Yet we still wait for confirmation from the CWU that the legal protections end after the 23 December until the new Ballot is actioned and put into place on the 16 January.
This post is admitting you will be in breach of your contract of employment for striking on the 24 December.
Taking strike action on the 24 December will mean you are in breach of your contract of employment and subject to the disciplinary process.
Why is that, people are really worried about this development that has been festering now for a month with no response?
How about two year suspended dismissal as an example as an altrnative with the displinary process for breach of contract. Imagine having that hanging over your head for two years?
And people will be naive to think people are not going to be targeted over this strike action, especially reps with future erroneous conduct action for trivial transgressions.
In summary, they can dismiss an employee - what they choose to do is up to them and nobody can then say it was unfair, unless the approach was actually unfair. The legal basis would be sound though.
Practically, they won’t. Would be suicide and they wouldn’t be able to manage the fallout administratively, let alone operationally.
However you raise an important point, they may chose to use other means. You’ve given one example.
I think another potential, used in other disputes of a smaller size is just issue new contracts on a take it or leave it basis. You either accept or you don’t. They would be banking on the fact majority would end up accepting for fear of losing jobs.
Yet we still wait for confirmation from the CWU that the legal protections end after the 23 December until the new Ballot is actioned and put into place on the 16 January.
This post is admitting you will be in breach of your contract of employment for striking on the 24 December.
Taking strike action on the 24 December will mean you are in breach of your contract of employment and subject to the disciplinary process.
Why is that, people are really worried about this development that has been festering now for a month with no response?
How about two year suspended dismissal as an example as an altrnative with the displinary process for breach of contract. Imagine having that hanging over your head for two years?
And people will be naive to think people are not going to be targeted over this strike action, especially reps with future erroneous conduct action for trivial transgressions.
In summary, they can dismiss an employee - what they choose to do is up to them and nobody can then say it was unfair, unless the approach was actually unfair. The legal basis would be sound though.
Practically, they won’t. Would be suicide and they wouldn’t be able to manage the fallout administratively, let alone operationally.
However you raise an important point, they may chose to use other means. You’ve given one example.
I think another potential, used in other disputes of a smaller size is just issue new contracts on a take it or leave it basis. You either accept or you don’t. They would be banking on the fact majority would end up accepting for fear of losing jobs.
It’s very extreme but it’s entirely plausible.
What about suing the Union for encouraging unlawful IA.
That's got to be possible surely.
Yet we still wait for confirmation from the CWU that the legal protections end after the 23 December until the new Ballot is actioned and put into place on the 16 January.
This post is admitting you will be in breach of your contract of employment for striking on the 24 December.
Taking strike action on the 24 December will mean you are in breach of your contract of employment and subject to the disciplinary process.
Why is that, people are really worried about this development that has been festering now for a month with no response?
How about two year suspended dismissal as an example as an altrnative with the displinary process for breach of contract. Imagine having that hanging over your head for two years?
And people will be naive to think people are not going to be targeted over this strike action, especially reps with future erroneous conduct action for trivial transgressions.
In summary, they can dismiss an employee - what they choose to do is up to them and nobody can then say it was unfair, unless the approach was actually unfair. The legal basis would be sound though.
Practically, they won’t. Would be suicide and they wouldn’t be able to manage the fallout administratively, let alone operationally.
However you raise an important point, they may chose to use other means. You’ve given one example.
I think another potential, used in other disputes of a smaller size is just issue new contracts on a take it or leave it basis. You either accept or you don’t. They would be banking on the fact majority would end up accepting for fear of losing jobs.
It’s very extreme but it’s entirely plausible.
What about suing the Union for encouraging unlawful IA.
That's got to be possible surely.
Industrial Action doesn’t become unlawful. It’s still lawful.
Choosing to to take action beyond 12 weeks jus means you have less legal protection and the employer has a lawful route to dismiss you.
Yet we still wait for confirmation from the CWU that the legal protections end after the 23 December until the new Ballot is actioned and put into place on the 16 January.
This post is admitting you will be in breach of your contract of employment for striking on the 24 December.
Taking strike action on the 24 December will mean you are in breach of your contract of employment and subject to the disciplinary process.
Why is that, people are really worried about this development that has been festering now for a month with no response?
How about two year suspended dismissal as an example as an altrnative with the displinary process for breach of contract. Imagine having that hanging over your head for two years?
And people will be naive to think people are not going to be targeted over this strike action, especially reps with future erroneous conduct action for trivial transgressions.
In summary, they can dismiss an employee - what they choose to do is up to them and nobody can then say it was unfair, unless the approach was actually unfair. The legal basis would be sound though.
Practically, they won’t. Would be suicide and they wouldn’t be able to manage the fallout administratively, let alone operationally.
However you raise an important point, they may chose to use other means. You’ve given one example.
I think another potential, used in other disputes of a smaller size is just issue new contracts on a take it or leave it basis. You either accept or you don’t. They would be banking on the fact majority would end up accepting for fear of losing jobs.
It’s very extreme but it’s entirely plausible.
What about suing the Union for encouraging unlawful IA.
That's got to be possible surely.
Industrial Action doesn’t become unlawful. It’s still lawful.
Choosing to to take action beyond 12 weeks jus means you have less legal protection and the employer has a lawful route to dismiss you.
The last line of your answer says it all. If people want to take that risk then do it. Personally I think the CWU should have had today and tomorrow instead of Saturday, that way this thread would have been null and void.
Reality is, there is a chance that royal mail are well within their rights ( and the law), to rip up our contracts and offer us new ones or show us the door, if we strike with no legal protection.
But why would Simon want to do that?.......oh hang on a minute, isn't that exactly what he's been wanting to do? Everything is unprecedented, until it happens. Simon could be rubbing his greasy hands together thinking a potential clusterfxxk again by the CWU could be handing him a legal way of getting what he wants. Did people stop sailing on p and o ferries when they did what they did? No. Joe public has no loyalties, anyone thinking there would be outrage are seriously deluded. It would be news for a couple of days then forgotten.
What about suing the Union for encouraging unlawful IA.
That's got to be possible surely.
All the action taken both before and after the 23rd is entirely legal, as a proper ballot was conducted in accordance with all the relevant legislation. You think if there was even a tiny error in the way it was conducted that RM’s legal time would not have challenged it in the courts??
You’re confusing strikes outside the legal protection period with unlawful (e.g. unballoted / wildcat strike action) the latter of which is, alas, now illegal, especially if incited by union officials.
Fact of the matter is he could stop paying us all tomorrow! But who has the skills we all do? And who will work on certain days? And If they do pull the trigger they will be f****d in the press. Stop having wet dreams simon oh and have a merry Christmas! It will take TWO WEEKS for the P45's too arrive and he probably has other work lined up like the teachers and doctors and civil service lined up!
In other words, there’s nothing you can do, you are not taking any additional risk by striking on 24th, it’s out your hands, you can’t save yourself, just your reputation with your colleagues, and if we all do get sacked, we bring all the strike breakers down with us too anyway.
Fact of the matter is he could stop paying us all tomorrow! But who has the skills we all do? And who will work on certain days? And If they do pull the trigger they will be f****d in the press. Stop having wet dreams simon oh and have a merry Christmas! It will take TWO WEEKS for the P45's too arrive and he probably has other work lined up like the teachers and doctors and civil service lined up!
What skills an most people will work any day just to have a job. I.e. agency..
Fact of the matter is he could stop paying us all tomorrow! But who has the skills we all do? And who will work on certain days? And If they do pull the trigger they will be f****d in the press. Stop having wet dreams simon oh and have a merry Christmas! It will take TWO WEEKS for the P45's too arrive and he probably has other work lined up like the teachers and doctors and civil service lined up!
What skills an most people will work any day just to have a job. I.e. agency..
In deliveries (my only function) i’d say It’s an unskilled job that requires experience for it not to be an absolute shite job for you, both in terms of dealing with the workload and also with managers and colleagues.