FAO Martin Walsh !!!

[Acca Dacca]

ACCA DECCA you live in cloud cuckoo land ... Senior bod with cushieest walk in the office

No wonder u do not want change

Who is Acca Decca?

[rmchat112]

You really are dumb aren't you.

Do you not get it

Striking and ia notice would add pressure on both sides to get a deal done

Dumb as f**k

I'll say it again

Calling for more strikes on one hand whilst saying commit to deliver should be implemented on the other = clown

if you believe the above, then you too are a clown

Haha your so thick!

Calling for more strike is just leverage

I didn't read anywhere commit to deliver should be implemented it's just an idea and like any idea swings and roundabouts

[Acca Dacca]

You really are dumb aren't you.

Do you not get it

Striking and ia notice would add pressure on both sides to get a deal done

Dumb as f**k

I'll say it again

Calling for more strikes on one hand whilst saying commit to deliver should be implemented on the other = clown

if you believe the above, then you too are a clown

Haha your so thick!

Calling for more strike is just leverage

I didn't read anywhere commit to deliver should be implemented it's just an idea and like any idea swings and roundabouts

Then maybe you should go back and read the thread, clown.

Any postie advocating committing to deliver what workload THE MANAGERS decide is fair whilst calling for more strikes to be called against those same senior managers is a clown - dress it up any way you want, thats what you are.

[rmchat112]

Dumb and thickest as they come you are

Biggest clown of them all

ACCA DECCA

Woops typo

[Acca Dacca]

Dumb and thickest as they come you are

Biggest clown of them all

ACCA DECCA

Woops typo

Well at least it's not a school night.

[rmchat112]

You really are dumb aren't you.

Do you not get it

Striking and ia notice would add pressure on both sides to get a deal done

Dumb as f**k

I'll say it again

Calling for more strikes on one hand whilst saying commit to deliver should be implemented on the other = clown

if you believe the above, then you too are a clown

Haha your so thick!

Calling for more strike is just leverage

I didn't read anywhere commit to deliver should be implemented it's just an idea and like any idea swings and roundabouts

Then maybe you should go back and read the thread, clown.

Any postie advocating committing to deliver what workload THE MANAGERS decide is fair whilst calling for more strikes to be called against those same senior managers is a clown - dress it up any way you want, thats what you are.

You really are dumb

It's black and white by the way

Not deliver work manger thinks is fair but just deliver your walk I read

Say it again Dumbo strikes are just leverage

[Acca Dacca]

You really are dumb aren't you.

Do you not get it

Striking and ia notice would add pressure on both sides to get a deal done

Dumb as f**k

I'll say it again

Calling for more strikes on one hand whilst saying commit to deliver should be implemented on the other = clown

if you believe the above, then you too are a clown

Haha your so thick!

Calling for more strike is just leverage

I didn't read anywhere commit to deliver should be implemented it's just an idea and like any idea swings and roundabouts

Then maybe you should go back and read the thread, clown.

Any postie advocating committing to deliver what workload THE MANAGERS decide is fair whilst calling for more strikes to be called against those same senior managers is a clown - dress it up any way you want, thats what you are.

You really are dumb

It's black and white by the way

Not deliver work manger thinks is fair but just deliver your walk I read

Say it again Dumbo strikes are just leverage

And who do you think decides how big ''your walk'' is, Brains?

And what do you think happens when the strikes are called for leverage and still no resolution happens?

[rmchat112]

Revisions are the process to decide the fairness of your walks with union consultation

Time for the union reps to earn the crust I think and sit together with coms and planners to equalise walks

It's not rocket science

If all walks had the same weighted items per work hour target to take account of all variables and it's all fair and achievable what's the problem

I suppose ACCA would not get the concept as he's a senior bod and expects the lightest walk of them all

[rmchat112]

And I am sure majority would agree that putting a deadline on the talks with strike notice would set a deadline for when a deal would have to be done

So would more likely to be done as it's just basic Parkinson's law

[aiden01]

For goodness sake another thread needs closed down

[pinstripe]

And the fact you or the CWU do not recognise there is already a 2 teir workforce is an issue as there has been for decades, if union really beleive in pay parity lets equalize everyone's pay don't just pick and choose, like I said how is it fair colleague is getting over £2000 a year more than I am for doing the same job... it is not fair!

The reason is that these people have been here for decades. They have kept their allowances from the past because the union and RM agreed that they would keep them for accepting changes that RM wanted to impose. This isn’t the first time RM have wanted changes, in the past they reached a compromise which included employees keeping certain allowances.

Should they lose these allowances because you think it’s unfair they take home more money than you?

[CRIBMAD]

FFS Shut up you shower of w*****s !

[k979aaa]

And the fact you or the CWU do not recognise there is already a 2 teir workforce is an issue as there has been for decades, if union really beleive in pay parity lets equalize everyone's pay don't just pick and choose, like I said how is it fair colleague is getting over £2000 a year more than I am for doing the same job... it is not fair!

The reason is that these people have been here for decades. They have kept their allowances from the past because the union and RM agreed that they would keep them for accepting changes that RM wanted to impose. This isn’t the first time RM have wanted changes, in the past they reached a compromise which included employees keeping certain allowances.

Should they lose these allowances because you think it’s unfair they take home more money than you?

And should be all be on the new contract of £11.30 per hour? a race to the bottom.

[adamanti]

Commit to deliver. Obviously some people are not getting what is going on with the latest revisions. Some thing's to consider. A lot of us had walk's pre revision that quite often took you over your time on busy day's. Common to be anything from 30-40 minutes over. Fine, choice of o/t or cut off. Under new revision estimated extra put on to van share is around 1 HR 20 for each postie on an average day. Are you getting the picture here. Now on a busy day that extra 1 HR 20 goes up by say an extra 20 minutes per postie. Add that to your own original round and work out your finish time. Add into that later start times, much later if annulized hours comes in and the icing on the cake, commit to deliver. But hey, the job need's to change right.

[pinstripe]

And the fact you or the CWU do not recognise there is already a 2 teir workforce is an issue as there has been for decades, if union really beleive in pay parity lets equalize everyone's pay don't just pick and choose, like I said how is it fair colleague is getting over £2000 a year more than I am for doing the same job... it is not fair!

The reason is that these people have been here for decades. They have kept their allowances from the past because the union and RM agreed that they would keep them for accepting changes that RM wanted to impose. This isn’t the first time RM have wanted changes, in the past they reached a compromise which included employees keeping certain allowances.

Should they lose these allowances because you think it’s unfair they take home more money than you?

And should be all be on the new contract of £11.30 per hour? a race to the bottom.

You can be quite sure that RM won’t increase wages so everyone is on the same, but then, some posters on here seem to like the idea that some employees should actually lose wages because they themselves, don’t have the seniority (and therefore protected allowances) built up through decades of service.

RM: We’re changing your job
Employee: I’ll lose my allowances, I’ll be worse off
RM: we really need to change your job, what if we change it and you keep your allowances?
Employee: So, if I agree to you changing my job, I’ll keep my allowances?
RM: Yes
Employee: For how long?
RM: Until you either leave or retire
Employee: Ok, I accept the changes you’re asking for

Fast forward 15-20-25 years

Different Employee: waaah, boo, he gets more than me, it’s not fair


As an aside, part of RM’s proposals was a removal of certain ‘allowances’, much as the original poster states he wants to see