not on facebook
ANNOUNCEMENT : ALL OF ROYAL MAIL'S EMPLOYMENT POLICIES (AGREEMENTS) AT A GLANCE (UPDATED APR 2019)... HERE

ANNOUNCEMENT : NEW CORONAVIRUS FORUM... HERE



I'm voting no

17 Sep 2017, 18:05

Maybe if the full time staff also stick to their contractual hours with no overtime, scheduled attendance and just working their contractual hours, maybe RM will also employ more staff.

Since the poster works in a mail centre or distribution, I will just shake my head and sigh...

* In this hard times, we expect people to just work 20, 24 and 27 hours (and no OT) and still be able to feed their families.

The irony is that some FT staff are already specifying how long they can last for in a strike (by the way I do understand the issues of big mandate - just ask Theresa May and the Tories... Ha ha ha).

Postman - thank you... I'll watch, wait and see...

I'm voting no

17 Sep 2017, 18:23

chrisj wrote:Maybe if the full time staff also stick to their contractual hours with no overtime, scheduled attendance and just working their contractual hours, maybe RM will also employ more staff.

Since the poster works in a mail centre or distribution, I will just shake my head and sigh...

* In this hard times, we expect people to just work 20, 24 and 27 hours (and no OT) and still be able to feed their families.

The irony is that some FT staff are already specifying how long they can last for in a strike (by the way I do understand the issues of big mandate - just ask Theresa May and the Tories... Ha ha ha).

Postman - thank you... I'll watch, wait and see...

Work pt myself but will be voting yes and me and my family will get by just not be having sausage chips and beans every night.

I'm voting no

17 Sep 2017, 18:24

It is not the case so if you work in a delivery office they just shuffle the staff around like cattle a work to whose rule won't work the whole idea of this action is too make respect dignity in the workplace a right and that flows through to retirement too! As for part timers we have a 35 hour working week which would also bump up the hourly wage but more importantly is that pro rata agreements would be closer than they are today but even bigger than that we believe if you work full time hours you should be made full time may happen quicker with a 35 hour working week!

I'm voting no

18 Sep 2017, 00:24

SpacePhoenix wrote:
POSTMAN wrote:I have voted YES for strike action in every ballot we have had and voted NO for every agreement that has come out of said strike action.

For instance I can't rem what agreement it was to screw new starters over the 1st year no sick pay thing, like I said I voted no for every agreement as each agreement was/is, a recipe for disaster and would always be interpreted by managers differently to what was actually in the agreement, the wording of every agreement is s**t.

CWU to this day have not learnt their lesson with that, will they in any new agreements.

I feel for the newbies and part timers, they could be the downfall in this dispute.

CWU to this day seem to have not learnt their lesson with the newbies and part timers, will it now bite them on the arse.

And lets not forget the ignorance of " some if not most " full timers/senior staff ignoring newbies and part timers. troubles.


Aren't the part-timers in a way their own worst enemy? If they all stuck with just their contract hours, RM might have been forced to make more of them upto full time. Why does RM need to make part-timers up to full time when they can get the work covered as needed by part-timers on ot?


It's life in business all over the world now as we all know,shitty little contracts because of sick and holiday pay.
Another industry my boy is on a 10hr contract but works 30+hrs a week and they wont give him a higher contract.
Only today my daughter was talking to a Gravesend (kent) postie who is on a 6hr contract!! but works 50hrs a week.
Most people know how the system works in the world now so they grab what contract they can cause they know they can usually make it up.

My boy is in Argos, my other daughter was on a 15hr contract at ASDA but never worked it.
Every body on here know someone outside of Royal Mail who is in a s**t contract job.

It's life. :neutral:

I'm voting no

18 Sep 2017, 09:44

The question isn't where we are or how we got here that's done and dusted. The question is what we do to improve it. I can't see how a no vote is going to help anyone in this industry no matter what contract they're on. It's just a case of petulant self harming.

Like Postman I've voted to reject every agreement shoved under my nose by the union and openly campaigned for a no vote on here and elsewhere ( against the wishes of my branch) primarily because they've let down one section or another of the members but I know that without a strong mandate from the members and the threat of strike action those agreements would have been even weaker and the conditions for new starts and part-time staff would also have been much worse.

I'm voting no

18 Sep 2017, 10:27

On a similar note I know many feel let down by the union. I have experienced three instances with two Area reps in which I have had to go above them to obtain a resolution. It's ironic therefore Royal mail want to get rid of area reps. However my vote is not influenced by those personal experiences, I voted yes on looking at the bigger picture.

I'm voting no

18 Sep 2017, 15:55

I wonder how many of you were aware but back in the 1990s the members actually voted no to a strike. So what happened? The union to their eternal credit took it on the chin manned up and went back to the negotiation table. RMG to their credit did not take any advantage of this, and the result (after tough negotiations) on both sides was a good result for the members. I am aware it was different times, and there may/maybe not a political agenda to this one. But a no vote is not necessarily the end of the road.

I'm voting no

18 Sep 2017, 16:10

Nick b wrote:I wonder how many of you were aware but back in the 1990s the members actually voted no to a strike. So what happened? The union to their eternal credit took it on the chin manned up and went back to the negotiation table. RMG to their credit did not take any advantage of this, and the result (after tough negotiations) on both sides was a good result for the members. I am aware it was different times, and there may/maybe not a political agenda to this one. But a no vote is not necessarily the end of the road.

Do you think it will be a no vote I don't more worried about turnout than anything else so get voting have your real say.

I'm voting no

18 Sep 2017, 16:19

Nick b wrote:I wonder how many of you were aware but back in the 1990s the members actually voted no to a strike. So what happened? The union to their eternal credit took it on the chin manned up and went back to the negotiation table. RMG to their credit did not take any advantage of this, and the result (after tough negotiations) on both sides was a good result for the members. I am aware it was different times, and there may/maybe not a political agenda to this one. But a no vote is not necessarily the end of the road.

Nick,
Interesting information there but "it was different times" are the most relevant four words. :shock:

I'm voting no

18 Sep 2017, 19:56

Nick b wrote:I wonder how many of you were aware but back in the 1990s the members actually voted no to a strike. So what happened? The union to their eternal credit took it on the chin manned up and went back to the negotiation table. RMG to their credit did not take any advantage of this, and the result (after tough negotiations) on both sides was a good result for the members. I am aware it was different times, and there may/maybe not a political agenda to this one. But a no vote is not necessarily the end of the road.


That's rewriting history.
What happened in London? How many days were they out to get that "good result"? I think it was around 20.

I'm voting no

18 Sep 2017, 20:09

I have no doubt it will be a significant YES vote. Even if I wanted to vote NO I'd seriously consider YES instead because 90% will be a lot better than 89.99%

I'm voting no

01 Sep 2019, 12:03

[
Last edited by 97gaz on 14 Dec 2019, 01:20, edited 1 time in total.

I'm voting no

01 Sep 2019, 14:01

97gaz wrote:In 2008 the final salary pension at Royal Mail was closed to everyone, new or old staff. It wasn't something we could really fight as the schemes were unaffordable. Everyone who worked at Royal Mail both current staff and future staff were enrolled in the new scheme. The pension you are on now is the same pension all of us are on. It also meant that the new schemes were now not going to pay out until the age of 65.

When the FS scheme closed on 31st March 2008, existing members were enrolled into the CARE/CSDB plan and started to accrue pension on an average salary basis instead.
Any new starters after that date were put into the DC scheme.

That remained so until the closure to future accrual of the DB scheme on 31st March 2018, when existing members started building up a lump sum via the DBSCB. But could switch to DC if they chose to.
And those post 2008 entrants in the DC scheme with 5+ years service were given the opportunity to pay into the DBCBS instead.

I'm voting no

01 Sep 2019, 19:19

Walking boots wrote:A bit controversial I know but is anyone else considering voting no, I've worked as a postman for just over a year so I don't feel like I'm very affected by the big issues, I'm in my 40s so I wouldn't expect an amazing pension and very much doubt I will do this job until retirement anyway.
I have no idea what legacy payments are other than to know I don't get them, I wonder if the posties that have been there years went on strike when it was decided new starters would not get them.
The only thing that would possibly affect me is the change in the pipeline but change happens I would have to see how it fits into my life then decide if I could stay with the company.
My worry is how long could strike action drag on for if neither side is willing to back down.
Do any fairly new part time staff feel the same?

Its like this. The more people who get behind our Union and vote yes the better chance there won't be a strike. Just like when we were balloted for the " Four Pillars ". However, division causes the Management to think they can turn us over! Together we are stronger!

I'm voting no

01 Sep 2019, 21:24

[
Last edited by 97gaz on 14 Dec 2019, 01:20, edited 1 time in total.

I'm voting no

01 Sep 2019, 22:45

RobertT wrote:
97gaz wrote:In 2008 the final salary pension at Royal Mail was closed to everyone, new or old staff. It wasn't something we could really fight as the schemes were unaffordable. Everyone who worked at Royal Mail both current staff and future staff were enrolled in the new scheme. The pension you are on now is the same pension all of us are on. It also meant that the new schemes were now not going to pay out until the age of 65.

When the FS scheme closed on 31st March 2008, existing members were enrolled into the CARE/CSDB plan and started to accrue pension on an average salary basis instead.
Any new starters after that date were put into the DC scheme.

That remained so until the closure to future accrual of the DB scheme on 31st March 2018, when existing members started building up a lump sum via the DBSCB. But could switch to DC if they chose to.
And those post 2008 entrants in the DC scheme with 5+ years service were given the opportunity to pay into the DBCBS instead.

So funny I nearly fell of my chair 3 pensions schemes in 10 years even Nigel Farage hes been in less political parties in that time frame and how is the pension we are in at the moment doing not that the legislation is going to go through parliament anytime for the next 40 years!

I'm voting no

02 Sep 2019, 12:20

re the pension element of this thread, i can honestly say i believe this will be immeasurably beneficial to future generations. will i benefit? Not so much!
Younger people coming in and paying in will see the true benefits.
Pie in the sky? maybe.. however people who plant forests will never likely see them in their full glory, but they have the vision, we need that same vision.

I'm voting no

02 Sep 2019, 12:41

bogstandard wrote:re the pension element of this thread, i can honestly say i believe this will be immeasurably beneficial to future generations. will i benefit? Not so much!
Younger people coming in and paying in will see the true benefits.


Totally agree with this.

I'm voting no

02 Sep 2019, 14:03

Not read it all but regarding Walking Boots or whatever his/her name is, last in first out when the redundancies come around and good luck finding a job that pays as well as RM fo an unskilled job.

I'm voting no

02 Sep 2019, 14:09

It's an old thread, walking boots is probably long gone.

Previous page Next page


Page 5 of 6   1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6