You are either voting yes and backing the union or no and backing Simon Thompson, it’s that simple. If you voted yes last time, I don’t see any reason why you would vote no this time, things are 100 times worse.
Still voting yes even if talks haven't ended well. It's not the unions fault or even our fault that an agreement hasn't been done.
The board want the union out the way so as they can bull doze by stripping even more terms and conditions. Some other things that they could get rid of if we don't have a union.
No paid breaks, no delivery supplement, no night shift allowance, Sunday rate gone. You probably wouldn't be assigned to a designated shift like you are now, it would be a case of come in tomorrow for 12 then the next day 9. Your rest day wouldn't be on rotation it would be whatever the quietest day of the week was.
We have come this far, and it's up to us to vote with our head and not our feet. What ever the outcome its not going to be pretty, but at least we fought.
The compromise the membership have made is not to withdraw our labour, while negotiations are currently ongoing. We are not capitulating, our representatives are negotiating on our behalf.
If people are leaving on reduced VR terms have we negotiated a new MTSF?
If start times (and finish times) are now later have we already negotiated that?
Have we accepted the parcel hubs as a strategy and the consequent loss for a lot of delivery offices of oversized parcels? And the loss of work from MCs to the super hubs?
I thought one of the first things these new "intensive" talks were to address is the criteria for the revisions? Have these been negotiated and are our reps supposed to be involved?
As of Monday we are no longer allowed to take half our meal relief at the end of our duty. Was this negotiated? Is this part of our compromise?
What exactly are our representatives negotiating on our behalf? While Rome is burning .......
The societies of consumption and squandering of material resources are incompatible with the idea of economic growth and a clean planet.
What exactly could the union do to stop Royal Mail implementing change by executive action?
Ballot for strike action?
Pushing forward with change while in an industrial dispute is not about the change itself, it is page one of the union busting playbook.
It is designed to illicit exactly the response it has in the thread. A feeling that it's all inevitable and there's no point in continuing with the dispute.
Unless we force them to Royal Mail will not resolve this dispute, they want us to vote No to industrial action so that it can remove the union entirely from the equation and steamroll in the kind of changes that make what has been changed by executive action look like a favour from a benevolent uncle.
The entire employment model is up for grabs in this ballot, not just changes to MTSF or later start times.
The compromise the membership have made is not to withdraw our labour, while negotiations are currently ongoing. We are not capitulating, our representatives are negotiating on our behalf.
If people are leaving on reduced VR terms have we negotiated a new MTSF?
If start times (and finish times) are now later have we already negotiated that?
Have we accepted the parcel hubs as a strategy and the consequent loss for a lot of delivery offices of oversized parcels? And the loss of work from MCs to the super hubs?
I thought one of the first things these new "intensive" talks were to address is the criteria for the revisions? Have these been negotiated and are our reps supposed to be involved?
As of Monday we are no longer allowed to take half our meal relief at the end of our duty. Was this negotiated? Is this part of our compromise?
What exactly are our representatives negotiating on our behalf? While Rome is burning .......
We havnt been allowed to finish on half a meal relief for ages, we were told.if you don't use it tough you lose it! I can't see why you can't myself, if it's within your working hours, ?
We havent been allowed to finish on half a meal relief for ages, we were told if you don't use it tough you lose it! I can't see why you can't myself, if it's within your working hours?
It is also another part of a national agreement that has been broken.
The societies of consumption and squandering of material resources are incompatible with the idea of economic growth and a clean planet.
We havent been allowed to finish on half a meal relief for ages, we were told if you don't use it tough you lose it! I can't see why you can't myself, if it's within your working hours?
It is also another part of a national agreement that has been broken.
Was there an agreement that we could take half our meal relief at the end of the shift then?
What are they talking about now?
Genuine question. Until the ‘yes’ vote is confirmed Royal Mail won’t offer their next final offer so is it just the small detail they are trying to compromise?
It’s not as if the union and ST will all of a sudden agree on anything before the ballot results are announced.
Most likely they will keep on talking and texting and when the results are known they will then say they have agreed to talk again in the coming weeks but this time the talks will be super intensive.
I mean the 10% no strings has vanished and even listening to folk on here and in my office different postman want different things. Some will only vote yes to an agreement if it involves one thing and others will only vote yes if it’s something else.
The compromise the membership have made is not to withdraw our labour, while negotiations are currently ongoing. We are not capitulating, our representatives are negotiating on our behalf.
If people are leaving on reduced VR terms have we negotiated a new MTSF?
If start times (and finish times) are now later have we already negotiated that?
Have we accepted the parcel hubs as a strategy and the consequent loss for a lot of delivery offices of oversized parcels? And the loss of work from MCs to the super hubs?
I thought one of the first things these new "intensive" talks were to address is the criteria for the revisions? Have these been negotiated and are our reps supposed to be involved?
As of Monday we are no longer allowed to take half our meal relief at the end of our duty. Was this negotiated? Is this part of our compromise?
What exactly are our representatives negotiating on our behalf? While Rome is burning .......
None of that has been negotiated. My rep is involved in the revision, the proposals have been taken down and the one to ones have been suspended.
What you are describing is a tactic that's being used by the employer in this dispute. Its purpose is to make us feel like strike action is not a threat, and is useless. They want to make us think it's over and we've already lost. It's that simple.
What exactly could the union do to stop Royal Mail implementing change by executive action?
Ballot for strike action?
Pushing forward with change while in an industrial dispute is not about the change itself, it is page one of the union busting playbook.
It is designed to illicit exactly the response it has in the thread. A feeling that it's all inevitable and there's no point in continuing with the dispute.
Unless we force them to Royal Mail will not resolve this dispute, they want us to vote No to industrial action so that it can remove the union entirely from the equation and steamroll in the kind of changes that make what has been changed by executive action look like a favour from a benevolent uncle.
The entire employment model is up for grabs in this ballot, not just changes to MTSF or later start times.
one of the few who comes on here and talks sense. if we vote no then we will be totally f@@@ed.as above they would love it if a no vote or a low yes comes in
What exactly could the union do to stop Royal Mail implementing change by executive action?
Ballot for strike action?
Pushing forward with change while in an industrial dispute is not about the change itself, it is page one of the union busting playbook.
It is designed to illicit exactly the response it has in the thread. A feeling that it's all inevitable and there's no point in continuing with the dispute.
Unless we force them to Royal Mail will not resolve this dispute, they want us to vote No to industrial action so that it can remove the union entirely from the equation and steamroll in the kind of changes that make what has been changed by executive action look like a favour from a benevolent uncle.
The entire employment model is up for grabs in this ballot, not just changes to MTSF or later start times.
one of the few who comes on here and talks sense. if we vote no then we will be totally f@@@ed.as above they would love it if a no vote or a low yes comes in
Thats what RM are waiting to see. There's gonna be no serious offer till then. It is not one bit in RM's interests to preempt a massive 'Yes' result. Till the ballot results are announced, RM are gonna feed crumbs to hold back further action, whilst simultaneously trying to demoralise us into voting 'No'. The 'Yes' result is crucial to ending this dispute.
Have we accepted the parcel hubs as a strategy and the consequent loss for a lot of delivery offices of oversized parcels? And the loss of work from MCs to the super hubs?
What about the DOs were they've gone back to the walks taking the oversized out?
