A message from Billy Hayes, and Dave Ward.

Night Tonic · Post by **Night Tonic** » 02 Apr 2008, 22:05

Look, only a fool strikes without a clear idea of what he/she expects and I've not even heard ONE proposal from the CWU other than "We don't like it". Fine, I do not disagree with that but if we're to counter it, hanging outside a delivery office won't do jack poo. Without a tenable alternative we're wasting our time. If its a total reversal being called for and gordon brown - sorry, the rest of the population, to put the money in the pot - no chance.

DGP1 · Post by **DGP1** » 02 Apr 2008, 22:11

Night Tonic wrote:Look, only a fool strikes without a clear idea of what he/she expects and I've not even heard ONE proposal from the CWU other than "We don't like it". Fine, I do not disagree with that but if we're to counter it, hanging outside a delivery office won't do jack poo. Without a tenable alternative we're wasting our time. If its a total reversal being called for and gordon brown - sorry, the rest of the population, to put the money in the pot - no chance.

No, I want RM to put the money in instead of the directors paying themselves massive bonuses and giving the rest to the government

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 02 Apr 2008, 22:14

Night Tonic wrote:Look, only a fool strikes without a clear idea of what he/she expects and I've not even heard ONE proposal from the CWU other than "We don't like it". Fine, I do not disagree with that but if we're to counter it, hanging outside a delivery office won't do jack poo. Without a tenable alternative we're wasting our time. If its a total reversal being called for and gordon brown - sorry, the rest of the population, to put the money in the pot - no chance.

Actually the CWU, and myself included, just want to talk to Royal Mail and see if they can compromise, but just like last years situation Royal Mail are refusing, so in this case any IA has the intention of forcing RM to the negotiating table and coming up with a mutually agreeable compromise. To quote the CWU Website.

â€œWeâ€™re now calling on Royal Mail to stop acting in undue haste and to discuss with the CWU how to solve the pension problem facing the company. After the last year of unrest Royal Mail needs to take the workforce along with them in this major change to postal workersâ€™ terms and conditions.

â€œWith such overwhelming opposition to their plans, if Royal Mail canâ€™t find an acceptable solution with the CWU, industrial action will be inevitable.â€

Night Tonic · Post by **Night Tonic** » 02 Apr 2008, 22:40

Yes but what ARE the proposals that challenge RM's?? Noone seems to be able to answer it.

Barry Trotter · Post by **Barry Trotter** » 02 Apr 2008, 22:42

Having just become a father last week and with a partner who will be on maternity leave for the next 8 months I dont particularly want to be on strike but if needs must and to ensure my pension I will be. What I do want however is an assurance from the union that we wont be sold down the river again like last year. Removing the pensions issue from the dispute last year was the biggest single failing of all the failings and allowed Royal Mail to once again believe its ok to shaft us over whenever they choose to. We created a backlog of mail that The powers at be had no chance of clearing only for the CWU to order us back to work to clear it for them,before pulling us out again with a weakened hand. Sorry but I honestly believe that a deal was done with Ward and co,I dont know what kind of deal other than we werent party to it and gained nothing from it other than a paltry sum of money we were due anyway.I can just about handle that but to face the prospect of paying into a fund for my old age and maybe still have to work in B&Q shuffling trolleys around to subsidise my day to day living,that I cant handle.

drb · Post by **drb** » 02 Apr 2008, 23:03

jemima · Post by **jemima** » 02 Apr 2008, 23:34

Proposals to challenge RM's? I expect the reversal of the enforced change is first priority, that's a matter of principle. Then have a proper look at recent accounting figures (if RM publish them), before working out what might have to change. The CWU will want to get the best deal possible for its members.

I'd say that the government should use all RM profits, except those which must be reinvested in the business, to rectify the pension deficit and that it shouldn't expect to take any cut until the pension fund is healthy. That would be a fair thing to do, and the CWU political campaign should raise awareness of the issue.

In the meantime, I've looked at last year's accounts and (if the latest figures don't change RM's ability to pay into the fund), I'd suggest that some compromises could be made by posties which would augment the fund and would allow both sides to feel they'd achieved something. Things along the lines of -
1) Increase the retirement age to 62 from 2010, but allow extra contributions from those posties close to retirement who want to take their full pension at 60, and allow those who might want to work till 65 to do so.
2) Ideally I'd like to see higher management grades paying a greater percentage of their salary to obtain pension benefits than posties pay, since they're the ones whose salaries increase the most during their careers.
3) New starters could have an increased retirement age of 65.
4) Put your own idea here.
etc..

I hope we'll be kept updated about what's happening this time. Not knowing leads to speculation...

Night Tonic · Post by **Night Tonic** » 02 Apr 2008, 23:39

Well put. At last a real proposal instead of the meaningless 'all out' solution.

jemima · Post by **jemima** » 02 Apr 2008, 23:58

"All Out" does apply until the enforced pension changes are reversed...
Enforcement is the main issue... We have to deal with that first.
I'm not a doormat.... I'm a self-respecting postie. I'd go to a lot of trouble to keep my self-respect.