Reject CWU/Labour government whitewash of Royal Mail crisis

[stage3]

Pinstripe is your contention the miners should have never waged their fight in 84-5. It was doomed to defeat rather than it was isolated and betrayed by the TUC ?

The veterans of that heroic struggle who gathered for the 40th Anniversary in south Yorkshire spoke about who they viewed as the culprits for their defeat : singling out the Labour Party and TUC. You can move swiftly on but for those who don't wish to join you, the interviews with former miners can be viewed via this link https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2024/0 ... b-m10.html

As mentioned that betrayal has been used for the past 40 years by every union bureaucrat to justify company management collusion. This includes Dave Ward who has picked up his gong from the Starmer government for services rendered.

You double-down on your message that nothing can be done in an echo of Thatcher's " let the lame ducks go to the wall"

For you the problem at Royal Mail is " the bottom cascading from the letters market" not more than a decade of privatisation and a new looting operation under Daniel Kretinsky. Your defensive approach is because that pro-business delusion peddled by the CWU bureaucracy is beginning to fall apart.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Posted in a Private Capacity, not as a Moderator.

I always wondered why a rank-and-file movement such as the PWRFC seemed to react negatively to pro-union posts, so I googled them. I am posting what I found not to criticise their views, or to support them, but so that members who are not aware of their political stance can understand where they are coming from:

To understand the World Socialist Web Site (WSWS) and its relationship with the Communication Workers Union (CWU), it is helpful to examine their respective political frameworks. Their perspective is rooted in a fundamental critique of modern trade unionism rather than a personal dislike of postal workers.

Here is a breakdown of why the WSWS maintains its particular stance:

View of Trade Union Bureaucracy: The WSWS argues that modern trade unions have transitioned from workers' organisations into "corporate partners." They claim that union leaderships, including the CWU's, prioritise the stability of the company and the national economy over the demands of the rank-and-file members.

Opposition to "Social Partnership": From their perspective, the CWU leadership colludes with Royal Mail management by negotiating deals that include productivity strings, pay cuts, or two-tier contracts. They often describe these agreements as "surrenders" that help implement the company’s business plan.

The "Pseudo-Left" Label: This term is used for any group or individual—including union leaders—that the WSWS believes uses radical language while ultimately working to keep the working class tied to the Labour Party or the existing capitalist state.

Strategy of Rank-and-File Committees: Because they view the CWU as "irredeemably" tied to management, the WSWS encourages postal workers to form independent Rank-and-File Committees. Their goal is to move the decision-making power away from union officials and directly into the hands of the "ordinary posties" on the shop floor.

Revolutionary vs. Reformist Goals: While a union like the CWU focuses on reform (better pay/conditions within the current system), the WSWS views such reforms as temporary or impossible under current conditions. They believe the only solution is a total socialist transformation, which they feel the CWU actively prevents by seeking compromise.

[pinstripe]

I had intended to ignore Stage 3, but

“ Pinstripe is your contention the miners should have never waged their fight in 84-5. It was doomed to defeat rather than it was isolated and betrayed by the TUC ?

The veterans of that heroic struggle who gathered for the 40th Anniversary in south Yorkshire spoke about who they viewed as the culprits for their defeat : singling out the Labour Party and TUC. You can move swiftly on ”

Where in any of my posts, have I ever suggested that the miners should not have fought. My point which could have been understood by a child, was that the country had moved on in 10 years. The power the miners had in 1974 was gone by the mid 1980’s. In 1974 the entire country ran on coal. Coal powered the power stations that the entire country relied on. That was not the case in 1984. So, yes in hindsight, it was doomed to fail, not that the battle should not have been fought.

And yes, again, I can swiftly move on after 40 years

“that betrayal has been used for the past 40 years by every union bureaucrat to justify company management collusion”

Your fight is against every single union, not just the CWU. Our fight is against RM.

“ For you the problem at Royal Mail is " the bottom cascading from the letters market" not more than a decade of privatisation and a new looting operation under Daniel Kretinsky. Your defensive approach is because that pro-business delusion peddled by the CWU bureaucracy is beginning to fall apart.”

I wrote
“ Yes the miners brought down a government in 1974 and that bought them 10 years, if you seriously think that 100,000 posties can bring down the government in 2026, especially with the bottom cascading from the letters market you are even more deluded than I could have imagined.”

I am at a loss how you can equate what I wrote with the drivel you just posted.

Have you ever visited reality? Your enemy is everyone that doesn’t wear a donkey jacket.

[stage3]

“Where in any of my posts, have I ever suggested that the miners should not have fought. My point which could have been understood by a child, was that the country had moved on in 10 years. The power the miners had in 1974 was gone by the mid 1980’s. In 1974 the entire country ran on coal. Coal powered the power stations that the entire country relied on. That was not the case in 1984. So, yes in hindsight, it was doomed to fail, not that the battle should not have been fought.”

Great logic here from someone lecturing about “visiting reality”

The miners were doomed but the battle should have still been fought!

Your version of “reality” involves taking an airbrush to it, specifically to avoid those responsible for the betrayal of the working class in the TUC and Labour Party.

You would have it the miners strike was simply about the coal industry rather than a massive restructuring exercise to privatise the economy and dismantle the social rights of the working class which has continued to the present day with the obscene levels of inequality and enrichment of the oligarchy. You never heard of the Ridley Report?

We are not simply talking about the past are we, otherwise Kretinsky would not now be sitting as sole owner of Royal Mail.

“Your fight is against every single union, not just the CWU. Our fight is against RM.”

What fight do you argue for against RM. You are more animated by arguing against one, defending a union bureaucracy which is tied to the hip of EP Group and the Starmer government.

Your line that its all about the decline of letters could have been cut and pasted from them all, plus Ofcom.

If that were the case explain the statutory breaches for years of the USO - as someone who is so a tune to reality - rather than banging on about the collapse of the letters “market.”

Everything you say is to argue for the working class to lie down and take it. I’m pleased to say we don’t share your "reality".

[pinstripe]

“ You would have it the miners strike was simply about the coal industry rather than a massive restructuring exercise to privatise the economy and dismantle the social rights of the working class which has continued to the present day with the obscene levels of inequality and enrichment of the oligarchy. You never heard of the Ridley Report? ”

Well, yes. My father, my uncles, all the other miners in the village, were not fighting about a “massive restructuring exercise to privatise the economy and dismantle the social rights of the working class”. They were fighting for their jobs, to put food on the table, to pay the rent. Not for some lofty socialist ideal, but for their livelihoods and their families.

I’m not even going to bother replying to the rest of your unhinged rant, I get it. Come the Glorious Revolution, I’ll be one of the first up against the wall. Or would you send me to a re-education camp

[clashcityrocker]

If that were the case explain the statutory breaches for years of the USO

Everything you say is to argue for the working class to lie down and take it. I’m pleased to say we don’t share your "reality".

The decline in letters has been outstripped by a decline in resources. It really isn't that hard to understand.

I could be wrong (and it is very difficult to judge a person simply by their written words on an online forum) but you don't actually seem to like the working class all that much.

[scotchy1962]

If that were the case explain the statutory breaches for years of the USO

Everything you say is to argue for the working class to lie down and take it. I’m pleased to say we don’t share your "reality".

The decline in letters has been outstripped by a decline in resources. It really isn't that hard to understand.

I could be wrong (and it is very difficult to judge a person simply by their written words on an online forum) but you don't actually seem to like the working class all that much.

Unless you agree with their views, in which case you will be embraced with open arms. I have occasionally explained to these workers rights warriors that to attract people to their cause they do need to actually not abuse them constantly if they don't agree with them.
On the odd occasion when they do come out with something which would be of use in the battle with the company, they compound it by not having anyone listening to them because of their attitude.
The old saying "You get more bees with honey" springs to mind.
Makes me wonder if it isn't just some people who are actively encouraged to stir things up on this forum, but then again i have no proof either way.

[stage3]

If that were the case explain the statutory breaches for years of the USO

Everything you say is to argue for the working class to lie down and take it. I’m pleased to say we don’t share your "reality".

The decline in letters has been outstripped by a decline in resources. It really isn't that hard to understand.

I could be wrong (and it is very difficult to judge a person simply by their written words on an online forum) but you don't actually seem to like the working class all that much.

Not sure how anything I have written on either this thread or any other could be interpreted as showing that "I don't actually like the working class" my criticism has been consistently directed against the CWU bureaucracy. The foundation of the rank and file committee is that workers take decision making into their hands to develop a strategy to fight to resolve their grievances against the company and it profit mad drive otherwise buried through the collusion of the CWU apparatus.

The news section on this forum has reports from the PWRFC on what postal workers are saying in London, Sheffield, Wakefield. If we were incapable of speaking with postal workers it would hardly be possible to provide such accounts. Where else would postal workers find out what is happening outside the walls of their workplace, via the CWU ?

It is precisely because we actually provide a voice denied by union HQ and raise awkward truths that we have come in for criticism. A lot of time has been dedicated by some to proving we are irrelevant. In many cases this has been based on anti-left tropes and just personal attacks including against any postal worker expressing support and relating their own experiences.

I've learnt to develop a pretty thick skin but some on here like to throw their weight about and then act offended once challenged.

I have spoken with postal workers face to face around the country and they have never taken offence at what the PWRFC is doing and that includes ones who do not agree. The only hostility I have faced is from management and union officials.