Vote No.

[sweepster70]

I think now is a good time to get an independent health and safety review on our working conditions

None of our vans have air con! Not even the new ones

At the moment some rounds in our office are doing the steeper more physical loops first in the morning before it gets too hot

But that won’t be possible if we’re starting later!!

For a company that’s supposedly big on health and safety I just can’t believe they’re even contemplating making us work at the hotter end of the day

Come on union get your thumb outta your arse come send a health and safety rep round West Yorkshire see if they survive the hills in this heat

Our new vans have air con but you have to use it sparingly otherwise it drain s the battery and we've been told to start 30 minutes early because of the heat so if the new later start times come In will they ask us to start 1hr 30 minutes early when it's hot?

Is this a real reply, or just made up?

[pieoftheday]

Yup real reply

[smartin1982]

We’ll said drake,at the end of the day people need a job,yes delivery’s are big but you have a start time/finish time

Can’t believe people are still being this short sighted and naive re start and finish times. If this deal with later start times is voted through now l, how long do you think it’ll be before they try to implement commit to deliver ?
This is just the beginning of the end of everything good (and sensible delivery wise) about this job.

[LouBarlow]

We’ll said drake,at the end of the day people need a job,yes delivery’s are big but you have a start time/finish time

Can’t believe people are still being this short sighted and naive re start and finish times. If this deal with later start times is voted through now l, how long do you think it’ll be before they try to implement commit to deliver ?
This is just the beginning of the end of everything good (and sensible delivery wise) about this job.

How will having no deal in place prevent them bringing in ‘commit to deliver’?

[Valentina@1]

If the business halved our pay somehow & CwU got a quarter of it back this Lou bloke would claim a win,stop this nonsense ffs
Where do we draw line?

[LouBarlow]

If the business halved our pay somehow & CwU got a quarter of it back this Lou bloke would claim a win,stop this nonsense ffs
Where do we draw line?

Not at all. I’ve always said the deal is terrible, but not having one is worse. I’ve never defended the agreement.

[LancePercival]

[Woody Guthrie]

Not at all. I’ve always said the deal is terrible, but not having one is worse. I’ve never defended the agreement.

This is the polemic world we live in.
You have to be for or against something.
There is no nuance, no recognition that you can be against something but even more against the alternative.

What do people actually think rejecting this agreement will result in?

I'm not asking for a comprehensive plan because the usual suspects will bleat that it's up to the union to come up with a plan b.

Just what do you think will happen.
Day 1.
Week 1.
Month 1.
Year 1.
Anything?
Anyone?
Any ideas?

[pieoftheday]

Vote No

[stevejm]

Not at all. I’ve always said the deal is terrible, but not having one is worse. I’ve never defended the agreement.

This is the polemic world we live in.
You have to be for or against something.
There is no nuance, no recognition that you can be against something but even more against the alternative.

What do people actually think rejecting this agreement will result in?

I'm not asking for a comprehensive plan because the usual suspects will bleat that it's up to the union to come up with a plan b.

Just what do you think will happen.
Day 1.
Week 1.
Month 1.
Year 1.
Anything?
Anyone?
Any ideas?

You're missing the point. You've negotiated an agreement. Let us vote on it. Then we will all have to live with the consequences if it's a no vote.

With-holding the vote is undemocratic.

Being part of an organisation which says you can have a vote but only if you vote 'yes' is worse than losing my job - i can go get another job but I can't live with having my rights trampled on , not by people or organisations.

And lets face it, with a 'no' vote, the subsequent actions that the company takes will see them do everything to increase the efficiency so that the company is more profitable and there are no job losses.

Our working conditions would be worse but then "quiet quitting" and massive increase of sickness would be a drag on any productivity gains they hoped to make. Which is why the Union had the mantra that they have to take the workforce with them.

In the end the company would have to face more parliamentary enquiries, more uncertainty with customer retention and an uncertain future - there'd be in a space not too different from where they've been the last year.

[pieoftheday]

The above post makes a good point, lets just vote if indeed there is an agreement? If its yes then its yes and we move on if it's no, I dunno? But if the vote is being delayed and delayed then why? If they're are still in talks then as I've already said there is no agreement because theres nothing more to discuss if they've agreed

[Woody Guthrie]

You're missing the point, You've negotiated an agreement. Let us vote on it. Then we will all have to live with the consequences if it's a no vote.

I'm not.
This is the "vote no" thread.
I believe there is a "give us our vote" thread elsewhere.

Lou was not arguing that we shouldn't have a vote, neither was I.

[nuisance]

Not at all. I’ve always said the deal is terrible, but not having one is worse. I’ve never defended the agreement.

This is the polemic world we live in.
You have to be for or against something.
There is no nuance, no recognition that you can be against something but even more against the alternative.

What do people actually think rejecting this agreement will result in?

I'm not asking for a comprehensive plan because the usual suspects will bleat that it's up to the union to come up with a plan b.

Just what do you think will happen.
Day 1.
Week 1.
Month 1.
Year 1.
Anything?
Anyone?
Any ideas?

Well if the workforce isn't compliant, working and making money, management would have to have some more sensible ideas. All along we have continued to deliver the service. The strikes didn't even last as long as RMs deliberate failures so they had no impact.

You can only respond to the alternatives in front of you, not pie in the sky scenarios that may or may not happen. If the consequences of the agreement they want us to sign up to are unacceptable, which they are, we must reject it. Hopefully by voting no, but if a yes vote wins, by moving on. You can't vote to support something worse and unacceptable. If the outcome turns out worse and unacceptable anyway, our options for not accepting that need to be explored. Please stop encouraging us to do something ridiculous and support this agreement to detrimental change.

[Woody Guthrie]

Please stop encouraging us to do something ridiculous and support this agreement to detrimental change.

Yet it's fine to encourage people to vote no without any consideration that the alternative may lead to more and faster detrimental change?

Your idea of ridiculous is different to mine.

[stevejm]

You're missing the point, You've negotiated an agreement. Let us vote on it. Then we will all have to live with the consequences if it's a no vote.

I'm not.
This is the "vote no" thread.
I believe there is a "give us our vote" thread elsewhere.

Lou was not arguing that we shouldn't have a vote, neither was I.

You also asked what does anybody think will happen after a no vote - I gave you my views. Deterioration in T&G, no huge job losses, deterioration in performance and critically profitability despite RM's best efforts to increase efficiency