Finally does anyone really believe a different union would be able to get all the agreements the CWU have over 40 years everything from seniority , MTSF , Shift pay , functional pay , paid meal reliefs up to 6 weeks leave , Christmas bonus ,SA , election payments to name a few.
A new union would come in without any of the above agreements and would have start from scratch.
Is that really right? (i don’t know for sure one way or t’other so not a trick question).
Is it not the case that terms and conditions agreed in all collective agreements concluded by RMG and the CWU are then incorporated into all relevant employees’ contracts of employment and as such would continue to be part of the legacy employment contract even if the CWU ceased to be recognised?
So say you had an office where most rounds were about the right size how would this work? Would they be shrunk in size or kept the same and pressure put on us to clear an almighty amount of mail whenever they get cleared?
Looking after us the membership should be the only priority of the union, nothing else.
How exactly do you look after the membership without taking account of the wider issues?
Clash they are trying to get to involved in the company running and finances, nothing to do with them, wider issues are our workload and the expectations of the membership for the union to look after them.
If they get to embroiled in the running of this company we are screwed, next thing they will be trying to cost everything and "can't give you a payrise, look at the books".
Companies problem not ours.
The reason for a union existing is to be involved in how the company is run. It always has been and always will be, otherwise what is the point?
No a union exists to protect it's members and to collectively bargain agreements on our behalf. That is the point, not how a company conducts its business.
So say you had an office where most rounds were about the right size how would this work? Would they be shrunk in size or kept the same and pressure put on us to clear an almighty amount of mail whenever they get cleared?
By the looks of it we will all be working in a totally different way, walks as we know them are gone.
Don't think there's much point worrying about it till it happens but it's all but confirmed it is happening soon
No a union exists to protect it's members and to collectively bargain agreements on our behalf. That is the point, not how a company conducts its business.
These really are just empty words.
The invention of the internet and the growth of email has devastated what was our business. (delivery of letters)
The increase in automation has replaced (and will continue to replace) tens of thousands of jobs.
No union can just ignore the fact that.
How do they "protect its members" if they don't propose alternatives?
The societies of consumption and squandering of material resources are incompatible with the idea of economic growth and a clean planet.
I can guarantee that there are and will be no talks on taking away paid meal reliefs.
New entrants however do not have paid meal reliefs so our aim to get them paid meal reliefs
The reference of 40 million is the cost that it will be for all new entrants to receive the delivery supplement.
Finally does anyone really believe a different union would be able to get all the agreements the CWU have over 40 years everything from seniority , MTSF , Shift pay , functional pay , paid meal reliefs up to 6 weeks leave , Christmas bonus ,SA , election payments to name a few.
A new union would come in without any of the above agreements and would have start from scratch.
Martin, during my time the CWU has either stood still or lost. The primary concern has been to sell jobs to fund redundancies, as if that was a progressive strategy. At no point during my time had their been a single progressive improvement in the terms or conditions. You don't do the job. You don't have to do the job. You couldn't do the job. You wouldn't put up with it. So why should we?
"The leadership will sabotage the fight and only make the slightest move under fear of powerful working class action" - Des Warren
Royal Mail in 2009 wanted to scrap D2D payments and simply put it into workload as traffic had declined and that the cap of 3 contract items per week was stopping any growth.
In addition the 2007 network changes meant that Royal Mail less people was receiving the early shift allowances so Royal Mail scrapped this.
The CWU through negotiations secured the combined monies on D2D and the early shift allowances and combined it with the Delivery Supplement to every one tagged and working in Delivery.
This payment would be paid as a permanent addition to basic pay and would increase with every pay rise.
D2D became part of normal workload from that point and that the cap on the number of contracts was lifted.
Roll on 14 years and the USO change next year and D2D will have to be reviewed as an address will only get non priority items delivered 5 times over 2 weeks and therefore D2D which are currently are due to be delivered over 5 or 6 day each week will suddenly either have to be done over 2 or 3 times per week which may not be possible.
In terms of 2.0 being scrapped , I believe there will be a 3.0 under the USO as you will have to have a 1st class IPS and a separate non priority IPS frame.
Remember on all mail days you will have more work and higher call rate but an address only recieves this every other day Monday to Friday. So each OPG who performs all mail delivery will have more than one walk to do so on a Monday they will do Walk A on Tuesday walk b on Weds Walk A , Thurs Walk B and Friday Walk A again.
On the days when a walk has only 1st class and parcels including a Saturday the call rate for letters will be on average 20%. So you can still use a frame but clearly it will not be as full a frame as all mail days.
I find it hard to believe 20% of households receive a 1st class letter every day, when we're only delivering to around 40% of households even on the busy mid week days? 20% sounds like the combined figure for Tracked & 1c letters? I can't see the DO's I've ever worked in could ever fit two IPS frames per delivery into their offices?
So say you had an office where most rounds were about the right size how would this work? Would they be shrunk in size or kept the same and pressure put on us to clear an almighty amount of mail whenever they get cleared?
The suggestion by RM was that rounds would be approximately 20% shorter, although the way things work RM will probably claim mails dropped by another 20% when it's ever introduced so there's now no need to reduce the length of the walks!!
No a union exists to protect it's members and to collectively bargain agreements on our behalf. That is the point, not how a company conducts its business.
These really are just empty words.
The invention of the internet and the growth of email has devastated what was our business. (delivery of letters)
The increase in automation has replaced (and will continue to replace) tens of thousands of jobs.
No union can just ignore the fact that.
How do they "protect its members" if they don't propose alternatives?
Not i or anyone i know have asked the union or expect them to propose alternatives to how this company is run.
Empty words you say, since when did a union exist for any other reason.
Reinventing the wheel, or if you want, trying to figure out how to deliver letters and parcels at the same time has been a puzzle to this company ever since the explosion in parcels and the decline in letters. They have paid a lot of people a lot of money to solve said problem and so far have failed miserably. Now you propose we get involved and tell them how to do it properly for nothing but a slap on the back and a hearty handshake.
Empty words you say, daft ideas is what i say.
Why is the union's priority about the new starters, when it's the old workforce who have paid CWU subs for years!!
It might sound harsh but new starters know what they are in for when they sign up for Royal Mail, It's there in black and white. Whereas we older workers have had the rug pulled from under us, year after year of effective pay cuts (with inflation) and so many failed promises.
Why is the union's priority about the new starters, when it's the old workforce who have paid CWU subs for years!!
It might sound harsh but new starters know what they are in for when they sign up for Royal Mail, It's there in black and white. Whereas we older workers have had the rug pulled from under us, year after year of effective pay cuts (with inflation) and so many failed promises.
I assume the CWU know we're daft enough to keep paying our subs, so they want to try and encourage the new starters to join up, as I doubt many are at present? RM seem to have no trouble employing new starters so I can't see they are going to be in any rush to increase their benefits.
Why is the union's priority about the new starters, when it's the old workforce who have paid CWU subs for years!!
It might sound harsh but new starters know what they are in for when they sign up for Royal Mail, It's there in black and white. Whereas we older workers have had the rug pulled from under us, year after year of effective pay cuts (with inflation) and so many failed promises.
New starters are a priority — a burning priority — because the CWU’s mandate and power to act for the staff side demands that at least 50% of employees are members. With 20% of the workforce now being those of us on new contracts, growing week on week, and with very few of us new starters wanting to join the CWU as things stand, it will only be a few years before CWU faces an existential and possibly terminal crisis. As such, the CWU is now trying to show it can represent new starters, old guard, and be all things to all people. Who knows, maybe it can be. Alternatively, as you rightly allude to, there may be a bit of an irreconcilable conflict of interest here for the cwu…?
Why is the union's priority about the new starters, when it's the old workforce who have paid CWU subs for years!!
It might sound harsh but new starters know what they are in for when they sign up for Royal Mail, It's there in black and white. Whereas we older workers have had the rug pulled from under us, year after year of effective pay cuts (with inflation) and so many failed promises.
New starters are a priority — a burning priority — because the CWU’s mandate and power to act for the staff side demands that at least 50% of employees are members. With 20% of the workforce now being those of us on new contracts, growing week on week, and with very few of us new starters wanting to join the CWU as things stand, it will only be a few years before CWU faces an existential and possibly terminal crisis. As such, the CWU is now trying to show it can represent new starters, old guard, and be all things to all people. Who knows, maybe it can be. Alternatively, as you rightly allude to, there may be a bit of an irreconcilable conflict of interest here for the cwu…?
You've hit the nail on the head here. That has to be the only reason why their beating that drum. Save there own skin.
