The Closed Pay Offer

[fishtank]

look what happened to Arthur.

Doesn't seem so bad...

[dvbuk55]

King Arthur

The very same

[k979aaa]

No Arthur's in our union we have BILLY and DAVE not a militant bone in all 412 bones between the two of them.

[dvbuk55]

No Arthur's in our union we have BILLY and DAVE not a militant bone in all 412 bones between the two of them.

Now there you go I didn't know it was 412, I was under the impression there was only 2 and they buried them pretty frequently

[UnhappyGremlin]

I personally think that, with privatisation looming large, we have a better chance of securing a better deal than was already offered. We are in a stronger position now than we were before the BT2010 deal, as we had less leverage then.
RM has already made quite a big change to it's approach in negotiations and it's offer. They also know that the union is prepping for an IA ballot.
Wait and see what's next is the best option. The mere fact RM have agreed to talk again, and soon, is a good sign.

[k979aaa]

I personally think that, with privatisation looming large, we have a better chance of securing a better deal than was already offered. We are in a stronger position now than we were before the BT2010 deal, as we had less leverage then.
RM has already made quite a big change to it's approach in negotiations and it's offer. They also know that the union is prepping for an IA ballot.
Wait and see what's next is the best option. The mere fact RM have agreed to talk again, and soon, is a good sign.

Money wise yes but how long will it last? We need capital/capitulation money always go hand in hand with corruption it is the root of all evil and some will do anything to have more and more than others. Greed and Avarice has not served our nation well it is time for us all to put our interests of one and all before a bribe to our downfall.

[UnhappyGremlin]

I personally think that, with privatisation looming large, we have a better chance of securing a better deal than was already offered. We are in a stronger position now than we were before the BT2010 deal, as we had less leverage then.
RM has already made quite a big change to it's approach in negotiations and it's offer. They also know that the union is prepping for an IA ballot.
Wait and see what's next is the best option. The mere fact RM have agreed to talk again, and soon, is a good sign.

Money wise yes but how long will it last? We need capital/capitulation money always go hand in hand with corruption it is the root of all evil and some will do anything to have more and more than others. Greed and Avarice has not served our nation well it is time for us all to put our interests of one and all before a bribe to our downfall.

All true. But the deal isn't just about money. It's about agreements to preserve pay/T&C's etc., with a signed and legally binding agreement to that effect. I don't care about £300 one off payments, they can keep them. I want a decent pay deal, with agreement that our pay won't be attacked, pensions left alone, and all free of having to agree to screw ourselves over again and again.

[k979aaa]

I personally think that, with privatisation looming large, we have a better chance of securing a better deal than was already offered. We are in a stronger position now than we were before the BT2010 deal, as we had less leverage then.
RM has already made quite a big change to it's approach in negotiations and it's offer. They also know that the union is prepping for an IA ballot.
Wait and see what's next is the best option. The mere fact RM have agreed to talk again, and soon, is a good sign.

Money wise yes but how long will it last? We need capital/capitulation money always go hand in hand with corruption it is the root of all evil and some will do anything to have more and more than others. Greed and Avarice has not served our nation well it is time for us all to put our interests of one and all before a bribe to our downfall.

All true. But the deal isn't just about money. It's about agreements to preserve pay/T&C's etc., with a signed and legally binding agreement to that effect. I don't care about £300 one off payments, they can keep them. I want a decent pay deal, with agreement that our pay won't be attacked, pensions left alone, and all free of having to agree to screw ourselves over again and again.

How can anything be legally binding after privatisation it cannot and will not it's like asking the new owner of your cherished car not to rag it or if you owned a coffee bar and said keep the prices down because I like coming here not a chance it will be a commercial decision money talks.

[alanmc]

look what happened to Arthur.

Doesn't seem so bad...

wish we had like button on some of these comments

[UnhappyGremlin]

I personally think that, with privatisation looming large, we have a better chance of securing a better deal than was already offered. We are in a stronger position now than we were before the BT2010 deal, as we had less leverage then.
RM has already made quite a big change to it's approach in negotiations and it's offer. They also know that the union is prepping for an IA ballot.
Wait and see what's next is the best option. The mere fact RM have agreed to talk again, and soon, is a good sign.

Money wise yes but how long will it last? We need capital/capitulation money always go hand in hand with corruption it is the root of all evil and some will do anything to have more and more than others. Greed and Avarice has not served our nation well it is time for us all to put our interests of one and all before a bribe to our downfall.

All true. But the deal isn't just about money. It's about agreements to preserve pay/T&C's etc., with a signed and legally binding agreement to that effect. I don't care about £300 one off payments, they can keep them. I want a decent pay deal, with agreement that our pay won't be attacked, pensions left alone, and all free of having to agree to screw ourselves over again and again.

How can anything be legally binding after privatisation it cannot and will not it's like asking the new owner of your cherished car not to rag it or if you owned a coffee bar and said keep the prices down because I like coming here not a chance it will be a commercial decision money talks.

All true. I personally think that after privatisation RM will try and rip up our contracts and give us new ones on minimum wage with no allowances and stupid hours to be worked.
But why say this then?

The pay offer is conditional on acceptance of the following:
Acceptance of the previously rejected pension proposals currently out to consultation.
Three year protection of existing contracts of employment and some other terms and conditions, alongside a commitment to no outsourcing for the three year duration of the deal.

Would that mean an agreement not to attack pay etc.? And if it's not legally binding, which it isn't, why say it? Just to bullshit us into agreeing?

[k979aaa]

I personally think that, with privatisation looming large, we have a better chance of securing a better deal than was already offered. We are in a stronger position now than we were before the BT2010 deal, as we had less leverage then.
RM has already made quite a big change to it's approach in negotiations and it's offer. They also know that the union is prepping for an IA ballot.
Wait and see what's next is the best option. The mere fact RM have agreed to talk again, and soon, is a good sign.

Money wise yes but how long will it last? We need capital/capitulation money always go hand in hand with corruption it is the root of all evil and some will do anything to have more and more than others. Greed and Avarice has not served our nation well it is time for us all to put our interests of one and all before a bribe to our downfall.

All true. But the deal isn't just about money. It's about agreements to preserve pay/T&C's etc., with a signed and legally binding agreement to that effect. I don't care about £300 one off payments, they can keep them. I want a decent pay deal, with agreement that our pay won't be attacked, pensions left alone, and all free of having to agree to screw ourselves over again and again.

How can anything be legally binding after privatisation it cannot and will not it's like asking the new owner of your cherished car not to rag it or if you owned a coffee bar and said keep the prices down because I like coming here not a chance it will be a commercial decision money talks.

All true. I personally think that after privatisation RM will try and rip up our contracts and give us new ones on minimum wage with no allowances and stupid hours to be worked.
But why say this then?

The pay offer is conditional on acceptance of the following:
Acceptance of the previously rejected pension proposals currently out to consultation.
Three year protection of existing contracts of employment and some other terms and conditions, alongside a commitment to no outsourcing for the three year duration of the deal.

Would that mean an agreement not to attack pay etc.? And if it's not legally binding, which it isn't, why say it? Just to bullshit us into agreeing?

As I see it yes.

[OnAFlyer]

Well this would have to be one hell of a deal for me to recommend this so called deal to anyone with the privatisation on the horizon (will this deal ever be implemented after privatisation) and the pension issue as if inflation rises above 5% your pension will not keep up with that rate. A lot of things to consider not least workplace issues never mentioned and what is the strategy to deal with TNT POST nothing in this deal encompasses these most important issues, I know some would like this so called deal and vote for is just because they need the money but to sell out for such a crap deal is the worst thing we can do!. I think Royal Mail could do better than this if it was just about the money maybe 15% over three years with the balance up front ie 5.6% + 5.0 + 4.4% = 15% if it were just about the money remember a strike would be like a stake in the heart of a Royal Mail privatisation as would privatisation to us all and our future terms and conditions!.

15%

Never in a million years are we going to get anywhere close to that. If RM do want a no strike clause then yes it's a definite deal breaker, but the money side isn't going to change by much no matter how long negotiations go on for. (I'm not talking about or counting lump sums as they are nothing to do with pay rises).

[dvbuk55]

Somebody came to me this morning and said "when are we getting this money" I think the union need to broaden their communication network so that people know that the deal has been rejected. On wtl today the management were handing out letters to staff showing the agreement and some must have assumed it was a done deal!

[BingBong]

subject to this and that...whatever!

[BingBong]

Why are people on here getting excited about being bribed a few hundred quid not to strike?
All this will we get £500 or £200+ £100 , do you not see what they are doing?
A few hundred and they can privatise without any threat of idustrial action ?
Will you be happy with that?

if our rights to strike action are taking we are screwed. the bullys win. this cant happen. people need to see the bigger picture. a few hundred quid wont last you forever.