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

ANNOUNCEMENT : NEW CORONAVIRUS FORUM... HERE



CWU appeal

28 Nov 2019, 17:40

Did anyone really expect anything else??

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 17:57

If the CWU does reballot, then keep it off all social media.
No selfies of people filling in their ballot papers at their frames. :roll: And no encouragement from the CWU to take photos of people posting their ballots either...
"Keep it secret, keep it safe" as a wise wizard once said...

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 17:57

I watched it and thought we had a chance.
Whats next?

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 18:23

The argument was that the breaches of the legislation were trivial and that the CWU never set out to break the law. Honestly I don’t think the judges had any choice but to not grant the appeal.

Hopefully the CWU already had the wheels in motion for a reballot. It’s really frustrating how long it feels since we voted.

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 18:25

should have reballoted weeks ago seen this coming
and cwu should have announced proposed dates of strike action to show our intention
i will now work to time all xmas
take out election material to time every day leaving loops of mail each time
girfut

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 18:56

SpongeBobPants wrote:The argument was that the breaches of the legislation were trivial and that the CWU never set out to break the law. Honestly I don’t think the judges had any choice but to not grant the appeal..


Yes it seems the main thrust of that very expensive appeal is that the union only broke the law a little bit.
Genuis argument.

Chelseablue wrote:Appeals been dismissed watched it live , shakes my head. All bcause of some idiots


The judges ruled that the union broke the law not the members.

So who are the 'idiots'?

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 19:29

I hope the CWU’s lawyers asked whether Royal Mail would have made their challenge to the result if those people who had filmed themselves, and posted clips on social media, has been voting ‘no’ ???
You can bloody bet they wouldn’t have, even though such actions would have been a similar breach...

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 20:10

wandle wrote:I hope the CWU’s lawyers asked whether Royal Mail would have made their challenge to the result if those people who had filmed themselves, and posted clips on social media, has been voting ‘no’ ???
You can bloody bet they wouldn’t have, even though such actions would have been a similar breach...


Good point wandle. What would happen if in the next ballot just one member deliberately posted a video of themself taking their ballot paper from the frame & completing it in the workplace.
Would that be enough evidence for the same high court proceedings?

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 20:31

Them cockney spivs and their shitty comms department need to feck off . Tubthumping rhetoric only gets you so far. :roll:

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 20:41

rogersh wrote:
wandle wrote:I hope the CWU’s lawyers asked whether Royal Mail would have made their challenge to the result if those people who had filmed themselves, and posted clips on social media, has been voting ‘no’ ???
You can bloody bet they wouldn’t have, even though such actions would have been a similar breach...


Good point wandle. What would happen if in the next ballot just one member deliberately posted a video of themself taking their ballot paper from the frame & completing it in the workplace.
Would that be enough evidence for the same high court proceedings?


You're both completely missing the point.
The judges didn't rule against the union because members opened their ballot papers at work or because they posted it online.

They ruled against the union because the union actively encouraged members to do it.

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 20:55

Woody Guthrie wrote:
rogersh wrote:
wandle wrote:I hope the CWU’s lawyers asked whether Royal Mail would have made their challenge to the result if those people who had filmed themselves, and posted clips on social media, has been voting ‘no’ ???
You can bloody bet they wouldn’t have, even though such actions would have been a similar breach...


Good point wandle. What would happen if in the next ballot just one member deliberately posted a video of themself taking their ballot paper from the frame & completing it in the workplace.
Would that be enough evidence for the same high court proceedings?


You're both completely missing the point.
The judges didn't rule against the union because members opened their ballot papers at work or because they posted it online.

They ruled against the union because the union actively encouraged members to do it.


Is that why the judges only took two minutes reach their verdict.
The judge said the CWU were not intentionally unlawful.

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 21:40

Leo lion gtf

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 21:43

Neither of those points change the fact that the ruling went against the union because it actively encouraged members to open their ballot papers in the office and post evidence of that online.

Opening your ballot paper is not unlawful, posting it online is not unlawful, a union encouraging members to do so is unlawful.

Not meaning to break the law is the weakest of defences.
Try it if you're ever up in front of a judge.

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 21:57

The danger in misunderstanding this ruling and blaming the wrong people (either members or the 'establishment') is that we fail to learn from our mistakes.

This is not a stitch up or a case of the judiciary closing ranks with big business it is a very basic amateurish mistake by the communications department of the CWU. The law on workplace ballots is very simple, ballot papers are sent to members home addresses where they can vote in secret free from real and perceived influence or intimidation from their peers. Anything that interferes with that process is automatically unlawful.

A first year law student would have known that this strategy was likely to be challenged so the question is was the legal advice the CWU received shockingly bad or did HQ just choose to ignore it?

Who made these decisions and are they still in post free to make more bad choices?

It's our future that's in the hands of what appears to be a bunch of incompetent fools.

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 22:03

Woody Guthrie wrote:The danger in misunderstanding this ruling and blaming the wrong people (either members or the 'establishment') is that we fail to learn from our mistakes.

This is not a stitch up or a case of the judiciary closing ranks with big business it is a very basic amateurish mistake by the communications department of the CWU. The law on workplace ballots is very simple, ballot papers are sent to members home addresses where they can vote in secret free from real and perceived influence or intimidation from their peers. Anything that interferes with that process is automatically unlawful.

A first year law student would have known that this strategy was likely to be challenged so the question is was the legal advice the CWU received shockingly bad or did HQ just choose to ignore it?

Who made these decisions and are they still in post free to make more bad choices?

It's our future that's in the hands of what appears to be a bunch of incompetent fools.


spot on mate, :Applause

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 22:23

Woody Guthrie wrote:The danger in misunderstanding this ruling and blaming the wrong people (either members or the 'establishment') is that we fail to learn from our mistakes.

This is not a stitch up or a case of the judiciary closing ranks with big business it is a very basic amateurish mistake by the communications department of the CWU. The law on workplace ballots is very simple, ballot papers are sent to members home addresses where they can vote in secret free from real and perceived influence or intimidation from their peers. Anything that interferes with that process is automatically unlawful.

A first year law student would have known that this strategy was likely to be challenged so the question is was the legal advice the CWU received shockingly bad or did HQ just choose to ignore it?

Who made these decisions and are they still in post free to make more bad choices?

It's our future that's in the hands of what appears to be a bunch of incompetent fools.


Can you please supply evidence of where the CWU encouraged me to open and complete my ballot paper at work whilst being filmed at the same time for social media upload purposes??

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 22:42

Don't worry. We'll get another cringe inducing catchphrase 'n a wee lion emoji from the cwu, only thing they're capable of.
Now, just ballot us and stfu this time!

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 22:53

Can you please supply evidence of where the CWU encouraged me to open and complete my ballot paper at work whilst being filmed at the same time for social media upload purposes??


Branches were told to do it by HQ, reps were told to do it by their branches, members were told at gate meetings to do it by their reps. Let's not play dumb here.

The videos are still on both the official CWU Facebook page and their twitter feeds, go look for yourself.

If you're looking for something more personal I have no idea whether you were personally encouraged to do it.

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 23:09

parcelforce ballot still legal what are they waiting for now

CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

28 Nov 2019, 23:45

The crux of the matter is the legislation provided for the ballot to be by postal vote and the purposive approach to construction concludes this was to keep the act of voting away from the “frenzy whipped up” within a pressurised workplace as seen in years previous to the Act.

The nature of our jobs meant we could circumvent that provision and on the evidence presented, it seems the union did utilise that unique situation not envisaged to arise by the legislature; a situation that allowed at least some members to vote in a “frenzied” environment rather than at home.

Members not wishing to take part would stick out like a sore thumb, quashing any argument that there was no pressure - the exact pressure the legislation was designed to avoid.

Learn from our mistakes, like someone said above, keep it secret keep it safe needs printing next time.

Previous page Next page


Page 2 of 4   1, 2, 3, 4