FINAL AGREEMENT:THE POLL

xopher · Post by **xopher** » 02 Nov 2007, 17:39

say no to the deal why should he get 26% and us postmen a pay cut :cfo

xopher · Post by **xopher** » 02 Nov 2007, 17:42

Crozier & Leighton with there large pay increases are taking the piss out of us with their pay deal and comments, how can you vote yes, that's like saying they are worth their money, when we all know they're not ! vote NO and give them a christmas Strike they won't forget!

xopher · Post by **xopher** » 02 Nov 2007, 17:46

A big fat resounding 'NO' from me!

Hopefully we can encourage others in the office to do the same, as this deal is feckin' dreadful.

I also agree that a vote of no confidence in both the CWU exec and the PEC are required - if we can do such a thing??? :cfo :lfo [/size]

earlyrisera · Post by **earlyrisera** » 02 Nov 2007, 17:47

xopher wrote:Crozier & Leighton with there large pay increases are taking the piss out of us with their pay deal and comments, how can you vote yes, that's like saying they are worth their money, when we all know they're not ! vote NO and give them a christmas Strike they won't forget!

up the strikers!

earlyrisera · Post by **earlyrisera** » 02 Nov 2007, 17:52

xopher wrote:A big fat resounding 'NO' from me!

Hopefully we can encourage others in the office to do the same, as this deal is feckin' dreadful.

I also agree that a vote of no confidence in both the CWU exec and the PEC are required - if we can do such a thing???

i went to an area reps meeting earlier this week where we disscussed tabling a no confidence vote Ward & Hayes don't think it's possible , but dave ward is up for reelection next year so f**k him off out of it, certain cwu officers won't even put their name to this deal it's that bad, Terry Pullinger was one of them, perhaps he should replace Dave Ward, at least he's not stupid enough to think it's a good deal unjlike our mate Dave,

neil1 · Post by **neil1** » 02 Nov 2007, 18:42

no no no

yorkie · Post by **yorkie** » 02 Nov 2007, 20:15

IM VOTING NO ALWAYS HAVE DONE CAUSE THEY CAN NEVER GIVE US ENOUGH.

WILL WE GET A YES VOTE AGAIN FOR STRIKE ACTION?

Post by **Carnoustie** » 02 Nov 2007, 20:20

Yorkie, there would not need to be a ballot for strike action if we return a NO vote.

The mandate for official action is still 'live' until the membership vote in favour of an agreement. Only when that happens is the dispute no longer 'live', in the eyes of the law.

yorkie · Post by **yorkie** » 02 Nov 2007, 20:21

WHEN WE STRIKE AGAIN IT WONT BE ANYTHING LIKE BEFORE SO GET READY, CAUSE BOTH DEALS WILL BE NO VOTES REST ASSURED. THATS NOT JUST WHAT PEOPLE SAY ON THIS FORUM IT IS WHAT MAJORITY OF THE UNION OFFICIALS ..

VOTE NO

UP YOUR BROWN!!!!!

yorkie · Post by **yorkie** » 02 Nov 2007, 20:22

carnoustie where did you get that from?

Post by **Carnoustie** » 02 Nov 2007, 20:54

That is my understanding of the legislation. More learned people (lovejoy??) should be able to tell you if I am wrong about this

But I'm 99% confident my reading of the situation is correct

lovejoy · Post by **lovejoy** » 02 Nov 2007, 21:59

Carnoustie wrote:That is my understanding of the legislation. More learned people (lovejoy??) should be able to tell you if I am wrong about this

But I'm 99% confident my reading of the situation is correct

Yeah you're right mate! Will there be a strike though before Xmas. I noticed in the latest socialist leaftets the 'SWP supporters within Royal Mail - those calling for No vote - are asking for a special national conference to discuss our next steps!

The only trouble with this is in the event of a no vote the preparation, booking, holding of a conference would take us past Xmas.

If I was campaigning for a No vote i'd have an IA scheduled and communications campaign ready to enact asap!

bigsharkboy · Post by **bigsharkboy** » 02 Nov 2007, 22:21

one of the strike breakers during one of the early morning discussions on thursday actually said that mr crozier was worth every penny

give me fecking strength were do RM find these numbnuts is it part of the job interview process to show how brown your tongue is

:cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo

earlyrisera · Post by **earlyrisera** » 02 Nov 2007, 23:51

bigsharkboy wrote:one of the strike breakers during one of the early morning discussions on thursday actually said that mr crozier was worth every penny

give me fecking strength were do RM find these numbnuts is it part of the job interview process to show how brown your tongue is

:cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo

strike breakers we have a non union member in our office on a temp contract who comes in nearly 2 hrs later, he's sort are f***ing proper posties over, and he uses his car for drlivery, which the DOM knows about ! isn't using your car a dismissable offence? well it would be for a proper 40 hr a week full contract postie! but not them tossers

earlyrisera · Post by **earlyrisera** » 02 Nov 2007, 23:52

earlyrisera wrote:
bigsharkboy wrote:one of the strike breakers during one of the early morning discussions on thursday actually said that mr crozier was worth every penny

give me fecking strength were do RM find these numbnuts is it part of the job interview process to show how brown your tongue is

:cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo :cfo
strike breakers we have a non union member in our office on a temp contract who comes in nearly 2 hrs later, he's sort are f***ing proper posties over, and he uses his car for drlivery, which the DOM knows about ! isn't using your car a dismissable offence? well it would be for a proper 40 hr a week full contract postie! but not them tossers

sorry meant 2 hrs early than he's start time,

ROYALMAILCHAT

FINAL AGREEMENT:THE POLL

WHAT WAY WILL YOU BE VOTING:THE FINAL AGREEMENT.

Re: FINAL AGREEMENT:THE POLL

Re: pay and modernisation deal

Re: pay and modernisation deal

pay and moderniation deal

Re: pay and moderniation deal