GESTAPO TYPE MANAGEMENT

[tommyrep]

dvbuk55

I do not profess to be a night in shining armour and you may be right about some offices having less members than non-members, but I will always maintain that if a workforce is united regardless of union membership - management would take a slightly different stance. I am not relic from union strength of the 70's, but I do see the dangers of RM's management tactics. They thrive on the division between staff members whether union or not, eg early starters/non break takers as compared to the ones who only wish to work their contracted hours.
Who does the manager in your reference go to when office matters are to be discussed, like weekly RM meetings ? or does he run the office like Stalin, bullying and intimidating staff at his whim ?
My wish and aim is only to see some level of fairness and respect displayed by management towards an ever more disillusioned staff, I am not some militant trouble maker !

I'm not suggesting that you are a 70s throwback nor a knight in shining armour but there is a tendency to blame anyone but the union, it's organisation at shop floor level, poor communication, poor agreements. How many offices do not have reps, how many where there is low membership, how many where the agreement is not adhered to? You see my opinion is that there should be less in the way of a reactive stance and a more pro active stance. The union should know the answer to those questions and organise area coverage where no reps exist. Because the union has relied far too much on local agreement within the national guidelines the result is a huge divide in acceptable practices. In order to rectify this the union must withdraw from the "Joint" activity and return to actually representing the membership and not merely a mouthpiece for Royal Mail. Unless the union becomes more member friendly with open negotiation and true financial accountability I am afraid it is a downward spiral.

dvbuk55

There is an element of truth in some points you make! My general point in all these exchanges is that, as a workforce - whether union members or not - we all need to address the obvious "apathy" that exits throughout the business, because if it continues without a massive re-think by us all we are all truly doomed. My personal view is that this would be better achieved with a united worforce - within a strong trade union. I know my opinion may differ from yours but RM only see a workplace without union reresentation/recognition or units with large numbers of non-members as an easy target to exploit people and "use and abuse" them at their whim ! Who can these individual turn to ? If they have NO voice they hold no clout what so ever, I know that and I think you do as well. You may be able to stand up to a bullying manager but many others can be more easily intimidated and would benefit from some support even if it's from a lack luster union. As Fishtank stated things have become so bad we may now be beyond the point of turning things around - my honest opinion is we should not just accept RM's current direction of hammering a good workforce into the ground only because there is no resistance - and I accept the CWU must take a more Pro-active role in stopping this style of management behavior. The Union has it's faults but we all need to "man up" soon, as I loath the thought that their ploy of grinding us down slowly will win at the end of the day.

[dvbuk55]

dvbuk55

I do not profess to be a night in shining armour and you may be right about some offices having less members than non-members, but I will always maintain that if a workforce is united regardless of union membership - management would take a slightly different stance. I am not relic from union strength of the 70's, but I do see the dangers of RM's management tactics. They thrive on the division between staff members whether union or not, eg early starters/non break takers as compared to the ones who only wish to work their contracted hours.
Who does the manager in your reference go to when office matters are to be discussed, like weekly RM meetings ? or does he run the office like Stalin, bullying and intimidating staff at his whim ?
My wish and aim is only to see some level of fairness and respect displayed by management towards an ever more disillusioned staff, I am not some militant trouble maker !

I'm not suggesting that you are a 70s throwback nor a knight in shining armour but there is a tendency to blame anyone but the union, it's organisation at shop floor level, poor communication, poor agreements. How many offices do not have reps, how many where there is low membership, how many where the agreement is not adhered to? You see my opinion is that there should be less in the way of a reactive stance and a more pro active stance. The union should know the answer to those questions and organise area coverage where no reps exist. Because the union has relied far too much on local agreement within the national guidelines the result is a huge divide in acceptable practices. In order to rectify this the union must withdraw from the "Joint" activity and return to actually representing the membership and not merely a mouthpiece for Royal Mail. Unless the union becomes more member friendly with open negotiation and true financial accountability I am afraid it is a downward spiral.

dvbuk55

There is an element of truth in some points you make! My general point in all these exchanges is that, as a workforce - whether union members or not - we all need to address the obvious "apathy" that exits throughout the business, because if it continues without a massive re-think by us all we are all truly doomed. My personal view is that this would be better achieved with a united worforce - within a strong trade union. I know my opinion may differ from yours but RM only see a workplace without union reresentation/recognition or units with large numbers of non-members as an easy target to exploit people and "use and abuse" them at their whim ! Who can these individual turn to ? If they have NO voice they hold no clout what so ever, I know that and I think you do as well. You may be able to stand up to a bullying manager but many others can be more easily intimidated and would benefit from some support even if it's from a lack luster union. As Fishtank stated things have become so bad we may now be beyond the point of turning things around - my honest opinion is we should not just accept RM's current direction of hammering a good workforce into the ground only because there is no resistance - and I accept the CWU must take a more Pro-active role in stopping this style of management behavior. The Union has it's faults but we all need to "man up" soon, as I loath the thought that their ploy of grinding us down slowly will win at the end of the day.

Believe it or not tommy we are singing from the same hymn sheet, where we differ is how we achieve a united workforce. There needs to be a rethink on how the union views its responsiblities and its method of communication, remember Kitcheners poster "Your Country Needs You" ........well that is the sort of direct confrontation the union needs to get the membership galvanised - the problem is "Joint Statements" which is totally at odds with a union supposedly representing its membership.

[LinChong]

There are loads of bright young people who, if they are lucky enough to get a job, don't have any prospects of advancement or of getting a place to live. They are crying out for the development opportunity that being a local rep offers. On top of this, if enough of them did it, they could change things for their generation.

If anyone wants to take the plunge they should realise that they are going to be on their own with only the law and the reluctant backing of their officially recognised Union. If they can get their branch to sign the form, they can get some excellent training at Alvescot. Failing that, they need to research the net for advice.

If anyone is prepared to stand up for their workmates, they can easily get elected because it is easy to use the grievance procedure and ETs to recover money like pay protection that reps on full time release have failed to get their members, despite agreements being in place. Your workmates will support you.

If I was a young person who had just finished a degree, was in debt up to the eyeballs and could not afford to pay for any more education, I would snap up this opportunity and get rid of a sitting rep if need be. Classrooms are good but they can't compare to live action.

To any young people who think they are in a dead end, there is a way to make this situation good for you but don't expect much help. In fact, prepare to be fought from all directions. If you mess up badly enough, you will lose your job. However, they have taken so much away from you that you don't have that much to lose any more.

To all young people that have joined Royal Mail Group:

Nowadays, unless you are a Russell Group graduate you have very few opportunities to get a fulfilling job as an employee in the UK. Due to headcount reductions, you have hardly any prospects of promotion in Royal Mail Group. Being a rep is the only way you are going to get development.

Take the risk.