why didnt the members get asked about the pay deal?

[dazzlin72]

The consultative ballot had nothing to do for with the predicament we all face now at all. It asked for 3 yes votes for a pay rise, boycott of dsa, & opposition to privatisation! It shouldn't have been taken for granted by those results that we would all agree to industrial action over pay, pensions, terms & conditions, job security etc, this is something completely different entirely. The union were too quick to cut the proposal down in flames without giving us an opportunity to see the deal for ourselves, as we've been totally left in the dark, don't they think we have educated minds?, & now all you are getting is rubbish pushed through your door on a weekly basis, one trying to out do the other, point scoring. This could & should have all been handled better by the union again if they were open and upfront from the start, people wouldn't think they had hidden agendas, or things to hide. We are the union, they are supposed to have our best interests at heart, so keep the members fully informed of things right from the very beginning & let them come to an educated decision in their own minds first, before riding rough shod, like the union do with everything else. To me, Billy & Dave have their own self interests at heart, not ours.

[fishtank]

It shouldn't have been taken for granted by those results that we would all agree to industrial action over pay, pensions, terms & conditions, job security etc.

It didn't.
That's why you're being balloted for industrial action over pay, pensions, terms & conditions, job security etc.

[dazzlin72]

That's not to say that the union have my full backing, just that i have my reservations about how we are being led, with the past debarcles, but hopefully they can redeem themselves, so the membership have total faith in them once more.

[Bernardson]

It wasn't a Pay Deal, it was a proposal which was rejected by the PEC. Even RM's propaganda says that negotiations continue so the proposal was not final
I can't believe at this late stage that there are colleagues who do not understand the issues or believe that they can stand on the sidelines and continue as they've always continued.
On this website is an article about TNT setting up a postal service in Manchester, 1200 workers on minimum wage and zero hours contracts.
The race to the bottom is on. The highest cost to the business is the labour cost, us.
If we enter this new world with unsecure terms and conditions then we are all condemned Union, non Union, Strikers and on lookers.

[dvbuk55]

It is simple , the deal was rejected by the PEC and the members rejected the deal on the basis of the consultation ballot.

The other reasons why it was rejected was the following.

1. Years 2 & 3 are not guaranteed and have reopener clauses.

2. The pay deal meant you had to accept the pension changes.

3. The pay deal meant you had to agree a no strike deal.

4. The pay deal meant you also agreed to changes to work practices including more flexibility under the Agenda for Change without you knowing what those changes are up front.

It was a no brainer !!

Re-opener clauses aren't new though are they - BT 2010 had one.
The pension changes will happen sooner or later - and I'd bet sooner

BUT

The No strike deal and agreeing changes without negotiation those two are the reason to say yes - you take them in tandem and they are a recipe for disaster.
Mind BT2010 was and that got voted in...............with a little nudging.

[hatetheboss]

I do believe that some of the misunderstanding is due to some local Reps not getting the message across. Having listened to some of the horror stories on here, I think it would be a good idea for staff to have their say on how they believe their Rep is performing. This could be a questionnaire like the have your say and could be from Div Reps all the way down.