VOTE NO!!!! ( For 1.6% Pay rise)

Post by **iainwilson** » 29 Jun 2016, 16:48

zx135 wrote:
iainwilson wrote:I work 60.5 hours a week so an extra 1% is worth more to me than that. And I do the same amount of work in 4 sectors that I did in 6 it's because the business is growing in volumes the area is shrinking thius making my job easier.
I earned over £30k last year so 3% would be £90 per month which is what I would consider a fair pay rise.

working a 60 hour week is less than a fiver in your pocket per week, how many days would you go on strike to get that, as again the amount would be wiped out in 2 days worth of strike action virtually

and what reason do you think we could use to justify such an increase with again no hoops to jump through? as simply rm could have offered nothing at all and then tied it in with the on going pension and condition talks

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 29 Jun 2016, 23:31

iainwilson wrote: I earned over £30k last year so 3% would be £90 per month which is what I would consider a fair pay rise.

Fair based on what?

also to get an extra 90 per month you would need to be earning nearly 35k and even then you would only be getting roughly 50 pound of that in your pocket

also worth pointing out rm is looking at shorter working weeks for ft staff so would you rather those shorter weeks were brought in now a year earlier which may directly affect someone like yourself who is working far in excess of the normal ft working week?

how many days would you be prepared to strike for to get that 3%?

wannabeek · Post by **wannabeek** » 30 Jun 2016, 14:02

aiden01 wrote:think It will be voted in by 80% plus just my opinion.

Good guess. 43,986 in favour out of 49,409 votes, so 90% or so.

Jefferson Starfish · Post by **Jefferson Starfish** » 30 Jun 2016, 14:04

90% turnout? No chance, more like 40%.

wannabeek · Post by **wannabeek** » 30 Jun 2016, 14:08

I never mentioned turnout. 90% of the votes cast were in favour.

Jefferson Starfish · Post by **Jefferson Starfish** » 30 Jun 2016, 14:10

But is there actually that many union members?

Post by **POSTMAN** » 30 Jun 2016, 14:12

Would it be right to say that nearly 100,000 didn't vote?

wannabeek · Post by **wannabeek** » 30 Jun 2016, 14:30

I think there are about 130,000 members of the CWU in Royal Mail. Could be wrong about that though. It's a pretty poor turnout anyway.

Jefferson Starfish · Post by **Jefferson Starfish** » 30 Jun 2016, 14:52

wannabeek wrote:I think there are about 130,000 members of the CWU in Royal Mail. Could be wrong about that though. It's a pretty poor turnout anyway.

I didn't think there were that many RM employees any more, and if my office is anything to go by only about 75% are in the union anyway.

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 30 Jun 2016, 15:23

There are 130,000 working for Royal Mail and IIRC about 100,000 CWU members in Deliveries, so turn out is around 48-50%

wannabeek · Post by **wannabeek** » 30 Jun 2016, 16:49

Ah OK sorry. I knew that 130,000 number was rolling around in my head for some reason.

Still strikes me as very peculiar that only half voted about something which directly affects their daily pay, yet many more than that probably voted in the EU vote considering it's quite possible that doing that will make actually make very little difference to their lives (unless you believe the 'end of the world' stuff coming from the pro EU camp)

Post by **iainwilson** » 30 Jun 2016, 20:06

zx135 wrote:
iainwilson wrote: I earned over £30k last year so 3% would be £90 per month which is what I would consider a fair pay rise.
Fair based on what?

also to get an extra 90 per month you would need to be earning nearly 35k and even then you would only be getting roughly 50 pound of that in your pocket

also worth pointing out rm is looking at shorter working weeks for ft staff so would you rather those shorter weeks were brought in now a year earlier which may directly affect someone like yourself who is working far in excess of the normal ft working week?

how many days would you be prepared to strike for to get that 3%?

Yes I earned nearly £34k and no my hours will not be cut because it would be impossible to run Parcelforce without route drivers doing 11 hour days

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 01 Jul 2016, 09:51

iainwilson wrote:
zx135 wrote:
iainwilson wrote: I earned over £30k last year so 3% would be £90 per month which is what I would consider a fair pay rise.
Fair based on what?

also to get an extra 90 per month you would need to be earning nearly 35k and even then you would only be getting roughly 50 pound of that in your pocket

also worth pointing out rm is looking at shorter working weeks for ft staff so would you rather those shorter weeks were brought in now a year earlier which may directly affect someone like yourself who is working far in excess of the normal ft working week?

how many days would you be prepared to strike for to get that 3%?
Yes I earned nearly £34k and no my hours will not be cut because it would be impossible to run Parcelforce without route drivers doing 11 hour days

it may be impossible run 11 hour days but who says that they could not bring in more route drivers and have you only work 4, 11 hour days

Post by **iainwilson** » 01 Jul 2016, 17:36

zx135 wrote:
iainwilson wrote:
zx135 wrote:
iainwilson wrote: I earned over £30k last year so 3% would be £90 per month which is what I would consider a fair pay rise.
Fair based on what?

also to get an extra 90 per month you would need to be earning nearly 35k and even then you would only be getting roughly 50 pound of that in your pocket

also worth pointing out rm is looking at shorter working weeks for ft staff so would you rather those shorter weeks were brought in now a year earlier which may directly affect someone like yourself who is working far in excess of the normal ft working week?

how many days would you be prepared to strike for to get that 3%?
Yes I earned nearly £34k and no my hours will not be cut because it would be impossible to run Parcelforce without route drivers doing 11 hour days
it may be impossible run 11 hour days but who says that they could not bring in more route drivers and have you only work 4, 11 hour days

Because customers would not like it and most probably we would lose business

IcanthelpthewayIam · Post by **IcanthelpthewayIam** » 01 Jul 2016, 18:16

iainwilson wrote:
zx135 wrote:
iainwilson wrote:
zx135 wrote:
iainwilson wrote: I earned over £30k last year so 3% would be £90 per month which is what I would consider a fair pay rise.
Fair based on what?

also to get an extra 90 per month you would need to be earning nearly 35k and even then you would only be getting roughly 50 pound of that in your pocket

also worth pointing out rm is looking at shorter working weeks for ft staff so would you rather those shorter weeks were brought in now a year earlier which may directly affect someone like yourself who is working far in excess of the normal ft working week?

how many days would you be prepared to strike for to get that 3%?
Yes I earned nearly £34k and no my hours will not be cut because it would be impossible to run Parcelforce without route drivers doing 11 hour days
it may be impossible run 11 hour days but who says that they could not bring in more route drivers and have you only work 4, 11 hour days
Because customers would not like it and most probably we would lose business

It's exactly what they done in rm, reduce the ft work force and bring in more staff on reduced hours, also customers don't really care who is doing the delivering as long as it's getting done properly so as long as properly trained staff were brought in then not likely that business would be lost