Sorry typo,everybody saw this coming.
Sorry another typo,everybody except the union apparently saw this coming.
Dude, chill out, I understand what you mean and your anger towards them.mandelsons_toenail wrote:zx135 wrote:if your going to pick and choose what union members you are going to represent its as bad as picking and choosing what strikes to observe or to work in my opinion,mandelsons_toenail wrote: I will not represent them ever again, even hearing rumours of a close CWU colleague going in![]()
i think if your not going to fairly represent all members then you should resign as rep
and if you didnt i think that someone should stand against you and get you out and let someone who is going to fairly represent the workforce in your office take the job![]()
Brilliant so now I'm a strike breaker?
You'd have to carry me over a picket line in a wooden box.
f**k them. I couldn't care less anymore, if they cannot for once look at the bigger picture instead of making selfish decisions for them only, then I reiterate, I will not be representing them. Period.
I wish anyone who decides to go for the reps job the best of luck. It's a thankless task and no one can hack it in my office for long.
http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/communit ... =7&t=56029" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;andy3665 wrote:Received a letter this morning from Moya Greene, I think we all should have got it.
I noticed that they have now changed the £300 lump sum bonus ruling. It now states that anyone who strikes won't get it and if you don't strike you'll get it.
That's going to cause some issues in offices!!!
Isn't it discrimination against strikers?
Naughty Moya
A true revolutionary should only have love in his heart for his members.ronpetetrevchris wrote:
Dude, chill out, I understand what you mean and your anger towards them.
So the £300 does not actually exist in present time and space but is simply an image of a past £300 lump sum?musicmaniax wrote:Therefore as it stands there is no £300 anyway
Is it on one of those drone planes I keep hearing about?fishtank wrote: therefore the £300 must exist on some plane somewhere.
Had to read this a few times. I think I better go back to school..fishtank wrote:So the £300 does not actually exist in present time and space but is simply an image of a past £300 lump sum?musicmaniax wrote:Therefore as it stands there is no £300 anyway
But surely every finite and contingent being has a cause and nothing finite and contingent can cause itself and if a causal chain cannot be of infinite length therefore, a First Cause (or something that is not an effect) must exist therefore the £300 must exist on some plane somewhere.
Or am I just making s**t up out of boredom?
that will cause loads of s**tandy3665 wrote:Received a letter this morning from Moya Greene, I think we all should have got it.
I noticed that they have now changed the £300 lump sum bonus ruling. It now states that anyone who strikes won't get it and if you don't strike you'll get it.
That's going to cause some issues in offices!!!
Isn't it discrimination against strikers?
Naughty Moya
to right how can she pay a bonus to them that break a strike when the full agreement was turned down by the cwu , surely they cant pick bits out of a legal agreement which benefit and suits them , corrupt bastards . come on cwu pick up on this and sort it out .viking1488 wrote:that will cause loads of s**tandy3665 wrote:Received a letter this morning from Moya Greene, I think we all should have got it.
I noticed that they have now changed the £300 lump sum bonus ruling. It now states that anyone who strikes won't get it and if you don't strike you'll get it.
That's going to cause some issues in offices!!!
Isn't it discrimination against strikers?
Naughty Moya