How we Square the circle

[Valentina@1]

All I’m expecting from this meeting today is a poxy joint statement saying that everything sorted regarding these revisions & ballot be out in week or so

At least that would be better than a statement saying what they've agreed what to discuss at today's meeting and further meetings will now take place later this week!

Wouldn’t put it past this mob

[RTP]

Looks like the status quo holds the field again.

ie...no communication today

[LouBarlow]

How can you agree with him?

He didn’t answer the question

You asked he answered. I get it, you and your intricate experience with employment law doesn’t agree, but it is what it is.

viewtopic.php?p=1057854#p1057854

[Acca Dacca]

How can you agree with him?

He didn’t answer the question

You asked he answered. I get it, you and your intricate experience with employment law doesn’t agree, but it is what it is.

viewtopic.php?p=1057854#p1057854

He never answered the question Lou

Since you agree with him, whatever that means, perhaps you can answer it.

Here is the question again;

How can Royal Mail enforce contractual changes without an agreement, collective or otherwise, without resorting to fire and rehire and the legal repercussions of unfair dismissal that come with that?

Dont tell me that its not illegal for RM to give notice they want to change our contracts
Dont tell me that its not illegal for RM to ask us to change our contracts
Dont tell me other businesses have annualised hours

Im not asking that.

Without our agreement, tell me how the business can make contractual changes without going down the fire and rehire route of those who dont agree please.

[redlen]

LouBarlow

Actually, the 90 days stated in that link for change of contractual terms is for redundancy/Fire and rehire/moving to a new location etc

The required changes to Sick Pay only 30 days' notice required

[Valentina@1]

I’ll wait

[Valentina@1]

He still not answered question

[LouBarlow]

He never answered the question Lou

Since you agree with him, whatever that means, perhaps you can answer it.

Here is the question again;

How can Royal Mail enforce contractual changes without an agreement, collective or otherwise, without resorting to fire and rehire and the legal repercussions of unfair dismissal that come with that?

Dont tell me that its not illegal for RM to give notice they want to change our contracts
Dont tell me that its not illegal for RM to ask us to change our contracts
Dont tell me other businesses have annualised hours

Im not asking that.

Without our agreement, tell me how the business can make contractual changes without going down the fire and rehire route of those who dont agree please.

He provided the answer. Collective bargaining or imposition. The trade union representing us has agreed to the change in principal, if we disagree it equates to working under protest. You can read the following for more information.

https://www.acas.org.uk/changing-an-emp ... -be-agreed

[redlen]

Does the CWU Constitution not state any collective bargained agreement has to be ratified by the membership to become effective?

[Acca Dacca]

He never answered the question Lou

Since you agree with him, whatever that means, perhaps you can answer it.

Here is the question again;

How can Royal Mail enforce contractual changes without an agreement, collective or otherwise, without resorting to fire and rehire and the legal repercussions of unfair dismissal that come with that?

Dont tell me that its not illegal for RM to give notice they want to change our contracts
Dont tell me that its not illegal for RM to ask us to change our contracts
Dont tell me other businesses have annualised hours

Im not asking that.

Without our agreement, tell me how the business can make contractual changes without going down the fire and rehire route of those who dont agree please.

He provided the answer. Collective bargaining or imposition. The trade union representing us has agreed to the change in principal, if we disagree it equates to working under protest. You can read the following for more information.

https://www.acas.org.uk/changing-an-emp ... -be-agreed

Yes so if we disagree then RM will be challenged and risk constructive dismissal claims

Which is what ive been saying from the start, that its not as easy as it is made out for RM to change our contracts without agreement and without the repercussions of being challenged

[redlen]

The problem I have is that the courts rarely recognise trade union agreements unless explicitly implied.

The CWU constitution states any collective bargained agreement has to be ratified by the membership to become effective yet?

As the CWU is the designated affiliated trade union in the business, they can make and recommend decisions as an implied term in your contract of employment.

This will be for the courts to decide if it gets ugly at the Employment Tribunal Service.

[LouBarlow]

The problem I have is that the courts rarely recognise trade union agreements unless explicitly implied.

The CWU constitution states any collective bargained agreement has to be ratified by the membership to become effective yet?

As the CWU is the designated affiliated trade union in the business, they can make and recommend decisions. But that does not take precedent over the Employment Rights Act and employee protections.

This will be for the courts to decide if it gets ugly at the Employment Tribunal Service.

It is a legal minefield, but I believe Martin indicated before, that the union has legal power, via collective bargaining, to bring about contractual change if necessary to prevent loss of jobs or possible insolvency. They are working to defend employees, and even if said employees want to sink the company they work for, they have legal precedent to protect them from this.

[redlen]

The problem I have is that the courts rarely recognise trade union agreements unless explicitly implied.

The CWU constitution states any collective bargained agreement has to be ratified by the membership to become effective yet?

As the CWU is the designated affiliated trade union in the business, they can make and recommend decisions. But that does not take precedent over the Employment Rights Act and employee protections.

This will be for the courts to decide if it gets ugly at the Employment Tribunal Service.

It is a legal minefield, but I believe Martin indicated before, that the union has legal power, via collective bargaining, to bring about contractual change if necessary to prevent loss of jobs or possible insolvency. They are working to defend employees, and even if said employees want to sink the company they work for, they have legal precedent to protect them from this.

Yet prescribed contractual terms are binding, unlike implied terms


This is the problem

The CWU Constitution states any collective bargained agreement has to be ratified by the members to become effective. That is supported through custom and practice yet

The law states

As the CWU is the designated affiliated trade union in the business, they can make and recommend decisions as an implied term in your contract of employment.

A legal minefield which i feel the CWU is being very clandestine about

[sindba]

They can't change our contractual terms without agreement or fire / rehire. It's really that simple.

[redlen]

They can't change our contractual terms without agreement or fire / rehire. It's really that simple.

Well, they can if the economic stability of the business is in jeopardy. Look at.

Tesco, British Gas as examples