As far as driving and contracts are concerned it's not as black and white as "it wasn't in my contract so I don't have to drive."
Contracts have both explicit terms and implied terms. You can accept a change in contract simply by submitting to it for a period of time without raising an objection.
If you do not tell your employer that you are unhappy with the change and start to work under the new terms and conditions, your employer may take this as your agreement to the change.
If you have driven for Royal Mail for years, especially if you accepted the driving allowance (remember that?) and then you suddenly decide you don't want to drive it would likely be seen as a breach of contract even if your original contract didn't specify driving.
What I would say to anyone is take some proper legal advice before going down this route, don't listen to some anonymous poster on the internet (including me) when it's your mortgage on the line not theirs.
I didn't know about these 'implied terms' in an employment contract. If they would tried to use them against somebody in a court of law with a driver's license, who refused to drive, it would be immediately thrown out.
Implied terms are for obvious things like 'not stealing' etc.
As far as driving and contracts are concerned it's not as black and white as "it wasn't in my contract so I don't have to drive."
Contracts have both explicit terms and implied terms. You can accept a change in contract simply by submitting to it for a period of time without raising an objection.
If you do not tell your employer that you are unhappy with the change and start to work under the new terms and conditions, your employer may take this as your agreement to the change.
If you have driven for Royal Mail for years, especially if you accepted the driving allowance (remember that?) and then you suddenly decide you don't want to drive it would likely be seen as a breach of contract even if your original contract didn't specify driving.
What I would say to anyone is take some proper legal advice before going down this route, don't listen to some anonymous poster on the internet (including me) when it's your mortgage on the line not theirs.
It doesn't have to be like that though. All that has to happen is that contract variations are taken into account when planning the changes. If more singleton duties have to come in so be it.
"The leadership will sabotage the fight and only make the slightest move under fear of powerful working class action" - Des Warren
It's only natural that some heads will have been turned with the prospect of a favourable outcome to deal with fatigue of those performing the walking parts of duties - and plenty of those people will drive too. Remember, just because you drive for RM doesn't guarantee you a shot at a less strenuous duty.
It doesn't have to be like that though. All that has to happen is that contract variations are taken into account when planning the changes. If more singleton duties have to come in so be it.
You're ignoring the reality of the situation.
This USO reform is about one thing, saving money.
If this version of USO reform doesn't bring the savings they will go for something else, most likely something more draconian and more brutal and cost more jobs.
You might not like that reality, I might not like that reality but this isn't a student forum dealing with a hypothetical situation. I'm not particularly a fan of this version of the CWU and have made that clear on many occasions but I do understand that Royal Mail will continue to cut costs with or without union involvement and there is little appetite amongst the majority of the members for another poorly led dispute so you can talk all day long about how corrupt the CWU is and it will achieve absolutely zero, nothing, not a thing.
As far as driving and contracts are concerned it's not as black and white as "it wasn't in my contract so I don't have to drive."
Contracts have both explicit terms and implied terms. You can accept a change in contract simply by submitting to it for a period of time without raising an objection.
If you do not tell your employer that you are unhappy with the change and start to work under the new terms and conditions, your employer may take this as your agreement to the change.
If you have driven for Royal Mail for years, especially if you accepted the driving allowance (remember that?) and then you suddenly decide you don't want to drive it would likely be seen as a breach of contract even if your original contract didn't specify driving.
What I would say to anyone is take some proper legal advice before going down this route, don't listen to some anonymous poster on the internet (including me) when it's your mortgage on the line not theirs.
I get what you’re saying here and that could apply to those that have done what was called the changeover but driving isn’t in my contract, I haven’t ever done a changeover and have never driven a Royal Mail vehicle.
As far as driving and contracts are concerned it's not as black and white as "it wasn't in my contract so I don't have to drive."
Contracts have both explicit terms and implied terms. You can accept a change in contract simply by submitting to it for a period of time without raising an objection.
If you do not tell your employer that you are unhappy with the change and start to work under the new terms and conditions, your employer may take this as your agreement to the change.
If you have driven for Royal Mail for years, especially if you accepted the driving allowance (remember that?) and then you suddenly decide you don't want to drive it would likely be seen as a breach of contract even if your original contract didn't specify driving.
What I would say to anyone is take some proper legal advice before going down this route, don't listen to some anonymous poster on the internet (including me) when it's your mortgage on the line not theirs.
I get what you’re saying here and that could apply to those that have done what was called the changeover but driving isn’t in my contract, I haven’t ever done a changeover and have never driven a Royal Mail vehicle.
Then you are currently a non driver surely ( doesnt matter if you have a license ) so this isnt applying to you
If you tolerate this, then your paid break will be next
You're ignoring the reality of the situation.
This USO reform is about one thing, saving money.
If this version of USO reform doesn't bring the savings they will go for something else, most likely something more draconian and more brutal and cost more jobs.
You might not like that reality, I might not like that reality but this isn't a student forum dealing with a hypothetical situation. I'm not particularly a fan of this version of the CWU and have made that clear on many occasions but I do understand that Royal Mail will continue to cut costs with or without union involvement and there is little appetite amongst the majority of the members for another poorly led dispute so you can talk all day long about how corrupt the CWU is and it will achieve absolutely zero, nothing, not a thing.
^^^
This....
We make this work or the USO is cut to 3 days a week. As much as I hate the 'think how bad it could have been' rhetoric around dispute resolution we are at the crossroads of the greatest paradigm shift in the way we work since the invention of the motor vehicles. We either go with it and try and get the best outcome for all members (drivers and non drivers and non driving drivers) or we face the total decimation of the workforce and the race to the Denmark model of a 0 day USO.
1000s of legacy contracts will then simply refuse to do the 6 monthly checks on their licence to get the Mon-Fri attendance and the whole business will collapse like a flan in cupboard.
There would be the risk that should it ever transpire that thousands of people suddenly stopped doing something they were doing for years on a 'custom and practise' basis it could be argued by Royal Mail to be a form of industrial action.
Maybe not. But I dont think theyd make it easy.
No it couldn't. These are workers who have a contractual variation. They are under no obligation to do anything other than they are contractually obliged to.
It could be, and I’m not saying it would be, classed as a form of working to rule though if thousands decided to stop driving when they had been which if it wasn’t following the correct process from the union to make that official action could be seen as unofficial action
It absolutely would be classed as unofficial industrial action. Mass and simultaneity. If just one person here and there sticks their neck out they'll be individually crucified, but if lots did it at the same time then collective action like that could only arise through organisation and communication. Before you know it, the company's speed-dial lawyers would be in the High Court.
You're ignoring the reality of the situation.
This USO reform is about one thing, saving money.
If this version of USO reform doesn't bring the savings they will go for something else, most likely something more draconian and more brutal and cost more jobs.
You might not like that reality, I might not like that reality but this isn't a student forum dealing with a hypothetical situation. I'm not particularly a fan of this version of the CWU and have made that clear on many occasions but I do understand that Royal Mail will continue to cut costs with or without union involvement and there is little appetite amongst the majority of the members for another poorly led dispute so you can talk all day long about how corrupt the CWU is and it will achieve absolutely zero, nothing, not a thing.
^^^
This....
We make this work or the USO is cut to 3 days a week. As much as I hate the 'think how bad it could have been' rhetoric around dispute resolution we are at the crossroads of the greatest paradigm shift in the way we work since the invention of the motor vehicles. We either go with it and try and get the best outcome for all members (drivers and non drivers and non driving drivers) or we face the total decimation of the workforce and the race to the Denmark model of a 0 day USO.
The government won’t let the USO go to 3 days a week too many people/MPs/ companies are moaning about the 2nd class mail being cut
There's no mail at all and walkers are stealing a living. Unfortunately walkers get thrown under bus on new plans but they've been loving life since covid
As far as driving and contracts are concerned it's not as black and white as "it wasn't in my contract so I don't have to drive."
Contracts have both explicit terms and implied terms. You can accept a change in contract simply by submitting to it for a period of time without raising an objection.
If you do not tell your employer that you are unhappy with the change and start to work under the new terms and conditions, your employer may take this as your agreement to the change.
If you have driven for Royal Mail for years, especially if you accepted the driving allowance (remember that?) and then you suddenly decide you don't want to drive it would likely be seen as a breach of contract even if your original contract didn't specify driving.
What I would say to anyone is take some proper legal advice before going down this route, don't listen to some anonymous poster on the internet (including me) when it's your mortgage on the line not theirs.
I get what you’re saying here and that could apply to those that have done what was called the changeover but driving isn’t in my contract, I haven’t ever done a changeover and have never driven a Royal Mail vehicle.
Then you are currently a non driver surely ( doesnt matter if you have a license ) so this isnt applying to you
There's no mail at all and walkers are stealing a living. Unfortunately walkers get thrown under bus on new plans but they've been loving life since covid
