatening to stop your salary). So there is your problem its not so much WHAT Royal Mail want to change but the way they have gone about it.

I see the prison guards have gone on strike and are also claiming bullying by management. There should be some place (court?) to where the CWU can take the RM in order to have any such allegations looked into, and if proven true then strong action should be taken to put things right. I see this as another preferred option to the awful strike.

Again I ask, if the CWU has extremely strong evidence, e.g. testimonies of victims (99% of the membership of this board), then why does it need to resort to such a measure of desperation as a general strike? What about the pen being mightier than the sword. This drama can't go on forever, and so the truth must out. There are accusations and counter-accusations a-plenty, and the members of the public who can be bothered to tune-in to the news must be scratching atop their furrowed brows. Why not take the fight TO the company and face them, instead of walking out the front door in the huff? If you have truly been wronged, then you have a grievance against your employer, and that's where an effective union should support you. And if all the many who went out on strike made a collective claim against the company, and were proven right, then not only would the workforce gain the full support of the public, the company then would have no option but to put its house in order. 'Bullying' is such a strong accusation - a clear winner - hence why both posties and prison guards alike are using it as their justification for strike action. Apparently, the prisons are a 'no-go area' at the moment.

On another point, how do the striking majority defend themselves when Joe Public says:

'Come on, ffs (NB Glasgow), times are hard, spending cuts are affecting everyone, at least you've got a job (NB Glasgow), you should expect to have to work a little, even a lot, harder - it's the way thing are. We're all in the same sinking ship!'

C'mon ACAS !

[axeman]

peejay royal fails answer to workers submission ......thank goodness we have people wo have the balls to stand and fight the 'oppressors' not whimps who turn around and run

[BELIAL]

Royal Mail also want change but feel they can simply introduce it without discussion or agreement by executive action and use bulling and intimidation (like threatening to stop your salary). So there is your problem its not so much WHAT Royal Mail want to change but the way they have gone about it.

I see the prison guards have gone on strike and are also claiming bullying by management. There should be some place (court?) to where the CWU can take the RM in order to have any such allegations looked into, and if proven true then strong action should be taken to put things right. I see this as another preferred option to the awful strike.

Again I ask, if the CWU has extremely strong evidence, e.g. testimonies of victims (99% of the membership of this board), then why does it need to resort to such a measure of desperation as a general strike? What about the pen being mightier than the sword. This drama can't go on forever, and so the truth must out. There are accusations and counter-accusations a-plenty, and the members of the public who can be bothered to tune-in to the news must be scratching atop their furrowed brows. Why not take the fight TO the company and face them, instead of walking out the front door in the huff? If you have truly been wronged, then you have a grievance against your employer, and that's where an effective union should support you. And if all the many who went out on strike made a collective claim against the company, and were proven right, then not only would the workforce gain the full support of the public, the company then would have no option but to put its house in order. 'Bullying' is such a strong accusation - a clear winner - hence why both posties and prison guards alike are using it as their justification for strike action. Apparently, the prisons are a 'no-go area' at the moment.

On another point, how do the striking majority defend themselves when Joe Public says:

'Come on, ffs (NB Glasgow), times are hard, spending cuts are affecting everyone, at least you've got a job (NB Glasgow), you should expect to have to work a little, even a lot, harder - it's the way thing are. We're all in the same sinking ship!'

C'mon ACAS !

Get real you sound like a management flunky, we all know the system is bent

[Jo_M]

Peejay

Royal Mail has a grievance procedure where workers can lodge any complaints against managers ,
before any external action can be taken then all internal procedures have to be followed.
Again tho the procedures are run by managers and senior managers who never seem to follow
these up in a timely manner , more than likely in the hope that given enough time between the
alleged offence and the investigation the matter will have died its own death and the individual will have lost the will to fight.

This means that you end up with a workforce who have little niggles at the back of their mind that
never get sorted but the rules are you can not take it external until all internal means are exhausted.

[norbert]

One of the biggest problems in all this is that Royal Mail's managers have been unleashed by the fact that there is not even a consensus of opinion between their top people. Managers at all levels are out of, or more likely lacking control, and in the same way as RM has localised and weakened our negotiating and decision making processes it now finds that it cannot directly govern it's managers behaviour. The first side of this confrontation to get itself together nationally will win this dispute outright - I certainly hope it is us.

nail on the head there ? - RM had the same problem in 2003 , the union had lost a ballot by 1.8 % and RM thought it was the green light to start attacking reps and activists but those out of control managers turned staff against RM to the CWU - losing the Hearts & Minds battle , that RM had thrown so much propaganda & money at .

Even a ex HR manager has been scathingly critical about the deliberate brinksmanship game RM has been playing and the lack of strategy , direction , planning and leadership .

The same Senior managers that according to Hooper , lacked the expertise to run a Postal Operation and :mfo called genetically deficient .

[infidel]

would someone please tell us what has been done over the past 2 weeks with exception of the members.

[peejay14]

Royal Mail has a grievance procedure where workers can lodge any complaints against managers ,
before any external action can be taken then all internal procedures have to be followed.

Not what I'm talking about. I am talking about taking the general complaint against RM's management to an external body (is there one, has this been tried already?) with the powers to stop whatever it is RM is doing (or not doing, pending an authoritative investigation.) My first suggestion for an alternative to going on strike was to test RM management in the court of public opinion, now I am suggesting that if possible why doesn't the CWU help its RM members take the company to trial in the legal environment? I am in an unknown minority that is undecided about the overall benefit of taking strike action.

C'mon ACAS !

[krussel]

Royal Mail has a grievance procedure where workers can lodge any complaints against managers ,
before any external action can be taken then all internal procedures have to be followed.

Not what I'm talking about. I am talking about taking the general complaint against RM's management to an external body (is there one, has this been tried already?) with the powers to stop whatever it is RM is doing (or not doing, pending an authoritative investigation.) My first suggestion for an alternative to going on strike was to test RM management in the court of public opinion, now I am suggesting that if possible why doesn't the CWU help its RM members take the company to trial in the legal environment? I am in an unknown minority that is undecided about the overall benefit of taking strike action.

C'mon ACAS !

I think you will find that the process with taking action against RM management is the same as it would be for anyone working in a normal working environment. Most companies have a grievance procedure that should be followed. Abusive behaviour, harrasment and bullying should be notified to a direct superior and union rep. If you don't feel that the issue has been addressed properly and are still getting grief then it is open to you to take civil action against the individual for harrasment or whatever else the problem is.
It may be possible for the union solicitors to assist but the action would have to be taken by the individual and not the union as it is essentially the individual who has suffered loss as a result of the harrasment or bullying. Unfortunately the action could not be taken against the RM management by a third party on your behalf, although 99% of the work could be done by the union solicitors as it would be done by a solicitor if a member of the public were issuing a claim.

[spilie]

infidel what is happening is that the executive are playing hide and seek with the members, when we find all members of the executive then and only then will they ..........................

[peejay14]

the action would have to be taken by the individual and not the union as it is essentially the individual who has suffered loss as a result of the harrasment or bullying. Unfortunately the action could not be taken against the RM management by a third party on your behalf

So, as a collective, the aggrieved work force could take such an action against the company, helped by the union. Sounds like a sensible way forward to me, or am I missing something? Isn't a strike a last resort?

C'mon ACAS !

[axeman]

a few cells, a backbone am i missing something ??

[smokerjim]

the action would have to be taken by the individual and not the union as it is essentially the individual who has suffered loss as a result of the harrasment or bullying. Unfortunately the action could not be taken against the RM management by a third party on your behalf

So, as a collective, the aggrieved work force could take such an action against the company, helped by the union. Sounds like a sensible way forward to me, or am I missing something? Isn't a strike a last resort?

C'mon ACAS !

As was explained above, a complaint cannot be taken to an external power ( such as an employment tribunal / other civil court ) until all internal procedures have been exhausted.....and wether through incompetence or malice, those internal procedures are often delayed, prevaricated and stalled in the hope the complainent gives up in frustration, leaves the company of their own volition, or better still is sacked with enough justification to make your complaint look like sour grapes.....however it happens, the complaint goes away - if the complaint was brought before a court or tribunal prematurely, the first thing that would be asked is "Have all internal procedures been exhausted?" and when the reply is "No" as it will be, the case will be dismissed.

At present, there are no legal ways for a body such as a union to bring a case against another body such as an employer to highlight a particular group such as employees - in short RM have not broken any laws, criminal or civil against it's employees in the manner it has forced the changes.

As for public opinion, it is very hard to get the mass media to pay attention and accurately report what is happening - part of it is the soundbite culture of TV & radio, part of it is the right wing leanings of print media owner and their general hysteria of trade union disquiet, part of it is those publications that are supportive are periodicals or do not have the circulation figures of the red tops or broadsheets.....yet funnily enough, I have never come across a customer that has blamed anyone but RM or the Govt!

[peejay14]

Then if the work force cannot rely on the support of the media - to gain the support of both the public and business customers - or on the support of the legal authorities, since getting to that point seems just too much hassle, then can I try another option on you?

Why doesn't the workforce act as one and with one voice (the union?) by refusing simply to carry out specific management orders that don't make sense in terms of service standards and feasibility for the job. Then the management would have to put the whole work force onto a conduct code, and face the possibility of having to sack 100% of its workers. Surely striking plays right into the management's hands, as shown by the collapse of, and fall-out from, the latest strike. Because when considering disciplining it's whole workforce, the management would have to consider the image that would portray of them, and the work force's strongest argument in this case would be that they were actually doing what they thought was best for the customers and the job, by working to the highest achievable standards (as set out by their union) and remaining in their posts, ie not deserting the customers. To me it would be better if the option of striking was ruled out, because I think that the management can make a good argument in that circumstance, and a strike is vulnerable to sabotage. I don't think I am talking about working to rule, this idea has more union involvement and takes the fight to the management in another way that perhaps has more credibility than strike action, which we have seen does not always work. I can see the headline: 'Royal Mail turns on its hard working posties'. Gauranteed support from both the public and customers, hands-on union involvement at every-day office level, driven by the common sense values and principals of hard working posties, and crucially in cooperation with the management. One cannot do without the other, I mean the management and the work force, and so both would have to find a way forward by working together.

C'mon ACAS !