CWU Letter to all London delivery members

[Danelectro]

The CWU has argued consistently that MTSF2 was never
designed to deal with the number of staff the London review
Why does this only apply to London?

This means that as long as they get your
work into delivery offices before 10.00 in the morning then
that has met their objective.
Is this not a CWU objective? The 'most offices will have last letter by 2 o clock ' sentence in the
agreement is the only time ive heard it mentioned and since then it seems every revision is last letter 3 o clock.

Be in no doubt work arriving later means you will have
later starts, no 4 day weeks, no 9 day fortnights
All of the above has been accepted in my area,the no 4 day week one because'you will need the extra day off to recover as you will be so knackered so best stick with the one in 6 (CWU advice)

FTCs (Fixed Time Contracts) will have their contract
terminated, ie, made compulsorily redundant (sacked).
which is exactly what will happen in my revision and has happened up and down the country

all delivery offices in London will have later
starts.


All members, when they decide to join a trade union, commit
to the principle that we are stronger standing together than we
will ever be standing individually. This is one of these
occasions when if you don’t fight, then you will be next in the
firing line.
unless you have already been shot

virtually removing all overtime.
done and dusted

it would have committed Royal Mail to a guarantee of no
compulsory transfers or redundancies, a commitment that
delivery offices would not get their work later than they would
do presently. Royal Mail rejected this proposal.
yet again this was not in the original agreement,yet again the idea that delivery offices would not get their
work later than they would at present seems to be only for London members

Any people reviewing the dispute will acknowledge that your
sacrifice was not in vain and led to the protection of your
terms and conditions and improvements.
lovely jubbly

Remember, all Delivery Offices are facing massive job losses
due to walk sequencing and delivery best practice revisions.
nice one cyril,dont forget the agreed/unagreed 100BSI

If the CWU top brass want to build support up and down the country then they are gonna have to raise their game
and come out with better than the above,its not criticism just a fact.

[dvbuk55]

Spot on Danelectro. What "some people" don't realise is that all the monsters quoted are already a reality for hundreds of delivery offices. Since the revisions, the later start and finish times we have actually taken on more staff, not lost any. You would have to assume then that some offices have not rescaled their workforce over the years to match the work. Some of our deliveries don't finish until 1600.....that is not last letter down which is probably 1400/1430 and then the parcels are delivered until 1600 finishing at 1620. Earlier on Saturday - 1520.

[rockytony67]

The CWU has argued consistently that MTSF2 was never
designed to deal with the number of staff the London review
Why does this only apply to London?

This means that as long as they get your
work into delivery offices before 10.00 in the morning then
that has met their objective.
Is this not a CWU objective? The 'most offices will have last letter by 2 o clock ' sentence in the
agreement is the only time ive heard it mentioned and since then it seems every revision is last letter 3 o clock.

Be in no doubt work arriving later means you will have
later starts, no 4 day weeks, no 9 day fortnights
All of the above has been accepted in my area,the no 4 day week one because'you will need the extra day off to recover as you will be so knackered so best stick with the one in 6 (CWU advice)

FTCs (Fixed Time Contracts) will have their contract
terminated, ie, made compulsorily redundant (sacked).
which is exactly what will happen in my revision and has happened up and down the country

all delivery offices in London will have later
starts.


All members, when they decide to join a trade union, commit
to the principle that we are stronger standing together than we
will ever be standing individually. This is one of these
occasions when if you don’t fight, then you will be next in the
firing line.
unless you have already been shot

virtually removing all overtime.
done and dusted

it would have committed Royal Mail to a guarantee of no
compulsory transfers or redundancies, a commitment that
delivery offices would not get their work later than they would
do presently. Royal Mail rejected this proposal.
yet again this was not in the original agreement,yet again the idea that delivery offices would not get their
work later than they would at present seems to be only for London members

Any people reviewing the dispute will acknowledge that your
sacrifice was not in vain and led to the protection of your
terms and conditions and improvements.
lovely jubbly

Remember, all Delivery Offices are facing massive job losses
due to walk sequencing and delivery best practice revisions.
nice one cyril,dont forget the agreed/unagreed 100BSI

If the CWU top brass want to build support up and down the country then they are gonna have to raise their game
and come out with better than the above,its not criticism just a fact.

But it's not from the TOP BRASS it's from LDC to the London workforce and it's not a fact it's your opinion

[Danelectro]

But it's not from the TOP BRASS it's from LDC to the London workforce and it's not a fact it's your opinion

Yes rocky i know its from LDC to the London workforce,but are London not looking for support from the rest of country?
and judging by recent LTBs the aim by the top brass is to employ a communications company to try and get the rest of us
on board,so my point is the letter from LDC is drumming up support by using what i highlighted above but the problem is
that some of it has already been implemented elsewhere in the country with CWU help and some could viewed as being part of the BT2010 agreement.

Look we are all in the same boat but if this is the kind of line the HQ are gonna try on the rest of us then i cant see it
achieving the desired result.

[dvbuk55]

I can't see my unit supporting a strike, certainly not to support BT2010, our branch rejected the agreement, as for the reasons for action.............been there, done that, got the T shirt.

[Dumpys Rusty Nuts]

After being on strike countless times in over 26 years,i cant ever remember EVER going back into work thinking that strike was worth it

[pickaname]

After being on strike countless times in over 26 years,i cant ever remember EVER going back into work thinking that strike was worth it

Instead of constant sabre rattling every two years isnt about time the CWU sought first clarification and then talks regarding their concerns.

I still cant see how, if there arent enough jobs, how the CWU can protect peoples employment. I dont see how IA can change this.

I feel the union may have allowed staffs T&C's to be eroded so much in the past that redundancy may be a better life option than being employed in this miserable job.

[dvbuk55]

I think you need a more compelling agenda than, "we don't want change"...........none of us want it but it's agreed and honourable people keep their word.

[rockytony67]

I think you need a more compelling agenda than, "we don't want change"...........none of us want it but it's agreed and honourable people keep their word.

You have to laugh otherwise you would crack up

[thelastpostie]

I think you need a more compelling agenda than, "we don't want change"...........none of us want it but it's agreed and honourable people keep their word.

You have to laugh otherwise you would crack up

Maybe you two should meet up and discuss your difference's over a pint? You'd probably get on like a house on fire?

[rockytony67]

I think you need a more compelling agenda than, "we don't want change"...........none of us want it but it's agreed and honourable people keep their word.

You have to laugh otherwise you would crack up

Maybe you two should meet up and discuss your difference's over a pint? You'd probably get on like a house on fire?

If you were paying I'm sure me and dvbuk, would be there like a shot

[dvbuk55]

I think you need a more compelling agenda than, "we don't want change"...........none of us want it but it's agreed and honourable people keep their word.

You have to laugh otherwise you would crack up

Maybe you two should meet up and discuss your difference's over a pint? You'd probably get on like a house on fire?

If you were paying I'm sure me and dvbuk, would be there like a shot

Well I would be there like a shot but only soft drinks for me, I am teetotal and I would be happy to buy you both a drink

[rockytony67]

I think you need a more compelling agenda than, "we don't want change"...........none of us want it but it's agreed and honourable people keep their word.

You have to laugh otherwise you would crack up

Maybe you two should meet up and discuss your difference's over a pint? You'd probably get on like a house on fire?

If you were paying I'm sure me and dvbuk, would be there like a shot

Well I would be there like a shot but only soft drinks for me, I am teetotal and I would be happy to buy you both a drink

I'd be happy not to buy a drink but I would be happy to drink them if someone else paid

[dvbuk55]

I think you need a more compelling agenda than, "we don't want change"...........none of us want it but it's agreed and honourable people keep their word.

You have to laugh otherwise you would crack up

Maybe you two should meet up and discuss your difference's over a pint? You'd probably get on like a house on fire?

If you were paying I'm sure me and dvbuk, would be there like a shot

Well I would be there like a shot but only soft drinks for me, I am teetotal and I would be happy to buy you both a drink

I'd be happy not to buy a drink but I would be happy to drink them if someone else paid

Tightwad still nobody got rich giving it away............I can testify to that

[thelastpostie]

I think you need a more compelling agenda than, "we don't want change"...........none of us want it but it's agreed and honourable people keep their word.

You have to laugh otherwise you would crack up

Maybe you two should meet up and discuss your difference's over a pint? You'd probably get on like a house on fire?

If you were paying I'm sure me and dvbuk, would be there like a shot

Well I would be there like a shot but only soft drinks for me, I am teetotal and I would be happy to buy you both a drink

I'd be happy not to buy a drink but I would be happy to drink them if someone else paid

Tightwad still nobody got rich giving it away............I can testify to that

its a deal, pint for rocky and a bottle of pop for dvb..on me..well the first round