Is this strong enough ?

[Cut Off King]

In the DRAFT agreement that negotiators thrashed out there was this statement on offices where EXEC.ACTION has been taken ---the draft read “In offices where change has been implemented without agreement the local parties will engage in genuine negotiations to reach local agreement”

Is that a strong enough, watertight and black & white with no grey areas for local DSM's & DOM's to wriggle out of

I personaly think exec. action needs to be REMOVED first, then negotiate local change.

If this was the final form of words in an agreement, then local managers would insist that all exec. action would STAY IN PLACE as the wording says nothing about removing it, until they get an agreement. The local managers would then STALL any agreement's for as long as possible ( until after XMAS at least, then ignore any agreement as the CWU's ballot would have run out by then )

I don't know about you , but I DON'T TRUST RM MANAGEMENT

[coxie]

never trust the management, its needs to be set in stone exactly what they plan to agree and what they will do in the future

[bandit1157]

In the DRAFT agreement that negotiators thrashed out there was this statement on offices where EXEC.ACTION has been taken ---the draft read “In offices where change has been implemented without agreement the local parties will engage in genuine negotiations to reach local agreement"

"and once agreement has been reached only then will industrial action cease" sounds better. we need to negotiate from a position of strength

also what about the offices that agreed/were shafted ? :cfo :mfo