Petition's Petition's Petition's

[Yahoorsur]

A CERTAIN DELIVERY OFFICE NOT FAR FROM HERE

There was a union rep,a good lad,did the job to the best of his ability,tried to do the best for the members.Anyway along came RM,with all these proposed changes,
'Make a choice between 3.5 hour deliveries and 4.5 hour deliveries,if you choose 4.5 there will be a lot of EVR for the folk who want to get out and full time working for the folk left'
'How about ,you get tae f**k,we want a national agreement,negotiated by our union,I'm not signing off any changes,you will just have to put them in by exec action'

Now the rep,who is following union policy,is put under pressure by a couple of folk in the office,the 2,go and start a petition to get rid of the rep,and to sign up for 4.5 hours delivery,the reasons for this? oh it just so happens that those two are high up the list for EVR,and they have a replacement all ready,thats right No1 petitioner,says 'I will stand for election.
Now to sumarise

Rep following agreed union policy

two ,egocentric, greedy, hoggish, mean, mercenary, miserly, narcissistic, narrow, narrow-minded, out for number one, parsimonious, prejudiced, self-centered, self-indulgent, self-interested,pair of bawbags think that they can ,get rid of rep

SIGN the changes in

Collect all that lovely EVR

oh and leave, their erstwhile colleagues coping with 4.5 hours delivery,while they sit back and laugh



WELL THINK AGAIN IT AINT GONNA f***ing WELL HAPPEN.

And I ken that the two of you pop in here now and again,so c'mon lets hear it got anything to say?

[darrybuncan]

why dont you name the office concerned and then maybe the 2 folk you are decrying will post their reply.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

why dont you name the office concerned and then maybe the 2 folk you are decrying will post their reply.

That would probably identify them and we do promise anonymity on here so I would not recommend it.

[banner18]

A CERTAIN DELIVERY OFFICE NOT FAR FROM HERE

There was a union rep,a good lad,did the job to the best of his ability,tried to do the best for the members.Anyway along came RM,with all these proposed changes,
'Make a choice between 3.5 hour deliveries and 4.5 hour deliveries,if you choose 4.5 there will be a lot of EVR for the folk who want to get out and full time working for the folk left'
'How about ,you get tae f**k,we want a national agreement,negotiated by our union,I'm not signing off any changes,you will just have to put them in by exec action'

Now the rep,who is following union policy,is put under pressure by a couple of folk in the office,the 2,go and start a petition to get rid of the rep,and to sign up for 4.5 hours delivery,the reasons for this? oh it just so happens that those two are high up the list for EVR,and they have a replacement all ready,thats right No1 petitioner,says 'I will stand for election.
Now to sumarise

Rep following agreed union policy

two ,egocentric, greedy, hoggish, mean, mercenary, miserly, narcissistic, narrow, narrow-minded, out for number one, parsimonious, prejudiced, self-centered, self-indulgent, self-interested,pair of bawbags think that they can ,get rid of rep

SIGN the changes in

Collect all that lovely EVR

oh and leave, their erstwhile colleagues coping with 4.5 hours delivery,while they sit back and laugh



WELL THINK AGAIN IT AINT GONNA f***ing WELL HAPPEN.

And I ken that the two of you pop in here now and again,so c'mon lets hear it got anything to say?

Sounds like a rather revolting pair of individuals. Have they thought of running for government, Mandelson needs these kind of people on his team?

[Broxi51]

why dont you name the office concerned and then maybe the 2 folk you are decrying will post their reply.

I think one just has

[DGP1]

Make sure as many people stick with the rep. and that way he can't be dismissed from his position.

[tpost]

RM are trying this in a large number of offices. They georoute it and then say x amount of people can have VR if the office accept the changes. The managers call the weak and gullible into their office and convince them to take on more work and then hope the old hands vote for change and take a pay off. Trouble is staff who are left have huge walks to deal with day in day out.

[darrybuncan]

as usual on a post like this a lot of what is being reported is inaccurate.it is not a minority of folk who want change in the office i suspect you are outing but nearly two-thirds,as illistraited by them declaring this in a preferance ballot [not recognised by the cwu].this is the same office who last year had the majority vote in a deal where now two thirds of the office work their contracted hours[including most of the office part-timers who would have achieved full-time positions if the cwu had given the okay to the new proposal as they did 6 miles away in the leven office] whilst the other third,the majority of whom are not in favour of the new deal,are sitting smugly in thier houses between one and two hours earlier each working day.As regards the removal of the office rep,nothing personal came into.It was a tactic considered to force the cwu area rep to tell the office why the union was blocking a deal that the majority of the office wanted.he said it would not make any differance as he would still block it in accordance with current union policy.the rep is still in place in a hugely divided office,where people are withdrawing from the union after hearing the result of the stage 3 disagreement hearing.no 6 vr's,No 13 part-time to full-time positions and people then all working their contracted hours.Instead royal mail are imposing option 2 of thier proposals they put to the men.this option results in 7 positions having the hours reduced,with most driving duties going part-time forcing the older staff members on those duties either buying down or going back on walking duties.this is being implemented during march.it will be interesting to see what the cwu does on this situation as it says its not talking about savings,but what will be the outcome if royal mail impose it by ea.as a footnote on the evr's you talked about.how do you know what people want to take it, when we havent even seen who is eligible.you should base your postings on facts not hearsay.

[Broxi51]

From what I have heard there's a DO in a mess with their 4.5 hour deliveries. Managers have been drafted in to cover the cut offs at a time when mail has been relatively low. They will tweak the duties time and again and when they finish I am sure that it will still be over 3.5 hour deliveries but it will fall short of 4.5 or 4.25 hour deliveries.
If you all stood firm with the CWU then when they tried to push in exec action you would all do your jobs properly. If it meant that the changes were feasible then so be it but I would suspect not and cut offs and no working days off would bring your office to it knees. The managers will sweeten their talks of 4.25 hour dels with FT and EVR but at the end of the day it will be a massive struggle for the older posties who are still there after the EVRs have come and gone. What happens to them or are you not bothered? Management want to create a divided office and you and your consorts are providing them with the ideal weapon. You may not agree with the CWU but it need not mean trying to stab them in the back. Once the CWU start negotiating again then you can complain to them about the choices but until then as a CWU member you should be supporting and not dividing.

[KYREP]

Simple question here...Why wont Royal Mail sit down with the C.W.U and agree a national for the 4.5 hours hmm?? We dont want to sell ourselves out by agreeing anything outwith national agreement for obvious reasons. So whats Royal Mail upto???

I have no trust in Royal Mail or in its sorry,pathetic brainwashed excuse for "Managment" (How much bonus are you tubes on for selling us down the river?) History shows that the company is full of empty promises and would stab us in the back given half a chance. Even the selfish F***ers have been stitched up at one time or another. Ohh some people have short memories!!

We WILL stand up for what we believe in. We WILL stay strong for the our future and the future of the Union and we will NOT surrender!!

As for the Rep under attack at the "unnamed office" stay strong son, even Jesus had his haters

[DGP1]

I thought CWU had a policy of NO negotiation about office savings so the rep. is right, anyway, why would you want to help out RM (and I can almost guarantee that there will be NO permanent FT contracts given).

[NoSurrenderX]

Well said KYREP. Spot on Son!! :cfo

[Yahoorsur]

'it is not a minority of folk who want change in the office i suspect you are outing but nearly two-thirds,as illistraited by them declaring this in a preferance ballot [not recognised by the cwu]'


So what your saying then is that,it wasnt a CWU ballot but a Royal Mail 'ballot' ,interesting ,wonder what choices were on this 'ballot',would there have been an option for NO to Both?,didnt think so,oh and if the CWU do a ballot,we will only ballot OUR members.


'As regards the removal of the office rep,nothing personal came into.It was a tactic considered to force the cwu area rep to tell the office why the union was blocking a deal that the majority of the office wanted.'


Soooooooo lets get this straight,you went round with a petition to get rid of your rep as a tactic to get the Area rep to go up there?,funny how I always use the phone to get in touch with him,and have always managed to speak to him,you and your cohort put the rep in a piss poor position re Royal mail management,and lets be honest about it,what your trying to do is f***ing despicable,cos you ken you are well up the line for EVR,lay off the bullying and harrasment of the rep.


And further to your petition,how the hell did it end up on his desk?,you sir are a disgrace.

[Broxi51]

'it is not a minority of folk who want change in the office i suspect you are outing but nearly two-thirds,as illistraited by them declaring this in a preferance ballot [not recognised by the cwu]'


So what your saying then is that,it wasnt a CWU ballot but a Royal Mail 'ballot' ,interesting ,wonder what choices were on this 'ballot',would there have been an option for NO to Both?,didnt think so,oh and if the CWU do a ballot,we will only ballot OUR members.


'As regards the removal of the office rep,nothing personal came into.It was a tactic considered to force the cwu area rep to tell the office why the union was blocking a deal that the majority of the office wanted.'


Soooooooo lets get this straight,you went round with a petition to get rid of your rep as a tactic to get the Area rep to go up to?,funny how I always use the phone to get in touch with him,and have always managed to speak to him,you and your cohort put the rep in a piss poor position re Royal mail management,and lets be honest about it,what your trying to do is f***ing despicable,cos you ken you are well up the line for EVR,lay off the bullying and harrasment of the rep.


And further to your petition,how the hell did it end up on hisdesk?,you sir are a disgrace.

[gmzx]