CWU : Ballot papers start to land from today : BUSINESS RECOVERY, TRANSFORMATION AND GROWTH AGREEMENT - CWU MEMBERS BALLOT - VOTE YES

[Anon14]

Royal Mail are lying to Parliamentary committees, to local MP's, to the media and public and to OFCOM. What makes you think they aren't lying to our union leaders?

Lying about what? And what evidence do you have to back this up? Evidence that RM, the CWU, the PEC and the independent arbitrators involved in negotiations aren’t privy to.

Did you watch the Parliamentary Committee hearings? Thompson sat there and lied about tracking workers via the "PVA's", staff being disciplined after being flagged on PDAs, about "rogue managers" telling staff to prioritize Tracked items, leaving mail in frames etc. I've also been in contact with my local MP and have written testimony which shows, at least at local level, major discrepancies in what they have been told and what is actually the case. I've witnessed first hand, managers clearing offices because they are "being inspected today" and have told us to clear frames regardless of whether or not we have time to complete. I've heard them on calls stating the office is clear when it is clearly not. I've also read several mainstream media articles where a spokesperson for Royal Mail has refuted claims that there are Nationwide issues regarding people not getting a 6 day mail service. Where is OFCOM? How do you think Royal Mail are continuing to fail the USO daily if they're being fully transparent with "independent arbitrators"?

Granted it's mostly what I've witnessed at local level but I strongly suspect it isn't just rogue managers and it's happening Nationwide to varying degrees. The fact that 1000's of us sent evidence to Darren Jones MP refuting the lies of ST prompting a second committee, would suggest this too.

I get it that members are feeling demoralised, this dispute (by RM's design) has been allowed to drag on for far too long. The job as we knew it has been obliterated through EA revisions and many people have quit the job entirely. Exactly what I suspect it was designed to do. The more people on the older contracts they can get out the door for free the better as far as the board is concerned. Well I'm not going anywhere and I'm not voting Yes to this sell out deal. I'm all for change if it's change for the better but this is clearly an attack on our T&Cs in the name of "modernisation" which seems to mean you do more for less. We're actually not that far away from being on minimum wage at this rate. Yes it's considered unskilled but it can be bloody brutal in the middle of winter and the wages should reflect this, as should the sick pay. I also don't fancy working in the dark either which we inevitably will when the later start/finish times come in.

The argument that we should vote yes because it's the best we are going to be offered doesn't cut it. Woody you're spinning this like a no vote is the weak option...."going back to Royal Mail cap in hand and begging for more". To me it's weak to accept these rotten T&Cs and real terms pay cut. If it was just the "pay rise/cut" without the attack on our start/finish times, seasonal working patterns, the sick pay, IHR etc. I would vote yes. As it stands I cannot, in good conscience, vote for something that will change the job to the extent that it is no longer the same job I signed up for. The early start/finish time is one of the main draws of this job for me as it allows me to take care of my other responsibilities outside of work. I know I'm not alone with this either. If this comes in I'll have to look for another job with similar hours which I'm guessing will be extremely difficult.

Also, due to the nature of the job i.e the physicality, being outdoors in all weather, the pressure from management to take more etc. it's no wonder we have such a high sickness rate. Any attack on that I cannot support either. Voting for something based on 'better the devil you know' is a legitimate strategy and I don't blame anyone who feels this is the case. I will not vote for something that I know is bad just because I'm led to believe the alternative MIGHT be worse. I'm willing to take that risk and continue to fight. If by some miracle the vote comes back as majority 'No' we need a change in leadership because this lot have messed this up spectacularly from day one. Poor communication, botched strikes and out of touch rhetoric. The last Live "debate" was the final slap in the face for me, refusing to acknowledge legitimate concerns of members and deleting comments on the only mode of communication available to members. All talk, tea and biscuits and no action. Win the vote, win the dispute? This doesn't feel like winning does it?

This is all great and dandy, but you said they were lying about the financial state of the company, which you have offered nothing to back up. At all. Like everyone else I ask that question, they serve up distractive bluster, because they can never answer it.

No I didn't, I just said they have a history of lying, but I wouldn't be surprised if the figures presented to the union were presented in a way that made it look worse than it actually is. It's not the first time they've used the "losing a million a day" sound bite is it?

[L8Hatter]

It's time you guys owned it.

Oh, do not even go there.

This shitshow is on 2 groups of people, RM and the CWU Union leadership.

If you'd asked me all the way through this dispute, "If you can only have one, your t & cs or a payrise, which would it be?" I'd have said, narkily, "the t & cs". I'm far from alone in prioritising my working conditions, security in ill health, and my work-life balance over money.

The union gambled our t & cs when they lead us into this and then f****d them when they combined the ballots.

As for RM, they do not deserve any staff, let alone their workforce who have seen their hard earned great reputation of being trustworthy grafters left in tatters by company policies that they couldn't even own up to under oath.

If you're trying to garner union support you're going the wrong way about it with comments like that. Just get back to representing your membership and stop spouting absolute lies.

At what stage could we have had a separate vote on the pay rise, that wasn't contingent on the ludicrous changes to t & cs that were proposed at the time. Or maybe I'm misremembering/misunderstanding?

[Woody Guthrie]

At no point.
It's ludicrous to believe that there would have been a separate vote on pay.
Who in their right mind would then vote for even the smallest amount of change?

Every pay deal has been linked to change or if you like to look on the positive side of life every change program has come with reward.

[zz666]

Why did the cwu bang on about a separate pay deal at the start? Distinctly remember Terry go on about a 1 year deal. It's a s**t deal.

[thefox]

Whens the result in? Im out of touch since I left the union.

Ballot closes 11th july i think so not long after that.

[Woody Guthrie]

Why did the cwu bang on about a separate pay deal at the start? Distinctly remember Terry go on about a 1 year deal. It's a s**t deal.

Because we didn't believe we needed a change agreement bearing in mind we had just signed one 18 months before.

Unfortunately Royal Mail tore it up and started imposing change so an agreement on change became necessary to try to mitigate the damage and protect members as much as possible.

[nuisance]

At no point.
It's ludicrous to believe that there would have been a separate vote on pay.
Who in their right mind would then vote for even the smallest amount of change?

Every pay deal has been linked to change or if you like to look on the positive side of life every change program has come with reward.

So every deal done has cost us worsening t & cs? Fantastic, it's a massive comfort to know that historically the union has always been pretty s**t.
There were separate ballots at the start of the dispute as soon as they were lumped together we weren't just looking at strings for our miles-less-than-inflation pay rise, but a robbery of our t & cs.

If we were always going to end up with this outcome, why were we encouraged to back random, ineffective strikes and lose money? I was doing it for the no strings pay rise and to fight the changes the union told us about. I wasn't doing it because it was going to give the green light to RM to screw up my working hours, take away reliable sick pay, bring in the seasonal flexing, cut IHR, see new recruits coming in on crappy contracts, but that is where the union's campaign of strikes have taken us to and now you expect a vote to approve of it? As if.

I'd vote for changes that benefit me. The union hasn't negotiated any, they're all detrimental to me so I voted against them. Since you insist on linking our pay to that now, well I'll just have to be happy to forfeit the pay rise, which isn't hard since its crap anyway.

[Woody Guthrie]

Since you insist on linking our pay to that now

I'm not Dave Ward ffs.
I'm trying to explain why they linked it and why they always have and always will.
It's not my call to actually do it.

So every deal done has cost us worsening t & cs?

Some have in some ways and improved them in others.
Sometimes it depends on the function, deliveries usually take the brunt.
Some things like MTSF and the way forward and the Single Dailly Delivery that brought us a 5 day week have improved our T&Cs and pay is of course a fundamental T&C to most people but lately... I would agree with you it's been at best damage limitation for about 15 years.

[LouBarlow]

So every deal done has cost us worsening t & cs? Fantastic, it's a massive comfort to know that historically the union has always been pretty s**t.

Nonsense. The union has performed miracles over the last ten years since privatisation. It is why now, all these changes at once are a shock to the system. They have kept them at bay until now, and even now, they have managed to secure a decent pay rise and lump sum out of a company losing millions.

[pieoftheday]

So every deal done has cost us worsening t & cs? Fantastic, it's a massive comfort to know that historically the union has always been pretty s**t.

Nonsense. The union has performed miracles over the last ten years since privatisation. It is why now, all these changes at once are a shock to the system. They have kept them at bay until now, and even now, they have managed to secure a decent pay rise and lump sum out of a company losing millions.

Not the old losing millions chestnut, giving away millions you mean

[L8Hatter]

So every deal done has cost us worsening t & cs? Fantastic, it's a massive comfort to know that historically the union has always been pretty s**t.

Nonsense. The union has performed miracles over the last ten years since privatisation. It is why now, all these changes at once are a shock to the system. They have kept them at bay until now, and even now, they have managed to secure a decent pay rise and lump sum out of a company losing millions.

Not the old losing millions chestnut, giving away millions you mean

That's what companies do, return dividends to shareholders (like a lot of us) when they make a profit. Which is why he said 'since' privatisation. It was Vince Cable and the coalition who created this mess, like so much that is wrong with The UK today.

[Woody Guthrie]

Giving away, losing, squandering, pissing up the wall.
It's still gone from our position.

I'm not really interested in accounts, on paper if you factor in my mortgage I'm bankrupt, add the value of my house and I'm solvent again, add the fact that I can't sell it cause I need to live in it and I'm screwed again you can see that accounts don't mean much.

What I do know is that Royal Mail has a broken, screwed up business model that doesn't work with the decline in letters so it does need to change or it will go the way of Blockbusters.

Do I have any confidence that the present crop of high flyers can do it or are even taking us in the right direction.

Do I f**k but there's not a great deal I can do about that and voting either way isn't going to change that fact.

[pieoftheday]

Giving away, losing, squandering, pissing up the wall.
It's still gone from our position.

I'm not really interested in accounts, on paper if you factor in my mortgage I'm bankrupt, add the value of my house and I'm solvent again, add the fact that I can't sell it cause I need to live in it and I'm screwed again you can see that accounts don't mean much.

What I do know is that Royal Mail has a broken, screwed up business model that doesn't work with the decline in letters so it does need to change or it will go the way of Blockbusters.

Do I have any confidence that the present crop of high flyers can do it or are even taking us in the right direction.

Do I f**k but there's not a great deal I can do about that and voting either way isn't going to change that fact.

Blockbusters is thriving, its called Netflix. I agree with your last comments, only way to change the way business is some kind of fight back, a revolution? Nah no fooker can't be arst

[LouBarlow]

Giving away, losing, squandering, pissing up the wall.
It's still gone from our position.

I'm not really interested in accounts, on paper if you factor in my mortgage I'm bankrupt, add the value of my house and I'm solvent again, add the fact that I can't sell it cause I need to live in it and I'm screwed again you can see that accounts don't mean much.

What I do know is that Royal Mail has a broken, screwed up business model that doesn't work with the decline in letters so it does need to change or it will go the way of Blockbusters.

Do I have any confidence that the present crop of high flyers can do it or are even taking us in the right direction.

Do I f**k but there's not a great deal I can do about that and voting either way isn't going to change that fact.

Blockbusters is thriving, its called Netflix. I agree with your last comments, only way to change the way business is some kind of fight back, a revolution? Nah no fooker can't be arst

Netflix is the perfect example of an company adapting to survive. They went from a DVD rental service to a streaming giant and flourished. Change is a necessity.

[pieoftheday]

I wasn't really comparing RM and Blockbusters but I take your point, however making terms and conditions worse for employees isn't necessary