TBH i dont think they have any other answers than to once again call the lads to the gate. But this time i dont think people will listen to that call. In BT2010 avoiding compulsory redundancies was never in black and white. All it was , "was an overarching aim" which in reality means "we`ll try our best but we cant give no guarantees" RM will say they have tried there best. Somehow i doubt they have. But can the CWU prove otherwise? Where are ACAS in all this, shouldnt they be keeping an eye on things?
ANNOUNCEMENT : ALL OF ROYAL MAIL'S EMPLOYMENT POLICIES (AGREEMENTS) AT A GLANCE (Updated 2021)... HERE
ANNOUNCEMENT : PLEASE BE AWARE WE ARE NOT ON FACEBOOK AT ALL!
Royal Mail's Betrayal:London Divisional Committee
-
Edward Hunter
- Posts: 680
- Joined: 23 May 2007, 22:30
Re: Royal Mail's Betrayal:London Divisional Committee
And the sad thing is the union top brass are getting there arses kicked, by a clueless inept management TBH i dont think they have any other answers than to once again call the lads to the gate. But this time i dont think people will listen to that call. In BT2010 avoiding compulsory redundancies was never in black and white. All it was , "was an overarching aim" which in reality means "we`ll try our best but we cant give no guarantees" RM will say they have tried there best. Somehow i doubt they have. But can the CWU prove otherwise? Where are ACAS in all this, shouldnt they be keeping an eye on things?
TBH i dont think they have any other answers than to once again call the lads to the gate. But this time i dont think people will listen to that call. In BT2010 avoiding compulsory redundancies was never in black and white. All it was , "was an overarching aim" which in reality means "we`ll try our best but we cant give no guarantees" RM will say they have tried there best. Somehow i doubt they have. But can the CWU prove otherwise? Where are ACAS in all this, shouldnt they be keeping an eye on things?-
belle smith
- Posts: 1557
- Joined: 26 Aug 2008, 17:41
- Gender: Male
- Location: scotland
Re: Royal Mail's Betrayal:London Divisional Committee
Playing devils advocate here a little bit.....but if the unions lawyers could show that RM have in the past illegally withheld their employees pay as described bellow. Then how straight foward would it be to get that injuction??dingo wrote:Its is one thing someone working their hours , its is totally different an whole office or as was being proposed an the whole country working to rule. Royal Mail will try and break it by fair means or foul and their tactic has been to take people off of pay until they agree to work normally and when they say normally what they were doing prior to working to rule. Now if an office sticks together then if a few of their mates are taken off pay then they will probably walk out to support them then that is unofficial and Royal Mail will probably get an injuction stopping further action.
If your in an office which does not stick together than after they taken the first few off pay the others will probably go back to working like they were previously to the work to rule.
Now the first example is something which Royal Mail have done in the past so its not made up and like I said the union won the cases at a tribunal but 12 months after the event.
We have seen this time and time again Streatham and Watford both the workers had to go to lengthy tribunals before they won their money back for being taken off pay for working normally.