Seriously worst post on here ive ever read delusional.
[/quote]
A little hypocritical don’t you think Aiden as you’ve started a thread in blue shirts complaining about how people throw insults at you because you have a different opinion to them
Afraid I must leave you now as I’ve always been taught not to argue with an idiot as they’ll only bring you down to their level and then beat you with experience
The union has to honour the ballot results and cannot make a deal without our agreement
If the majority of us vote no and the union doesn’t support us they’ll be forced out as they’re not acting in the interests of its members
So I’m not sure why you think we won’t have the backing of our union?
Surely you don’t think they’re stupid enough to do themselves out of a job??
The union has to honour the ballot result, but in the event of a no, what do you think RM will do? Do you think they will turn around and say ‘oh well, the posties haven’t agreed to our proposal, so I guess we just leave things the way they are, continue to lose millions a year, and give them a nice pay rise and lump sum anyway’ or do you think they will impose the changes they want to make regardless? Think about it.
You can’t just turn around and refuse to work under these conditions, despite what you seem to think. I mean you can, ultimately by leaving and getting another job.
The union has to honour the ballot results and cannot make a deal without our agreement
If the majority of us vote no and the union doesn’t support us they’ll be forced out as they’re not acting in the interests of its members
So I’m not sure why you think we won’t have the backing of our union?
Surely you don’t think they’re stupid enough to do themselves out of a job??
The union has to honour the ballot result, but in the event of a no, what do you think RM will do? Do you think they will turn around and say ‘oh well, the posties haven’t agreed to our proposal, so I guess we just leave things the way they are, continue to lose millions a year, and give them a nice pay rise and lump sum anyway’ or do you think they will impose the changes they want to make regardless? Think about it.
You can’t just turn around and refuse to work under these conditions, despite what you seem to think. I mean you can, ultimately by leaving and getting another job.
More scaremongering from Lou , I have voted no and many others intent on voting no will have done so by now ,
Your scaremongering tactics have a very little audience now Lou .
I can’t see any other than a no vote, already the company are going against the agreement and the joint statement, only last Wed there was a joint meeting Ward/McPherson stating both committed to the agreement/joint statement. Both saying we had to improve the quality of service and the USO and win back customers to grow the business.
The very next day in offices at our branch we were told Agency been stood down and overtime cut back/cancelled so we are actually failing more now rather than it improving. There was guys in our DO on Sat who took out tracked and specials only for 4 walks, not a letter or non tracked item was delivered.
The union has to honour the ballot results and cannot make a deal without our agreement
If the majority of us vote no and the union doesn’t support us they’ll be forced out as they’re not acting in the interests of its members
So I’m not sure why you think we won’t have the backing of our union?
Surely you don’t think they’re stupid enough to do themselves out of a job??
The union has to honour the ballot result, but in the event of a no, what do you think RM will do? Do you think they will turn around and say ‘oh well, the posties haven’t agreed to our proposal, so I guess we just leave things the way they are, continue to lose millions a year, and give them a nice pay rise and lump sum anyway’ or do you think they will impose the changes they want to make regardless? Think about it.
You can’t just turn around and refuse to work under these conditions, despite what you seem to think. I mean you can, ultimately by leaving and getting another job.
That’s the whole point Lou they can’t just impose changes without agreement if they could do you think they’d be bribing us with a lump sum and a pay rise?
I can’t see any other than a no vote, already the company are going against the agreement and the joint statement, only last Wed there was a joint meeting Ward/McPherson stating both committed to the agreement/joint statement. Both saying we had to improve the quality of service and the USO and win back customers to grow the business.
The very next day in offices at our branch we were told Agency been stood down and overtime cut back/cancelled so we are actually failing more now rather than it improving. There was guys in our DO on Sat who took out tracked and specials only for 4 walks, not a letter or non tracked item was delivered.
That would tie in with the sudden massive reduction in agency locally. Lucky is currently really quiet but if it gets a bit busier then that's probably an almost guaranteed failure
The union has to honour the ballot results and cannot make a deal without our agreement
If the majority of us vote no and the union doesn’t support us they’ll be forced out as they’re not acting in the interests of its members
So I’m not sure why you think we won’t have the backing of our union?
Surely you don’t think they’re stupid enough to do themselves out of a job??
The union has to honour the ballot result, but in the event of a no, what do you think RM will do? Do you think they will turn around and say ‘oh well, the posties haven’t agreed to our proposal, so I guess we just leave things the way they are, continue to lose millions a year, and give them a nice pay rise and lump sum anyway’ or do you think they will impose the changes they want to make regardless? Think about it.
You can’t just turn around and refuse to work under these conditions, despite what you seem to think. I mean you can, ultimately by leaving and getting another job.
That’s the whole point Lou they can’t just impose changes without agreement if they could do you think they’d be bribing us with a lump sum and a pay rise?
They want an agreement for sure, but the changes will be made regardless. They have literally said this very thing. I don’t know why people seem to refuse to believe them, especially with all the changes going on around us as we speak. They have said they are ploughing on regardless of a deal being accepted, as they need to adapt to survive. If you turn around and refuse to these changes, well then I guess they just stop paying you, but there won’t be unofficial or official strike action as you seem to imply, no matter the outcome of the vote.
The union has to honour the ballot results and cannot make a deal without our agreement
If the majority of us vote no and the union doesn’t support us they’ll be forced out as they’re not acting in the interests of its members
So I’m not sure why you think we won’t have the backing of our union?
Surely you don’t think they’re stupid enough to do themselves out of a job??
The union has to honour the ballot result, but in the event of a no, what do you think RM will do? Do you think they will turn around and say ‘oh well, the posties haven’t agreed to our proposal, so I guess we just leave things the way they are, continue to lose millions a year, and give them a nice pay rise and lump sum anyway’ or do you think they will impose the changes they want to make regardless? Think about it.
You can’t just turn around and refuse to work under these conditions, despite what you seem to think. I mean you can, ultimately by leaving and getting another job.
That’s the whole point Lou they can’t just impose changes without agreement if they could do you think they’d be bribing us with a lump sum and a pay rise?
They want an agreement for sure, but the changes will be made regardless. They have literally said this very thing. I don’t know why people seem to refuse to believe them, especially with all the changes going on around us as we speak. They have said they are ploughing on regardless of a deal being accepted, as they need to adapt to survive. If you turn around and refuse to these changes, well then I guess they just stop paying you, but there won’t be unofficial or official strike action as you seem to imply, no matter the outcome of the vote.
Why do they need an agreement then? Why did they go through the last 12 months? Why are they bothering with the payrise and lump sum?
If they really do think its their business to run, want the union to have less influence in the workplace and want to bring in the changes they want regardless - why havent they before now and why have they conceded anything at all?
I keep asking this question and never get an answer
If you tolerate this, then your paid break will be next
The union has to honour the ballot results and cannot make a deal without our agreement
If the majority of us vote no and the union doesn’t support us they’ll be forced out as they’re not acting in the interests of its members
So I’m not sure why you think we won’t have the backing of our union?
Surely you don’t think they’re stupid enough to do themselves out of a job??
The union has to honour the ballot result, but in the event of a no, what do you think RM will do? Do you think they will turn around and say ‘oh well, the posties haven’t agreed to our proposal, so I guess we just leave things the way they are, continue to lose millions a year, and give them a nice pay rise and lump sum anyway’ or do you think they will impose the changes they want to make regardless? Think about it.
You can’t just turn around and refuse to work under these conditions, despite what you seem to think. I mean you can, ultimately by leaving and getting another job.
That’s the whole point Lou they can’t just impose changes without agreement if they could do you think they’d be bribing us with a lump sum and a pay rise?
They want an agreement for sure, but the changes will be made regardless. They have literally said this very thing. I don’t know why people seem to refuse to believe them, especially with all the changes going on around us as we speak. They have said they are ploughing on regardless of a deal being accepted, as they need to adapt to survive. If you turn around and refuse to these changes, well then I guess they just stop paying you, but there won’t be unofficial or official strike action as you seem to imply, no matter the outcome of the vote.
Why do they need an agreement then? Why did they go through the last 12 months? Why are they bothering with the payrise and lump sum?
If they really do think its their business to run, want the union to have less influence in the workplace and want to bring in the changes they want regardless - why havent they before now and why have they conceded anything at all?
I keep asking this question and never get an answer
I’ve answered you before. This dispute has been going for nearly a year. They were bitter enough in the first place, but it would have been acting in bad faith to ram through change while still talking with the union. They had to wait either for discussions to finish and/or an agreement be signed.
As to why they want an agreement. I believe it has something to do with freeing up liquidity. Without a deal I don’t think they can access these extra funds, or it might be related to accessing future credit or something. Martin posted the exact answer before, so it wouldn’t be hard to find.
A nonsense reason. If they brought the changes they wanted in, they wouldnt be denied access to a credit facility because there was no agreement with a trade union.
A union that has already all but said they arent going to call anymore strikes.
As for 'they dont want to act in bad faith' part - it would be acting in pretty bad faith to ram through all the changes they want if their employees voted No to this agreement dont you think?
If you tolerate this, then your paid break will be next
A nonsense reason. If they brought the changes they wanted in, they wouldnt be denied access to a credit facility because there was no agreement with a trade union.
A union that has already all but said they arent going to call anymore strikes.
As for 'they dont want to act in bad faith' part - it would be acting in pretty bad faith to ram through all the changes they want if their employees voted No to this agreement dont you think?
They have already said that changes will happen because if they don’t the company is finished. It isn’t acting in bad faith. It is survival. The CWU and RM have bashed out this agreement. If we don’t agree with it, it isn’t in bad faith for them to then turn around and say ‘f**k you’ we are bringing in the changes anyway. The extra changes on top will be because they will have to save even more money if there is no agreement and access to said credit.
It is still mindblowing to me that we have members here who believe this is all some conspiracy. That RM is in fine financial shape, despite literally everyone involved telling them otherwise. As for questions nobody ever answers - where is your proof that RM, the CWU and the PEC are all fibbing about the financial state of RM? I can’t believe anyone in deliveries, can look at the amount of mail being handled today by them personally and think that things are a-ok.
A nonsense reason. If they brought the changes they wanted in, they wouldnt be denied access to a credit facility because there was no agreement with a trade union.
A union that has already all but said they arent going to call anymore strikes.
As for 'they dont want to act in bad faith' part - it would be acting in pretty bad faith to ram through all the changes they want if their employees voted No to this agreement dont you think?
They have already said that changes will happen because if they don’t the company is finished. It isn’t acting in bad faith. It is survival. The CWU and RM have bashed out this agreement. If we don’t agree with it, it isn’t in bad faith for them to then turn around and say ‘f**k you’ we are bringing in the changes anyway. The extra changes on top will be because they will have to save even more money if there is no agreement and access to said credit.
It is still mindblowing to me that we have members here who believe this is all some conspiracy. That RM is in fine financial shape, despite literally everyone involved telling them otherwise. As for questions nobody ever answers - where is your proof that RM, the CWU and the PEC are all fibbing about the financial state of RM? I can’t believe anyone in deliveries, can look at the amount of mail being handled today by them personally and think that things are a-ok.
First things first, the mail in my office relative to the number of people delivering it is busy enough - busy enough that many people cant complete their duty.
Second of all, that goes back to question 1
If the changes need to happen or the company is finished - why are they waiting on an agreement? Why have they conceded to some of the changes we were told they wanted to make? And why do they need to take away our sick pay, bring in PDA performance management, later starts to avoid going bust? They dont.
Access to credit facilities doesnt hinge on an agreement - thats just nonsense whether Martin Walsh said it or not.
I note the union are still talking about the warchest in their leaflet that came with the ballot paper......
Last edited by Acca Dacca on 26 Jun 2023, 17:33, edited 3 times in total.
If you tolerate this, then your paid break will be next
A little hypocritical don’t you think Aiden as you’ve started a thread in blue shirts complaining about how people throw insults at you because you have a different opinion to them