ANNOUNCEMENT : ROYAL MAIL EMPLOYMENT POLICIES (AGREEMENTS) AT A GLANCE (UPDATED 2017)... HERE


MTSF

10 Oct 2017, 16:17

What's the latest state of play?
Lots of talk of pipeline changes and pension changes and this and that but not much about one of the most important agreements we have, the escape route.

It's just that I've heard some nasty rumours that I won't repeat because I'm hoping they aren't true.


MTSF

10 Oct 2017, 16:41

It is a strange day when you need to ask others on here for advice.....

If the new machines can do half what is claimed (Area Rep - "we need to shut the trial down because it is too efficient") then the scale of redundancies may be horrific.
Paying anything above the legal requirement will be cost prohibitive.
I can't see the current board seeing the benefit in paying much above the legal requirement. It wouldn't make good business sense.

It wouldn't surprise me if this is what the dispute is actually about.
Pensions - we've been shafted before. (And said thank you afterwards)
Pipeline - has been moving later for decades.
But wholesale redundancies may well signal the end of the CWU?

MTSF

10 Oct 2017, 16:51

Isn't that the end game anyway, the end of the CWU? They are after all a perpetual thorn in the side of the business ,with their irritating concerns for workers rights and health and safety objectives, fair terms and conditions for their members. How glad they would be to be rid of that menace. So the board can race to the bottom,via their bank accounts and personal gain of course, but think of the returns for shareholders.

MTSF

10 Oct 2017, 16:56

To imagine that Royal Mail want to see the end of the union is to imagine that the business is capable of implementing change without the union.

I seriously doubt that.

MTSF

10 Oct 2017, 17:19

They might want to implement change with a union on board - just not the current union.

I could be wrong but I don't think the union finances are particularly healthy.
Job losses will lead to subs losses and the CWU as an independent trade union will be no more.
We will still be free to join a trade union, just one with less clout in the workplace.

But this is beside the point.
What are the plans for MTSF?
It is hard to see the current board wanting to improve the current redundancy terms.

MTSF

10 Oct 2017, 18:47

Just my thoughts but I can't see them offering the current ihr terms for much longer, currently thick end of a years wage, won't they just save money by stopping pay after 12mths then hoping you just leave !

MTSF

10 Oct 2017, 19:35

fishtank wrote:What's the latest state of play?
Lots of talk of pipeline changes and pension changes and this and that but not much about one of the most important agreements we have, the escape route.

It's just that I've heard some nasty rumours that I won't repeat because I'm hoping they aren't true.

Fish, wasn't this going to be re-visited when RM got their way on Pensions, Pay, Pipeline and Legally Binding Agreements, but still a very good Question in my opinion, need more clarity :wave :wave

MTSF

10 Oct 2017, 21:14

Is it not we are going on strike for it is not just to protect our terms but enhance those of others especially of part time staff! The future is not bright whilst the likes of the CEO Moya and her cronies are in charge as for in the long term the MTSF agreement should hold sway but it is down to us all how we show unity against capitalism stay strong and united!

MTSF

10 Oct 2017, 21:56

I don't see this dispute as a vote against capatilism. If it was, I would have voted No. Anyone wanting those economic, illiterate eejits Corbyn and McDonnell should check themselves into The Priory.

MTSF

10 Oct 2017, 22:00

I love abbreviations

MTSF

11 Oct 2017, 13:35

clashcityrocker wrote:It is a strange day when you need to ask others on here for advice.....

If the new machines can do half what is claimed (Area Rep - "we need to shut the trial down because it is too efficient") then the scale of redundancies may be horrific.
Paying anything above the legal requirement will be cost prohibitive.
I can't see the current board seeing the benefit in paying much above the legal requirement. It wouldn't make good business sense.

It wouldn't surprise me if this is what the dispute is actually about.
Pensions - we've been shafted before. (And said thank you afterwards)
Pipeline - has been moving later for decades.
But wholesale redundancies may well signal the end of the CWU?



Good post.
The removal of the present MTSF agreement is the real elephant in the room as far as I am concerned.
It's rarely been mentioned.
I go all around the country the amount of people wanting out is staggering......

MTSF

11 Oct 2017, 13:35

clashcityrocker wrote:It is a strange day when you need to ask others on here for advice.....

If the new machines can do half what is claimed (Area Rep - "we need to shut the trial down because it is too efficient") then the scale of redundancies may be horrific.
Paying anything above the legal requirement will be cost prohibitive.
I can't see the current board seeing the benefit in paying much above the legal requirement. It wouldn't make good business sense.

It wouldn't surprise me if this is what the dispute is actually about.
Pensions - we've been shafted before. (And said thank you afterwards)
Pipeline - has been moving later for decades.
But wholesale redundancies may well signal the end of the CWU?



Good post.
The removal of the present MTSF agreement is the real elephant in the room as far as I am concerned.
It's rarely been mentioned.
I go all around the country the amount of people wanting out is staggering......

MTSF

11 Oct 2017, 14:48

clashcityrocker wrote:

Pensions - we've been shafted before. (And said thank you afterwards)

Quality

MTSF

11 Oct 2017, 17:01

they want to change the MTSF according to our div/rep. no more 2 years pay or big wedge for those getting out. they are looking at the legal minimum. about 14 grand I think Robert T mentioned.

MTSF

11 Oct 2017, 17:04

MTSF is the War and Peace of agreements ( perhaps Crime and Punishment fits better ), I think if it were being rewritten we would know about it. If it isn't being reviewed is it being torn up? You would probably need one of those moustachioed strongmen in a striped leotard to do the tearing.

We know some facts, we are an aging demographic us posties, I think the average age would be 45-55, when I started if you got to that age and the bones started aching you started looking at what was available in the mailcentre, a nice cushy half dozen years propping up the canteen earning all kinds of allowances and trying not to break anything.

That was then and this is now, even if you could get a job in a mailcentre you wouldn't want one, apparently they make you work now... so where do broken posties go, early retirement? ...with the pension changes announced, in 10 years time you won't be able to afford it. IHR?...34 weeks pay sounds like a lot but it's not and is IHR under attack?

What I'm getting at is basically like Clash says the business has a huge problem looming, an outdoor job that's only going to get harder, an indoor job that's disappearing, a pension that isn't enough to retire on and an aging workforce that they can't financially afford to move on. If they don't make a move soon the problem will just get worse, half the delivery staff will be on adjusted duties.

Of course the real elephant in the room isn't actually MTSF, it's compulsory redundancy. If the VR terms are shite you can't move anyone on...unless you don't give them the choice.

Previous page Next page


Page 1 of 2   1, 2