Union updates

[thedonkey]

Everytime I read a union update regarding the current dispute I get a feeling we are being primed for yet another shafting.

[Acca Dacca]

Thats because we are

[Clappedoutpostie]

That’s not the unions fault, their job is to reduce the level of shafting.

[Jack1960]

That’s not the unions fault, their job is to reduce the level of shafting.

Thats a very good point and by the look of it, its whats happening

[Dexydog]

The union's job is to be honest in the first place.
They've talked tough, and suddenly a no strings ballot on pay has turned into us discussing how much shafting we're prepared to take for what ultimately isn't going to be an inflation based pay rise.
It's a disgrace.

[jagger]

That’s not the unions fault, their job is to reduce the level of shafting.

Got it in one

[TopperGas]

The union's job is to be honest in the first place.
They've talked tough, and suddenly a no strings ballot on pay has turned into us discussing how much shafting we're prepared to take for what ultimately isn't going to be an inflation based pay rise.
It's a disgrace.

I assume at the outset the union hoped to get a no strings pay rise but the BoD seem prepared to tough this one out, perhaps you'd sooner they held out for a no strings deal and then the BoD decide to make even more redundancies.

[Schiff]

The union's job is to be honest in the first place.
They've talked tough, and suddenly a no strings ballot on pay has turned into us discussing how much shafting we're prepared to take for what ultimately isn't going to be an inflation based pay rise.
It's a disgrace.

I assume at the outset the union hoped to get a no strings pay rise but the BoD seem prepared to tough this one out, perhaps you'd sooner they held out for a no strings deal and then the BoD decide to make even more redundancies.

Yes! They should hold out for a no strings deal. That is the only mandate that they have from their members.

[POSTPERSON50]

The union's job is to be honest in the first place.
They've talked tough, and suddenly a no strings ballot on pay has turned into us discussing how much shafting we're prepared to take for what ultimately isn't going to be an inflation based pay rise.
It's a disgrace.

I agree. One minute Royal Mail has declared war on the posties, tearing up all the agreements and trying to de-recognise the union, the next minute they are releasing joint statements.

The level of shafting will be high.

[Clappedoutpostie]

The union's job is to be honest in the first place.
They've talked tough, and suddenly a no strings ballot on pay has turned into us discussing how much shafting we're prepared to take for what ultimately isn't going to be an inflation based pay rise.
It's a disgrace.

How else would u suggest they talk? Ultimately it’s not upto the union what the payrise/deal is but I would suggest they will drive the hardest bargain they can.

[Dexydog]

Bottom line, one of the ballots was for a no strings pay rise.
That was the mandate.
The union is about to renage on that mandate given by its members.
Doesn't that make including strings a red line?

[POSTPERSON50]

The union's job is to be honest in the first place.
They've talked tough, and suddenly a no strings ballot on pay has turned into us discussing how much shafting we're prepared to take for what ultimately isn't going to be an inflation based pay rise.
It's a disgrace.

How else would u suggest they talk? Ultimately it’s not upto the union what the payrise/deal is but I would suggest they will drive the hardest bargain they can.

Driving a hard bargain won't be enough. With Thompson in place, they'll shaft us big style in January when Christmas is done.

Has nobody recognised that Royal Mail are happy to tear up every agreement we will ever have without notice?

[Dexydog]

The union's job is to be honest in the first place.
They've talked tough, and suddenly a no strings ballot on pay has turned into us discussing how much shafting we're prepared to take for what ultimately isn't going to be an inflation based pay rise.
It's a disgrace.

I assume at the outset the union hoped to get a no strings pay rise but the BoD seem prepared to tough this one out, perhaps you'd sooner they held out for a no strings deal and then the BoD decide to make even more redundancies.

What I'd prefer is when my union ask me to go on strike, the reason for me accepting to do so is upheld.
Of course it's a negotiation and no-one expects to come out of it happy, but the mandate has been thrown out of the window.
The union is up in arms over 1-2-1 meetings; how about this- the union does its own and find out what the majority find acceptable and then put that on a ballot paper?
They are deciding for us what is acceptable- obviously it will go to a ballot to be voted on, but surely its better to do more groundwork before agreeing anything.
I would say annualised hours is something the majority of posties are against, so why on earth is that not now a red line?
They should have agreed a no strings pay rise this year and then strings attached to next years- that's what the ballot was for pretty much.
ST/board of directors decided that wasn't an option for them, but so what?
You simply cannot ballot someone for one thing, then do the complete opposite.

[Dexydog]

To be clear, the union's job is a difficult one, especially given who they're negotiating with.
I appreciate that.
At the same time I don't think they're particularly good at their job.

[Clappedoutpostie]

Let’s all enjoy the rest of our Sunday and see what the union come back with when they update us next.