Postal Strike Looms

[BELIAL]

The so called deficit is calculated on the assumption that the pension fund closes tomorrow, ie no further contributions whatsoever and all benefits are paid immediately. Realistic?

No since RM have already said that it will take 17 years to clear the deficit, EVEN allowing for the changes proposed. I guess you could choose to disbelieve the deficit if you like, but lack of acceptance doesn't make it any less real or less of a problem. They're not closing it down either. Most of my colleaues have money tied up in the pension and ofcourse they're pissed off, ofcourse they're angry, but few of us see ANY benefit in strike action. The most likely scenario, and RM will have already allowed some degree of slack, is that a few amendments are made to lighten the load - much like lasttime.

Hayes latest bulletin only mentions a step up in it's 'campaign' if this goes through, which in laymans terms is the equivalent of pestering the Trustees and being noisy. A strike without any plan of action/outcome won't go down with the vast majority of members and the CWU would be on a hiding to nothing. They've done it once and even if the grass roots are keen on confrontation, the vast majority won't be. Thats realistic.

Not sure wether you are having genuine difficulty understanding or not.

I'll do my best to keep it very simple.

Yes RM said it will take 17 years to clear the claimed deficit Even allowing for the proposed changes but you seem to be forgetting that as a result of those changes they will be reducing their contributions.
RM owe X to the pension fund and need to pay Y annually over 17years to clear the debt.
RM want to reduce X so they can reduce Y by a corresponding amount, it still takes 17 years to pay the debt.
As far as lack of acceptance goes you are dead right, given my experience of big business and RM in particular it would be a foolish act to take their figures at face value,we all know"lies ,damned lies and statistics" RM do have a lot of creative flair in the numbers dept. witness last years expensive production of two completely different sets of accounts. So you to can choose to believe that RM's figures based as they admit ,on assumptions are "real" but to quote the independent auditors[Ernst and Young] RM paid to certify their regulatory accounts 2007 "we cannot guarantee that these figures represent a fair and accurate description of the companys trading position".If their auditors are not willing to risk their reputations certifying RM's accounting practices I'm not taking their pension propaganda on trust.

"closing it down" ,never said that,so its either misread ,misunderstood or mischief on your part?The methodology used by RM to calculate it's theoretical deficit ,makes the assumption that the pension scheme ceases overnight, quite a different meaning.
Don't really get this plan of action stuff, it's simple we strike to defend our standard of living,we stand to lose a lot more if we roll over,perhaps we should hold some militant sherry mornings,occupy the set of Eastenders or invade Malta dunno what did you have in mind?

[BELIAL]

This is getting tedious.
Thinking behind industrial action=hands off the pension
Stop knicking my money and I work as normal

Heres the alternative to having our pension fund pinched = stop them pinching your money.

Still have to marvel at your confident claim to speak for so many NT, very different opinions in my area ,maybe yours is opinion too?
As an aside did you notice the bit about Standard and Poor rating RM's pension fund among the top seven,healthiest and best performing funds in the UK for 2007

[Night Tonic]

Yawn. Again, strike action with no plan of action - OTHER than strike. Lots of talk, no ideas.

The hole in our pension fund is the biggest this country has ever known, not only that, most pensions are going through the same problems. If (and I say if) the grass roots down tools ideal is that strong, then we would not have had acceptance of the pay deal last time. Your views (and theres nothing fundamentally wrong in them) still amount to a minority in the workforce which is why all this banter about 'we are the union' is compete b**ls in the scale of things. If you're to get your argument across, you need a stronger case than "I'm striking to protect my pension' - there are too many of us that are just as pissed off about this as you are, but remain unconvinced that a strike without tangible proposals is even worth contemplating. Yes we're all in the union but it doesn't mean we're like sheep either. Hayes himself has given no firm ideas other than trawling over the wording and it has nothing to do with lacking the gumption to strike - the stark reality is that theres NO chance of us keeping things as they are Belial - strike or no strike.

If you want to pretend the deficit is a lie, then fine, but its no basis to put forward an argument that will convince either me, the 50 guys in my office or convince enough of us collectively to follow suit. We're ALL in agreement that any reduction/damage to our pensions is deplorable (and thats putting it mildly) but there is NO WAY a strike would reverse anything. Be nice if Hayes can pull a real gem out of the hat this month but theres little sign of that.

[dvbuk55]

. Be nice if Hayes can pull a real gem out of the hat this month but there's little sign of that.

The clown couldn't pull a rabbit out of rabbit hutch. There is talk of linking the pension to the future of RM and the review of the effect of an open market. I wouldn't disagree that these are important issues and do have a bearing on the future performance of RM but I feel it is more a case of getting Billy to the masters table than resolving any pensions issues; let's face it though a buffoon is a buffoon whichever table he's sat at.

[tpost]

The CWU are saying that they only agreed to the starting of the pension consultation but not the outcome. The obvious answer is to stop the pay and modernisation deal in its tracks and refuse any more co-operation until we can get a better deal on the pensions issue. I am quite prepared to wait for my £400 flexability payment as I stand to lose a lot more in the long run. No need to vote for strikes, just use delaying tactics as a lever. RM are in a rush to bring changes in and delays cost them money.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

RM did send a letter about 2 weeks about the same time we had a DVD presented at a WTLL session. In fact both were discussed on here so I am confused. IS your unit the only one who has not got these, and if so why not. Ask the DOM would be my suggestion especially for the DVD.

[bandit650]

TBT we have not had any DVD about it in our office but then our manager is hard pushed even to do a WTLL i fact when we bought it up with DOM he said we should stop picking as we should know that its very hard for her to keep up with everything and finds it very difficult to answer all the questions that we never get a reply to.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

TBT we have not had any DVD about it in our office but then our manager is hard pushed even to do a WTLL i fact when we bought it up with DOM he said we should stop picking as we should know that its very hard for her to keep up with everything and finds it very difficult to answer all the questions that we never get a reply to.

Perhaps you should Ask Adam whatever that email address is. Because all managers were instructed that everyone should see the DVD so much so that people on leave on the 2 sessions were being given it to look at home, that's how hard they were pushing it.

If anyone has it or can get access can they post it on You Tube or host it anywhere, I mean its not very good but at least you will get Royal Mails POV as well as the Unions, and then you can make an informed choice.

[DirtyHarry]

When joining Royal Fail, I entered into an agreement on the funding of my pension. I pay my contributions, Royal Fail pay theirs. What happened?...
In an unbelievable act of staggering ineptitude, Royal Fail in their infinate stupidity decided not to pay their contributions for not 5 years, not 10 years,
not even 15 years, but 17 bloody years, in my opinion, the major contributing factor as far as this debacle is concerned.

Now, what do Royal Fail in their infinate stupidity believe is the answer to THEIR cock-up?...........Get the only people, who down the years, and without
fail, have honoured their side of the bargain, to pay for Royal Fail's gross ineptitude. They have a helluva brass neck, I'll give 'em that.

The CWU must do everything possible to make the shareholder accept sole responsibility for IT'S negligence, right down to calling for strike action.
We, as a people, cannot continue to take passively, every knock-back these crooks hurl at us, we must fight, no matter the odds.

Scuse me, Tommo......... I blame these two morons..... :lfo :cfo

[Night Tonic]

You can say the same of quite a few private pensions that have fallen into the abyss. These days, a shoebox under the bed sounds a more certain proposition.

[BELIAL]

You can say the same of quite a few private pensions that have fallen into the abyss. These days, a shoebox under the bed sounds a more certain proposition.

You certainly could say it but the fact remains that if RM succeed in this pensions smash and grab attempt then our pensions will provide the worst payouts throughout the entire public sector

[pinstripe]

You can say the same of quite a few private pensions that have fallen into the abyss. These days, a shoebox under the bed sounds a more certain proposition.

The point is this was not a 'private pension'. The government is the only shareholder in RM, they take the profits that we make. When RM took the pension break, they should have informed the paying members that they were doing so. They should not have continued to accept payments from members knowing that they were not meeting their own legal requirements. The government is not responsible for private companies, they are responsible for National Companies. A 17 year payment break takes us back into the Conservative Govt. of the early 1990's and the new Labour Govt of 1997 to now. I'm sure that Gordon Brown as chancellor was aware of this 'break' and was quite happy to accept whatever RM gave him as long as we were on our way to making a profit. The government is responsible, ultimately, and they should pay for governments mistakes. What would be the outcome if you had decided not to pay into your pension for 17 years? Pretty much the same situation you are in now. Thank god I decided not to join RM's pension scheme, maybe it was a premonition. You're right, by the way, a shoe-box would have been a better investment.

[k979aaa]

You can say the same of quite a few private pensions that have fallen into the abyss. These days, a shoebox under the bed sounds a more certain proposition.

The point is this was not a 'private pension'. The government is the only shareholder in RM, they take the profits that we make. When RM took the pension break, they should have informed the paying members that they were doing so. They should not have continued to accept payments from members knowing that they were not meeting their own legal requirements. The government is not responsible for private companies, they are responsible for National Companies. A 17 year payment break takes us back into the Conservative Govt. of the early 1990's and the new Labour Govt of 1997 to now. I'm sure that Gordon Brown as chancellor was aware of this 'break' and was quite happy to accept whatever RM gave him as long as we were on our way to making a profit. The government is responsible, ultimately, and they should pay for governments mistakes. What would be the outcome if you had decided not to pay into your pension for 17 years? Pretty much the same situation you are in now. Thank god I decided not to join RM's pension scheme, maybe it was a premonition. You're right, by the way, a shoe-box would have been a better investment.

A fine post and the truth and nothing but!. And if the new scheme come's in i will take the shoe box than trust these two low life fu*kers :cfo & :lfo

[BELIAL]

Yeh but take that courses of action en masse an in two years time they will be telling you that the shoe box was their property all along.Legally you have no right to possess a shoebox.
Obviously if you can accumulate a nest egg you have been overpaid

[POSTMAN]

Like i've said before and it aint rocket science,fair enough we had to take a holiday for tax reasons,BUT the minute the defecit went to a quid the alarm bells should of rung and things sorted,but they didn't do f**k all!!
They left it and left it and now we're supposed to pay for it!
With proper management and common sense the deficit would no way be this big and a burden to the company.
f**k 'em,they owe us and it big time.