What deal are you waiting for?

[postiewhite]

Either squeeze another £500 out of them or up the increase to 15% over 3 years with the £1500. I'd want that to a vote

[k979aaa]

Either squeeze another £500 out of them or up the increase to 15% over 3 years with the £1500. I'd want that to a vote

If we all hold out it can happen but change will come but it is coming anyway!

[postiewhite]

Either squeeze another £500 out of them or up the increase to 15% over 3 years with the £1500. I'd want that to a vote

If we all hold out it can happen but change will come but it is coming anyway!

Yeah. The big thing for me would be no Sunday working and not much later on delivery plus to keep the sick pay. Everyone's circumstances/ priorities are different though. I've definitely dreaded compulsory Sunday working. That's when I'd leave.

[twoloops]

Any change in start & finish times, you can keep your deal & pay rise

[k979aaa]

Any change in start & finish times, you can keep your deal & pay rise

I remember delivering at 6:15 am but times have changed we need a recompense for this change but ultimately this is why we should have the procedures that were in place for those who are redundant surplus to requirement! Change happens but it need not be so brutal about it sorry if this upsets people but that is what change is!

[stevejm]

This is exactly the issue. If the CWU had a proper legal team they would have pointed out to the CWU that calling that ballot would allow the agenda for growth to be attacked and decimated.
After that the union lost, not only the dispute now, but the years and effort coming to that original agreement.

a proper legal team is needed - it would never have allowed that clause to be inserted into the previous agreement as it takes away all leverage the cwu has - or at least a sub clause could and should have been added saying that annual wage increase must match inflation or some variant - similar to the triple lock for pensions. The RM would be mad to agree to that so the CWU could have said, well if you don't agree to that we don't agree to a clause stipulating that strike action null and voids this agreement - it's not that difficult but sometimes I really despair about the CWU - they need to up their game considerably.

[stevejm]

This is exactly the issue. If the CWU had a proper legal team they would have pointed out to the CWU that calling that ballot would allow the agenda for growth to be attacked and decimated.
After that the union lost, not only the dispute now, but the years and effort coming to that original agreement.

a proper legal team is needed - it would never have allowed that clause to be inserted into the previous agreement as it takes away all leverage the cwu has - or at least a sub clause could and should have been added saying that annual wage increase must match inflation or some variant - similar to the triple lock for pensions. The RM would be mad to agree to that so the CWU could have said, well if you don't agree to that we don't agree to a clause stipulating that strike action null and voids this agreement - it's not that difficult but sometimes I really despair about the CWU - they need to up their game considerably.

[stevejm]

Royal Mail already werent adhering to the agreement by imposing the 2% by exeuctive action without negotiating

So if RM can refuse to adhere to the agreement without consequence, it doesnt matter if the agreement is ripped up or not - its not being adhered to so not worth the paper its written on

If RM told the union they werent going to abide by it any longer, what is the union supposed to do? Do nothing? Refuse to take action because.....the agreement that is already not being honoured will get torn up?

The fact that RM wasnt honoring the agreement is the REASON strike action was called

''Im going to keep punching you in the face, and if you dare punch me back, im going to keep punching you in the face''

''ok I wont punch you back will you stop punching me in the face?''

''no''

The point being if we never took action the agreement was out the window regardless - RM had no intentions of sticking to it.

Then what you are saying is that even if we get an agreement next week it means nothing. It’s not worth the paper it’s written on and the union are powerless to stop the changes.

Makes you wonder what the point of any of these talks are.
[/quote
well of course! R.M are not to be trusted as shown by actions, the poor performance in front of MPs - and of course agreeing to stop revision activity whilst in talks but carrying on regardless - bunch of vipers - no trust factor at all ..... if the board were on trust pilot it'd be a negative 5 star score