CWU militant????!!!!!

ally0001 · Post by **ally0001** » 06 Nov 2008, 16:26

I'am currently doing a project on the CWU and Royal Mail. I have read that the CWU is becoming militant in it's approach to negotiations etc. Is this the case and if so why and if not why? Also any other additional information would be useful.

Cheers

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 06 Nov 2008, 16:32

Welcome ally0001 - Militant who said that. Have a look round and you will find a mix of views but most would not describe the CWU leadership as militant.

Perhaps they meant the grass roots

especially last year when we were asked, nay told, we would loose allowances and pay to the tune of £40 per week for me. Perhaps we were militant because we said no thanks come back with a better offer.

Phantom · Post by **Phantom** » 06 Nov 2008, 16:34

Erm no its not, well the executive are not anyway otherwise they wouldn't have signed up to this "flexibility" crap that is simply not working or benefiting anyone.

woofwoof · Post by **woofwoof** » 06 Nov 2008, 17:46

deeffo its a no wish WE was sometimes

pinstripe · Post by **pinstripe** » 06 Nov 2008, 17:53

Anyone get the letter from CWU HQ today, telling us what's happening regarding the Hooper review, the pensions and modernisation? I've read the letter twice and I think they forgot to tell us what they are ACTUALLY doing apart from one line in red ink,
"We are not prepared to let this go unchallenged." Well, d'uh, that's why we pay our union fees. Militant, we should be!

norbert · Post by **norbert** » 06 Nov 2008, 18:41

ally0001 wrote:I'am currently doing a project on the CWU and Royal Mail. I have read that the CWU is becoming militant in it's approach to negotiations etc. Is this the case and if so why and if not why? Also any other additional information would be useful.

Cheers

the "militancy " comes from RM's management - only it's with a different twist - everything is based on confrontation - IR are dire - there is IA ballots - but a lot of IR disputes have / still are Orchestrated .

the problems are mistrust on both sides which has got a lot worse with :lfo & :cfo at the Helm - so everything from breathing onwards becomes a Union Issue - in the Lord Sawyer report a culture of bullying was mentioned - hence the "entrenched " Unionism , again that's got a lot worse with pressure from on very high

In the Public Sector , I see union membership as insurance against bad management which you will get - there's also mediocre to average staff too , a mirrored culture maybe

Amongst other Trade Unionists - the CWU rank and file is seen as demanding but not necessarily militant , the leadership is seen to be a difficult job , especially with pressure from all sides like a hostile Senior management , Postcom the regulator , Government " Public Sector Reforms " and EEC deregulation directives .

bandit650 · Post by **bandit650** » 06 Nov 2008, 18:46

CWU militant no i would not say that we are,i would say that there are times when we the members will stand up and be counted,that sometimes we just say that is enough.
Not militant no.

BELIAL · Post by **BELIAL** » 06 Nov 2008, 22:55

About as easy going as you could wish for till recently, Fortunately management tactics have changed all that ,and I look forward to the day when Crozier, Leighton et.al, have all their assets seized by our magnificent JUSTICE system to help offset the pension fund "deficit"

Martin Walsh · Post by **Martin Walsh** » 06 Nov 2008, 23:10

Compared to other unions we are millant. No union is nationally as millant as us. No union has as many industrial action ballots as our union endorsed by our headquaters. The RMT are strong in London but not very strong outside.

If you look at the history of the cwu or ucw then prior to 1997 our leadership was always considered within the trade union movement as on the right of the centre. Once Alan Johnson resigned in 1997 then with Billy Hayes, John keggie and now Dave ward we were considered as being on the left.

Whether we are called millant it depends on your opinion. If you speak to senior Royal Mail management they will say we are. But the truth is that since 2000 we have had two huge bouts of unoffical action an independent report by Lord Tom Sawyer into industrial realtions. One ballot which delivered a no vote. one which we had a strike on last year. So we certainly not a weak union.

But in my opinion anyone can lead a strike its whether you get the right deal which measures a strong union

dunposting · Post by **dunposting** » 06 Nov 2008, 23:14

We walk. We Drive. We Strike!

mailsort6 · Post by **mailsort6** » 07 Nov 2008, 00:38

ally0001 wrote:I'am currently doing a project on the CWU and Royal Mail. I have read that the CWU is becoming militant in it's approach to negotiations etc. Is this the case and if so why and if not why? Also any other additional information would be useful.

Cheers

The CWU is a great union and we are not militant, what is wrong is standing up for your rights? We have managed to achieve a decent pay rise over 2 years, even though they are attachments. Whilst other unions have struggled to get a decent pay rise (e.g the police, prison officers). The CWU are growing stronger and other industries and companies are going to realise how important it is to have a strong union when there are mass redundancies from now into next year. The CWU have secured many postmen's/women's jobs over the years is this what you call being militant?

paul_skinback · Post by **paul_skinback** » 07 Nov 2008, 18:53

pinstripe wrote:Anyone get the letter from CWU HQ today, telling us what's happening regarding the Hooper review, the pensions and modernisation? I've read the letter twice and I think they forgot to tell us what they are ACTUALLY doing apart from one line in red ink,
"We are not prepared to let this go unchallenged." Well, d'uh, that's why we pay our union fees. Militant, we should be!

We could do with you at outr place instead of all the lemmins we ahve at the mo. (except me)

Post by **stokes11eg** » 20 Nov 2008, 13:18

paul_skinback wrote:
pinstripe wrote:Anyone get the letter from CWU HQ today, telling us what's happening regarding the Hooper review, the pensions and modernisation? I've read the letter twice and I think they forgot to tell us what they are ACTUALLY doing apart from one line in red ink,
"We are not prepared to let this go unchallenged." Well, d'uh, that's why we pay our union fees. Militant, we should be!
We could do with you at outr place instead of all the lemmins we ahve at the mo. (except me)

I am, and have been completely dissolusioned with the C.W.U. They do not fully represent the vast
majority of subscribers----in some cases they 'Bully' us more than the Managment do.

brothermagrew · Post by **brothermagrew** » 20 Nov 2008, 20:57

stokes11eg wrote:
paul_skinback wrote:
pinstripe wrote:Anyone get the letter from CWU HQ today, telling us what's happening regarding the Hooper review, the pensions and modernisation? I've read the letter twice and I think they forgot to tell us what they are ACTUALLY doing apart from one line in red ink,
"We are not prepared to let this go unchallenged." Well, d'uh, that's why we pay our union fees. Militant, we should be!
We could do with you at outr place instead of all the lemmins we ahve at the mo. (except me)
I am, and have been completely dissolusioned with the C.W.U. They do not fully represent the vast
majority of subscribers----in some cases they 'Bully' us more than the Managment do.

Respectfully if as you say you are completely dissolusioned with the CWU then fair doos jack your membership card in and stop paying the weekly fees. But I somehow suspect that you won't. Better being in than out as strength is unity.

Post by **stokes11eg** » 21 Nov 2008, 12:11

There are many people in my office who came out of the unions---not because
they don't believe in the union movement, but because they feel let down--I know you can'tas they say.
please all of the people all of the time-but a fairer representation, across the board,for ALL people
people who pay their fees,would perhaps help, I know you can transfer the fees you pay to a charity.
And the Unions would still represent you.
Cheers.