Try and get as many 'no' voters as you can to go to the meeting.
our branch officials have already had a meeting,and a yes vote was decided,by how many i no not.i havent heard of a meeting for the members as yet
I find it odd that branch officials can announce a recommendation without taking into account the wishes of the membership - there are two reasons for this - it is undemocratic and it may give the impression that the membership accept the agreement
Pressure,pressure,pressure.
HQ pressures division to accept,
Division pressures branch to accept,
Branch pressures local reps tp accept,
Local reps pressure members to accept.
It is a rather upside down version of democracy when the last people given a chance to declare their interest in the agreement are the ordinary members.
How about we give this a chance.
Members inform local reps of their position,Local rep informs branch,branch informs division and division informs HQ.
I always thought that was how a democratic union worked but what do i know i'm wearing a tinfoil hat in case Big Dave can read my thoughts.
What a good idea that is - sort of the people who pay the piper call the tune - seems like a good idea to me. Somehow I thought that was what conference was for but when the agenda is set by those with vested interests perhaps not.
Wouldn't it be a good idea if at some point HQ sent us a sort of blank wish list - little boxes we could tick with what we would wish them to press our interests. I mean a harem with beautiful young women would be out of the question but an occasional pay rise, reasonable work loads, union leaders willing to fight for our terms and conditions - surely they aren't beyond our reach.
I believe your cover is blown ft, the monkeys are out looking for some bloke wearing a tin foil hat
Try and get as many 'no' voters as you can to go to the meeting.
our branch officials have already had a meeting,and a yes vote was decided,by how many i no not.i havent heard of a meeting for the members as yet
I find it odd that branch officials can announce a recommendation without taking into account the wishes of the membership - there are two reasons for this - it is undemocratic and it may give the impression that the membership accept the agreement
in a nutshell SHAFTED by the people who take our sub's each week,and should listen to our views before deciding a recomendation.more worrying this target's the stupid members we have,who only see the pound signs.not the hidden agenda
"I have opinions of my own –strong opinions– but I don’t always agree with them"
Always Tell The Truth. If You Can't Always Tell The Truth,Don't Lie
"2010 And Beyond" The Year Of The Pay Cut...£3.01 Sub's For The Worst Deal In CWU History...
The term double standard, coined in the early 1950s, refers to any set of principles containing different provisions for one group of people than for another. VOTE.... fcuk it whats the point
geopip wrote:I hear the Group are refusing to allow any pay talks to take place with POl or Parcelforce because they are worried the agreement is going down.
geopip wrote:The Kent Invicta Branch is Recommending NO
There are more coming out for a No and so the leadership better start thinking about a plan B
I think we have established that the vote will not be overwhelmingly influenced by branch recommendations because if it was then give up as 90% plus of branches will / have recommended a yes vote to this agreement. So if the aim of this thread is to gain an idea of how likely a no vote is based on branch recommendations then the answer is not very likely at all.
However the vote is an individual members one thus rendering this thread pointless for anyone pushing either a no or a yes vote.
geopip wrote:I hear the Group are refusing to allow any pay talks to take place with POl or Parcelforce because they are worried the agreement is going down.
Not true
If I was them I'd be seriously worried that this is quickly going pear shaped and not going according to plan - that I suppose is the problem of having just the one
geopip wrote:I hear the Group are refusing to allow any pay talks to take place with POl or Parcelforce because they are worried the agreement is going down.
Not true
If I was them I'd be seriously worried that this is quickly going pear shaped and not going according to plan - that I suppose is the problem of having just the one
I suppose the evidence will come soon enough. I still think it will be a Yes vote but that is just my opinion.
geopip wrote:I hear the Group are refusing to allow any pay talks to take place with POl or Parcelforce because they are worried the agreement is going down.
Not true
If I was them I'd be seriously worried that this is quickly going pear shaped and not going according to plan - that I suppose is the problem of having just the one
I suppose the evidence will come soon enough. I still think it will be a Yes vote but that is just my opinion.
Well exactly how soon? It seems to be taking a helluva long time to get to the ballot stage considering the cat has been out of the bag for nearly a month - has the three ringed circus not finished yet or have they run out of snake oil.
Perhaps they are hoping to take the steam out of things by the forthcoming elections - and I mean the important ones not the NEC.
geopip wrote:I hear the Group are refusing to allow any pay talks to take place with POl or Parcelforce because they are worried the agreement is going down.
Not true
If I was them I'd be seriously worried that this is quickly going pear shaped and not going according to plan - that I suppose is the problem of having just the one
I suppose the evidence will come soon enough. I still think it will be a Yes vote but that is just my opinion.
Well exactly how soon? It seems to be taking a helluva long time to get to the ballot stage considering the cat has been out of the bag for nearly a month - has the three ringed circus not finished yet or have they run out of snake oil.
Perhaps they are hoping to take the steam out of things by the forthcoming elections - and I mean the important ones not the NEC.
The last I heard it was papers out on 6th - heard nothing since but PEC will decide that.
For me the sooner the better although despite what some posters in here think the local reps briefings have been a major success not just from the point of HQ pushing a yes vote but also from the unit reps who have been able to question,criticise and debate with the unions senior officials!
I think for a number of reasons (and some I don't buy into myself but each to their own) that this agreement will go through.
Last edited by lovejoy on 30 Mar 2010, 18:09, edited 1 time in total.
