Later start times

[bomby459]

Here in our office at Macclesfield the management have decided to put up notices about the change to later start times!!
What really gets me is that it is written with the heading"Lets talk about it". yet on the notice it says "subject to CWU consultation, in other words they intend to bring it in despite any agreement and yet staff need to know that if they do this then they will be facing a pay cut in three years time.

As stated earlier they put on with the heading "lets talk about it", yet who have they spoke with, the RAT'S, not with the staff or CWU.

We need to ensure that if they continue to use executive action then we need to fight back with our own action(know what i mean).

Anyway lets hope we get the result to-day that we all hope for - A RESOUNDING "YES" VOTE, this will then tell them to stop F-----g with us!!!!!!

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Yes praying for a YES vote or in my case if we let RM get what they want I will lose £42 a week and only a £5 a week rise. But you never hear this in the nationals.

[IWW Fellow Worker]

Here in our office at Macclesfield the management have decided to put up notices about the change to later start times!!
What really gets me is that it is written with the heading"Lets talk about it". yet on the notice it says "subject to CWU consultation, in other words they intend to bring it in despite any agreement and yet staff need to know that if they do this then they will be facing a pay cut in three years time.

As stated earlier they put on with the heading "lets talk about it", yet who have they spoke with, the RAT'S, not with the staff or CWU.

We need to ensure that if they continue to use executive action then we need to fight back with our own action(know what i mean).

Anyway lets hope we get the result to-day that we all hope for - A RESOUNDING "YES" VOTE, this will then tell them to stop F-----g with us!!!!!!

If it's anything like our consultation, the DOM told the CWU rep we had no choice as the vans would be arriving later. They aren't and we've been stuck with this since October because the rep thinks later start times are a good idea and gave us the same message as the DOM gave him. The vote was taken on the dodgy info given to us via the DOM who no doubt got a nice bonus for bringing them in. I'm not sure what the rep got out of it though.

[bomby459]

Thanks IWW Fellow Worker
I myself am the CWU Rep and believe me I do not want later start times, we also av the majority of our mail by 0700am so therfore their is no need for us to go to later start times and this is what I will be telling my members and the DOM.

Due to yesterdays result this may put a stop this for the present but we will wait and see but we will be ready for it.

[postie dave]

We have been told ours will be in by end of July no matter what, personally I will start at 6am, but I will not give up my pensionable early shift allowance, I regard that as part of my pay.

[IWW Fellow Worker]

Thanks IWW Fellow Worker
I myself am the CWU Rep and believe me I do not want later start times, we also av the majority of our mail by 0700am so therfore their is no need for us to go to later start times and this is what I will be telling my members and the DOM.

Due to yesterdays result this may put a stop this for the present but we will wait and see but we will be ready for it.

Good for you mate. We were misled and since last October we've had an article in the Courier quoting a lad who says he was misquoted and announcing to the world how great we all think it is. It makes me wonder why, if it's so great, that most people still come in well before their official start time. Only last week we had a film crew in and getting a couple of alkies who couldn't get out of bed in the past telling them how much better the late start is. Needless to say, they didn't ask for both sides of the argument.

[dvbuk55]

Our DOM is not pushing it at the moment as our sub rep has taken it to disagreement so unless there is agreement then it's status quo - if we come in at our normal start time and the mail isn't there - who's to blame?

[mitzi]

the answer to later starts if you dont want them has to be an emphatic NO. it will constitute a change to agreed contract of employment and if they cannot prove a business need then they should be taken to tribunal.
the real argument winner is to walk, take no notice to what management or cwu hq say just vote with your feet.

[side_door]

I'm slightly confused and would be grateful for a little clarification.

My contract says 30 hours and it makes no mention of my start or finish time. I do not, and never have had, a 318 - I do not think these were ever issued after SDD.

I am assuming that when mitzi says "a change to agreed contract of employment" he is referring to the terms negotiated by the CWU through collective agreements. It is these that RM are telling us that they can ignore through "executive action" and that our union rep had told us they can do legally because of the "any other duties" bit at the bottom of my actual contract. The problem of course is that we can all do exactly the same and insist on working only the hours stipulated (in my case) 30 and put them right in the s**t. This is why they want agreements - to avoid such unpleasantness.

Am I right here in my thinking or is mitzi. Are the agreements that CWU negotiates legally binding in the contractual sense? If so does this only apply to some of them? Can RM decide, for example, to suddenly pay me less, per hour, and get away with it legally? What is contracted and what isn't?

[mitzi]

as soon as a collective agreement is actioned and both sides are working to it. it is legally binding.

[tyconuk]

We at our office (cheadle) start at 5am, phgs and four on an hours o/t (4am). we were told in last weeks WTL, sorry written to,
that we were changing our start times too 6.30am. And that the DOM would ask us too a 1 too 1 with him ,
to ask what we think about it.
so our rep has taken it to disagreement so unless there is agreement then it's status quo -?
That was last wednesday, no reply too it yet. We have a great union REP, he was at manchester until he transfer to us
late last year. All i can says is
LETS STICK TOGETHER BROTHERS

[POSTMAN]

Just been told we're (SE London) going from 05-45 starts to 06-00 in August
This is because other offices in the London are on earlier starts so we're all being put to the same time.
Loads and loads of savings!!!

AND the Union are taking Royal Mail to court over this as it's illegal,they can't change our contracts like that.

[madelin4]

Just been told we're (SE London) going from 05-45 starts to 06-00 in August
This is because other offices in the London are on earlier starts so we're all being put to the same time.
Loads and loads of savings!!!

AND the Union are taking Royal Mail to court over this as it's illegal,they can't change our contracts like that.

[center]Well i found out 2day that our rep is doing a ballot in our office re: short and longs , i think the majority dont want short and longs... as re the later starts a lot of guys it dont suit, i.e . kids .. and sum it wud suit like me with no kids..i didnt know it was illegal, wud they do it if they thought they cud face a big fine of sum sort.. [/center]

[smokerjim]

Just been told we're (SE London) going from 05-45 starts to 06-00 in August
This is because other offices in the London are on earlier starts so we're all being put to the same time.
Loads and loads of savings!!!

AND the Union are taking Royal Mail to court over this as it's illegal,they can't change our contracts like that.

[center]Well i found out 2day that our rep is doing a ballot in our office re: short and longs , i think the majority dont want short and longs... as re the later starts a lot of guys it dont suit, i.e . kids .. and sum it wud suit like me with no kids..i didnt know it was illegal, wud they do it if they thought they cud face a big fine of sum sort.. [/center]

When you say it would suit you madelin, is that just cos you get a bit more time in bed, or is there an actual reason it would suit you better?

Sorry if that sounds agressive - that's not my intention, I couldn't think of a more subtle way to pose the question - it is a genuine enquiry, because I am in a similar position to yourself ( although I would vote against to help my colleagues position ).

[madelin4]

Just been told we're (SE London) going from 05-45 starts to 06-00 in August
This is because other offices in the London are on earlier starts so we're all being put to the same time.
Loads and loads of savings!!!

AND the Union are taking Royal Mail to court over this as it's illegal,they can't change our contracts like that.

[center]Well i found out 2day that our rep is doing a ballot in our office re: short and longs , i think the majority dont want short and longs... as re the later starts a lot of guys it dont suit, i.e . kids .. and sum it wud suit like me with no kids..i didnt know it was illegal, wud they do it if they thought they cud face a big fine of sum sort.. [/center]

When you say it would suit you madelin, is that just cos you get a bit more time in bed, or is there an actual reason it would suit you better?

Sorry if that sounds agressive - that's not my intention, I couldn't think of a more subtle way to pose the question - it is a genuine enquiry, because I am in a similar position to yourself ( although I would vote against to help my colleagues position ).

Hi smoker jam.. means i cud have a bit of a life in the evenings without rushing back to get to bed..and mite not be as tired.. it has its good points and bad, i like to go to the gym in the afternoons when it is quiet so it suits me there.. we cant have it all can wee like,,, but yes , i wud prob vote against it as i wud put myself in the position if i had kids, just because i have no responsibilites , but some day im sure i will, so yes, i will vote against it to help my pals, i dont wanna be in this job for lots of years or i will be going crazy!! what do u think of it??