Network Dispute

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Letter to Branches




No. 453/2012
Ref: 233.08
Date: 13th June 2012

FOR THE URGENT ATTENTION OF:

All Postal Branches with Network Members
All Divisional Representatives
All Regional Organisers
All Area Distribution Representatives
All RDC Representatives
All LGV Representatives



Dear Colleague

Letter to Branches




No. LTB
Ref: 233.08
Date: 13th June 2012

FOR THE URGENT ATTENTION OF:

All Postal Branches with Network Members
All Divisional Representatives
All Regional Organisers
All Area Distribution Representatives
All RDC Representatives
All LGV Representatives



Dear Colleague

Network Dispute

Further to LTB’s 346/12 and 380/12 the Postal Executive have now debated the issue and agreed that management’s actions in regard to Network 12 and other negotiations currently taking place are totally unacceptable and disingenuous.

The PEC equally understands why such actions have generated an atmosphere of no trust and no confidence in the integrity and commitment from Network management to existing National agreements.

The fait accompli managerial position on issues that are a direct threat to our member’s job security, are in conflict with commitments they have made to develop mutual interest solutions and are certainly out with the spirit and intent of all existing agreements.

We believe that the current position represents a prevailing attitude which is retarding and undermining a number of current Network negotiations and we have requested urgent talks to develop a framework of actions and commitments to try and restore confidence in the processes and negotiations going forward.

Paying lip service or adopting insincere positions to consultations on potential site closures, innovating new products and services to protect jobs and developing mutual interest solutions, whilst favouring a dash for cash self interest and lack of ambition mentality is totally unacceptable to the CWU.

Against that backdrop the PEC has set the policy that if this adversarial Network managerial attitude should prevail and they ignore or disrespect resolution discussions by taking executive action anywhere within the Network function, then the Union will defend our agreements and our members by using all means possible up to and including a ballot for industrial action of all Network members in RDC’s and VOC’s.

A meeting has been arranged for Thursday 14th June where we hope to make positive progress on our objective of restoring confidence and trust.

Branches are reminded that until this dispute is resolved that the position as notified in LTB’s 346/12 and 380/12 remains the same, i.e.

‘In the meantime we advise that there should be no local negotiations on these matters until a resolution to this National disagreement is found. If any attempt is made by local managers to progress revision activity then the matter should be the subject of a disagreement via the provisions of the IR Framework and my department at CWU HQ notified immediately’.

Branches and local representatives are encouraged to ensure that all membership records are up to date and that our members are fully briefed verbally on this current update.

Any enquiries in relation to this LTB should be addressed to Terry Pullinger, Assistant Secretary, e-mail: dwyatt@cwu.org quoting reference number: 233.08

Yours sincerely




Terry Pullinger
Assistant Secretary

[POSTMAN]

Seriously HQ,wake up and smell the f***ing s**t ffs!

[clashcityrocker]

Coffee - I think you mean coffee.

[fishtank]

Coffee - I think you mean coffee.

Maybe he means both.

Kopi Luwak.
Coffee beans caked in s**t.

[fishtank]

So we have deliveries all nicey,nicey look at our new agreements,come along to our party Moya,any chance of a seat on the board?
And we have Network 12 where management are having a laugh at our expense.

How do we spin this into the new shiny relationship thing?
Or is it just that Terry Pullinger knows a con when he sees it?

[BB brother]

Hello again all !

Can anyone shed any light on a ltb ( Letter to branch for the lucky people who dont get spammed with the stuff ! )
about senior management messing us about within the network agreement.

Must be pretty serious as ltb tells al reps to cease revision activity till further notice.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Hello again all !

Can anyone shed any light on a ltb ( Letter to branch for the lucky people who dont get spammed with the stuff ! )
about senior management messing us about within the network agreement.

Must be pretty serious as ltb tells al reps to cease revision activity till further notice.

Merged into thread with the LTB in it.

[BB brother]

Cheers mod !
Bit rusty.

[The wanderer]

Thanks for the LTB.

What do people think will happen next?

What will management try, will it end in Industrial action or is this posturing?
Judging by past experience involving changes within the business what are we in the RDC/VOC network faced with?

Any opinions most welcome.

Thanks.

[heathrow86]

I think the management wil back down. They will not want us rocking the boat with the Olympics around the corner, plus what point could the RM put across in the media should a strike occur?

[POSTMAN]

Oh yes the Olympics......a bit like xmas then.

[The wanderer]

Well ultimately it could end with a ballot for industrial action, I just wonder what the results would be.

It would be involving the drivers this time and not just the indoor staff so the results will be anybodies guess.

[The wanderer]

People talk about the Olympics, will it really be that busy?

What are they expecting to happen mail wise?

I don't think it will be as busy as Christmas.

[POSTMAN]

People talk about the Olympics, will it really be that busy?

What are they expecting to happen mail wise?

I don't think it will be as busy as Christmas.

http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/communit ... =1&t=45263" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Mister T]

There is a big problem at the moment with Network as managers are bringing in private contractors to do runs without any notice or talking to the CWU ie Eddie Stobart and such like doing runs where you are bringing an empty trailer back.
A lot of drivers feel RM do not want a Network fleet of HGVs you only have to look at the age of some of the units and the mileage on them, 800,000 miles is not uncommon.