The Postal Executive has agreed the following timetable for the forthcoming ballot on Royal Mail Pay:

[SkiSunday]

Voting no. We can do better.

vote how you like of course but don't pretend this useless union can squeeze more blood from a rock

VOTE NO.

[funkflex55]

To add, the incentive scheme is bollocks because we all know that RM like to move money around to hide figures and plead poverty. The money will be moved and we'll end up with 20p each.

Vote NO!

[mentaltheshots]

The 4.2% is ok for this year [ and only ok because i don't see anything better as likely obtainable ] but the 2% for the next 2 years is a cop-out.
I was just discussing with my colleague today that I/we have no confidence in official inflation figures anyway. Since 2018/9 it seems prices for many living costs have risen close to 100 %, food especially.
Over and above that it's not a real 4.2% rise. By the time you deduct 20% tax and 12%NI that leaves you with 2/3 of 4.2% . ie. 2.8% in real terms yet inflation is a lot higher than that. Yet look how much the cost of postage rose last year - wouldn't RM be squealing like stuck pigs if the government had it in their power to restrict postage price rises to 2.8%.

This is just about the last straw for me regards staying in the union. The only reason I do stay in is as an insurance should something crop up on the disciplinary front - either real or manufactured - but that seems unlikely. Saving 200 pounds a year or whatever it is sounds like an attractive trade off.

[hewittinspain]

I've yet to meet someone from my large office that is voting yes

People always say this and it is always a massive yes percentage.

I'm not so sure this time, I think it will be closer than you think. Im actually ok with the 4.2% it's the following two years that are questionable. Energy, food and water prices are rocketing and things will look tighter in our pockets after next year when in reality if CPI goes up 5,6 or 7% we may only get a rise of 2.5%.
The deal should have been for this year only not signing away for 3 years. People that are generally short sighted (or people that usually fall for the carrot dangler) will vote yes and it may well get pushed through because of that.

[LouBarlow]

It isn’t really a carrot dangler this time though. The reality is the job is changing regardless, and people are struggling financially, so any increase in pay at this point is going to be voted for by the majority. You might be right in that it is closer this time, but I see no alternative strategy if it is a no as I certainly will not go on strike for a pay deal this time round.

[thefox]

What's the alternative...Industrial action go out for 1 or 2 days only to come back and watch your colleagues clear the backlog just so they can claw back 2 hours they have lost na yer ok

[sindba]

A 3 year deal that will leave us no better off financially ( or even a bit worse off)

That's not a pay "rise" at all!

I'm voting no, but I'm expecting a yes result.

[Barnacle]

A 3 year deal that will leave us no better off financially ( or even a bit worse off)

That's not a pay "rise" at all!

I'm voting no, but I'm expecting a yes result.

You have to vote the way you feel, rather than what anyone else might be saying. Then you can live with yourself.

[Acca Dacca]

It isn’t really a carrot dangler this time though. The reality is the job is changing regardless, and people are struggling financially, so any increase in pay at this point is going to be voted for by the majority. You might be right in that it is closer this time, but I see no alternative strategy if it is a no as I certainly will not go on strike for a pay deal this time round.

.

[kazardaimenu]

I would think a lumper would get this through but they haven’t even put a lumper on the table apart from meagre back pay. Could be close.

[Martin Walsh]

I read on this sight that posters did not want a pay deal linked change.

This deal is unconditional .

It is above inflation in the first year which has not been a common event since privatisation or indeed during the 1990s public pay freezes or limits were put in by the Government.

In years 2 and 3 it matches inflation. CPI is forecasted to be 2.6% in 2026 and 2.2% in 2027. However it has reopener clause if inflation is above 3%.

This is a company which is not very profitable and will not make the savings under USO reform which they originally wanted or forecasted.

I have a question for those who are supporting a rejection of a pay deal. Do you really think EP and Royal Mail are going to find an extra few hundred million to fund an improved pay rise without the pressure of strike action ?

Equally do you really think if there was an improvement it would not be linked to further change even to supporting ODM which the CWU are not ?

The pay offer is reasonable in all the circumstances and it now allows us to concentrate on equalisation of new entrants pay, terms and conditions which will also add costs to the overall wage bill.

I know some of you don’t look at these things and just think a company should just pay you higher regardless of the impact it has on the companies finances. Companies do not tend to survive if they adopt that strategy.

[LouBarlow]

It isn’t really a carrot dangler this time though. The reality is the job is changing regardless, and people are struggling financially, so any increase in pay at this point is going to be voted for by the majority. You might be right in that it is closer this time, but I see no alternative strategy if it is a no as I certainly will not go on strike for a pay deal this time round.

You didnt last time around

Yes actually I did. And all the previous times asked to by the union. If you are going to slander someone at least have some evidence to back it up.

Post reported.

[TopperGas]

A 3 year deal that will leave us no better off financially ( or even a bit worse off)

That's not a pay "rise" at all!

I'm voting no, but I'm expecting a yes result.

If you want to be "better off" that's never going to happen at RM, at best all wages will do is keep level with inflation particularly for any legacy staff.

[A2B]

The pay offer is reasonable in all the circumstances and it now allows us to concentrate on equalisation of new entrants pay, terms and conditions which will also add costs to the overall wage bill.

So if RM wasn't having to pay out for equalisation of contracts do you still think the pay deal is "reasonable"?

The way that comes across to me is that legacy staff are having to finance the mistakes of the past

[SkiSunday]

VOTE NO!