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

ANNOUNCEMENT : NEW CORONAVIRUS FORUM... HERE



How can anyone even think of voting no

04 Sep 2019, 19:07

Just read the comments on the ft website reporting the story about the strike,

https://www.ft.com/content/5072ca4a-c4f ... 6ca66511c9

what a bunch of d***s. Posties that deliver to the filthy rich snobs, remember what they think about you when you're delivering their mail.

How can anyone even think of voting no

05 Sep 2019, 17:04

I thought we had "legal protections" from the last agreement?

If we are legally protected surely we should not need to strike?

This should be getting fought in the courts?

How can anyone even think of voting no

05 Sep 2019, 18:17

twiddledumb wrote:Just read the comments on the ft website reporting the story about the strike,

https://www.ft.com/content/5072ca4a-c4f ... 6ca66511c9

what a bunch of d***s. Posties that deliver to the filthy rich snobs, remember what they think about you when you're delivering their mail.


Behind a pay wall. Could you copy and paste some examples. I can imagine though. Not just the rich but the general public have no idea what the job is actually like.

How can anyone even think of voting no

06 Sep 2019, 07:12

Does anyone else think the shorter working week is asking too
Much and is unrealistic? It’s 14% payrise! How about a 35 hour week and a 100% secured payrise every year to match inflation?
I don’t know it just seemed too good to be true and now we are where we are again.

How can anyone even think of voting no

06 Sep 2019, 07:13

awesomepenguin wrote:I thought we had "legal protections" from the last agreement?

If we are legally protected surely we should not need to strike?

This should be getting fought in the courts?

Innit. Surely if it’s a signed agreement it’s legal binding.

How can anyone even think of voting no

06 Sep 2019, 09:30

postmanzach wrote:
awesomepenguin wrote:I thought we had "legal protections" from the last agreement?

If we are legally protected surely we should not need to strike?

This should be getting fought in the courts?

Innit. Surely if it’s a signed agreement it’s legal binding.

It was never legal protection in the sense of laws passed by the government for example to protection people, animals, or the environment. It was just a business agreement which in theory can be amended or broken at any time. I really hope & pray the CWU do not put the SWW and any pay rises in the forefront of the negotiations. A bit more money in the wage packet is fine but not at the expense of horrendous changes to how we do the job or if we have jobs at all.

How can anyone even think of voting no

06 Sep 2019, 21:31

rambo1 wrote:
fed_up_postie wrote:It baffles me how so many people are worried about losing a days pay here and there from IA and are gonna vote no in the ballot, dont look at the short term lose look at the long term lose!!! No one can afford to lose any money but how can anyone afford to lose their job!!! I'm voying yes and will stand on the picket line if it means I've got a job in years to come with the terms and conditions we have now #WeRiseAgain #StandAs1 #DontVoteNo

No way that I'm gonna lose money standing on a picket line next to people who come in to work 30 mins early, run round with a bag on their shoulder and 'don't have time for a break' . They are a big part of the problem and it would be hypocritical of them to vote for strike action.


if you ever use a bag without a trolley for ANY reason from now until whenever consider yourself a hypocrit

How can anyone even think of voting no

08 Sep 2019, 17:12

The guys whove been in rm for years and refuse to join the union and take the pay rises better terms n cons etc does grate a lot . All down to greed and being selfish with some relying on others to fight the fight . Anyone else think this .

How can anyone even think of voting no

08 Sep 2019, 17:41

How do we ensure the strike is effective? I am all for solidarity and taking a stand but I can imagine, the day after strike action, half the office will agree to do loads of overtime to clear the backlog (thinking they have made their point the day before) which then reduces the impact of the strike. Is it down to the effectiveness of the office rep to ensure that any action actually has a material impact?

How can anyone even think of voting no

11 Sep 2019, 15:22

Staff in my office say about losing days pay (i imagine this will be a long strike) but if royal mail have their way you will lose pay breaks (first thing to deffo go) and lose almost 2k on the spot (if i worked that our right) plus others.

How can anyone even think of voting no

11 Sep 2019, 17:03

glass joe wrote:Staff in my office say about losing days pay (i imagine this will be a long strike) but if royal mail have their way you will lose pay breaks (first thing to deffo go) and lose almost 2k on the spot (if i worked that our right) plus others.


I've always thought that with the amount of breaks not taken or booked at the end of the duty, that RM would eventually try to only pay
for the first 20m - 30m break and anything after that you can take but would be unpaid. We'll see......VOTE YES!

How can anyone even think of voting no

11 Sep 2019, 19:03

Sometimes I think that us suggesting what RM might do is actually giving them ideas, they probably think "yes, what a good idea that is..."

Previous page Next page


Page 2 of 2   1, 2