IMPORTANT:Time to fight and not give in

[BELIAL]

Take ten ,read it again ,Huddersfield is a good example, the union did not fail
And I agree with the other points you raise,hence my request to stop shifting the blame. Union officials are elected to do a job and if they fail ,it seems a bit rich to blame the calibre of the membership

[stokes11eg]

So the question is there are rummours around the country that other areas have decided to do deals on savings. Is this true and if so why ?? What is the point in being in a national union if when the Postal Executive instruct all Branch`s that no savings should be given that some choose to ingnore it.

Frankly as someone who is committed to balloting 14 000 members against Royal Mail`s plans it does not only make me frustrated but dammed angry that others areas are too weak to hold firm against Royal Mail`s threats. However I have the upmost respect for those who are holding the line and are balloting locally where managment are threatening or attempting executive action.

In order for us to have a national ballot we all must be prepared to hold the line and not give in. For if we were to ballot nationally we must get a yes vote or we will be finsihed as a union.


Dingo
there are v.small offices all over the UK where there is no culture or history of folk standing up for themselves,the East Neuk of Fife is notorious up here for signing agreements,...not even signed by CWU members ,I honestly cant find the heart to slag them off anymore,weak,foolish call them what you will ,maybe its a fault in our structure,or maybe its inherent in the very nature of our job,maybe it's just some folks human nature whan faced with conflict,to retreat ,whatever it is, we the unon have to find a way to stop RM,they have embarked on a strategy of picking us off unit by unit,area by area,that why we have to ballot unit by unit,have local meetings, unit by unit(maybe when we stop funding Labour we can start employing full time organisers in these areas)to put over our case.
I know one thing that this site(your to blame Postman) has led to folk in my D.O being more aware of RM tricks,we must build the case brick by brick,so that when Rm come for us,we are ready.

Rockytony67 makes a very good point, 'the union as it was 20 years ago',
we have to fight here and now ,not as things were, Scotland No 2 are making basic moves in this area,getting mobile no's,e-mail addresses,the forum, etc but and here's the killer,how bout talking face to face,someone with the skills to convince folk of the rightness of our case?,thats what wins people,not fancy gadgets,applications,etc,but talking face to face.

I have to say in our office, there are times we feel there has been a national agreement because after discussions, the Union rep has come round and suggested we accept what's on offer, inferring that this has come from H,Q,--
maybe this is why some offices seem to be 'going it alone' when in fact reps have had them believe otherwise.

[dvbuk55]

You are right Dingo in saying that we need face to face opportunities to state the union case BUT it is a question of whether the Area, Div and Local Reps can be bothered to actually arrange a face to face - in my case we are lucky if the Rep shows his face which leaves the sub rep in a difficult position because he simply hasn't got the training nor in truth the inclination to organise the workforce nor explain the consequences of doing some of the things they do. So who is at fault?: poor Area, Div, Rep, sub-Rep or the fact that there is so little contact between the union and the branch that the failings are either ignored or considered inconsequential and of course it makes elections easy because there is little competition.

[Martin Walsh]

Stoke I dont know why local reps are saying that. It could not have been any clearer to Branch`s across the country when both the DGSP and the Assistant secretary outdoor said NO MORE SAVINGS AND NO MORE GEO ROUTE. Since then the assitant secretary for losgistics (RDCs and VOCs ) has held a meeting with branch`s around the country to state do not agree savings. In fact Divisonal reps are having to do a weekly proforma on where each mail centre and Delivery office are in the framework . If Branch`s and Local reps are not holding the line then its not through a lack of policy its more likely a lack of backbone.

Look this is not about whether your office can do a deal or not whether the savings can work or not its about whether you have a full time job in the future. Its weather you have a mail centre in your area and its whether we defeat Royal Mail`s slash and burn modernisation plans. How they have the nerve to call it Modernisation when 40% of the work will not arrive until after 10 oclock in a delivery office is beyond me as it will mean no work including firms will be delivered until the second batch has been walksorted hence with a two o clock last letter it equals a part time delivery model.

Dvbuck I agree that comms is hit and miss in different branch`s and Divisions. Before 1992 the union had over 700 different branch`s within the CWU and in my own opinion we were weaker for it. When we introduced branch amalgamation in 92 along with the industrial relations framework we decided to move to 90 Branch`s based on postcodes and a divisonal set up.

The division I come from this made us stronger and we built unity especially in industrial action which had not existed previously but I reliase other branchs cover a huge geographical location and sometimes comms could be improved. Personally I am a great believer in de centralisation and allowing more rescouces to the regions and branch`s in order for them to communicate with the members more effectively of what is happening both nationally and in the division.

I also believe the PEC not the officers should produce a monthly report. I am not in favour of an indivdual like pete keenyside doing it becasue its just one indivudal out of 17 voting members of the PEC.and it is based on his opinion and his beliefs. I have no issues with Pete and understand the reasons why he has produced the report but the PEC shoud now produce one based on the collective voice of the PEC. This will assist in the PEC holding to count the National Officers who are non voting members of the PEC and will inform the membership better.

[Yahoorsur]

'I also believe the PEC not the officers should produce a monthly report. I am not in favour of an indivdual like pete keenyside doing it becasue its just one indivudal out of 17 voting members of the PEC.and it is based on his opinion and his beliefs. I have no issues with Pete and understand the reasons why he has produced the report but the PEC shoud now produce one based on the collective voice of the PEC. This will assist in the PEC holding to count the National Officers who are non voting members of the PEC and will inform the membership better.'


Absolutely,just as a matter of interest Dingo do any of the PEC blog?,just another way to reach out and inform,one amonst a few.

[padraig1965]

So the question is there are rummours around the country that other areas have decided to do deals on savings. Is this true and if so why ?? What is the point in being in a national union if when the Postal Executive instruct all Branch`s that no savings should be given that some choose to ingnore it.

Frankly as someone who is committed to balloting 14 000 members against Royal Mail`s plans it does not only make me frustrated but dammed angry that others areas are too weak to hold firm against Royal Mail`s threats. However I have the upmost respect for those who are holding the line and are balloting locally where managment are threatening or attempting executive action.

In order for us to have a national ballot we all must be prepared to hold the line and not give in. For if we were to ballot nationally we must get a yes vote or we will be finsihed as a union.


Dingo
there are v.small offices all over the UK where there is no culture or history of folk standing up for themselves,the East Neuk of Fife is notorious up here for signing agreements,...not even signed by CWU members ,I honestly cant find the heart to slag them off anymore,weak,foolish call them what you will ,maybe its a fault in our structure,or maybe its inherent in the very nature of our job,maybe it's just some folks human nature whan faced with conflict,to retreat ,whatever it is, we the unon have to find a way to stop RM,they have embarked on a strategy of picking us off unit by unit,area by area,that why we have to ballot unit by unit,have local meetings, unit by unit(maybe when we stop funding Labour we can start employing full time organisers in these areas)to put over our case.
I know one thing that this site(your to blame Postman) has led to folk in my D.O being more aware of RM tricks,we must build the case brick by brick,so that when Rm come for us,we are ready.

Rockytony67 makes a very good point, 'the union as it was 20 years ago',
we have to fight here and now ,not as things were, Scotland No 2 are making basic moves in this area,getting mobile no's,e-mail addresses,the forum, etc but and here's the killer,how bout talking face to face,someone with the skills to convince folk of the rightness of our case?,thats what wins people,not fancy gadgets,applications,etc,but talking face to face.

Well said STICK BY THE UNION.

[stokes11eg]

Stoke I dont know why local reps are saying that. It could not have been any clearer to Branch`s across the country when both the DGSP and the Assistant secretary outdoor said NO MORE SAVINGS AND NO MORE GEO ROUTE. Since then the assitant secretary for losgistics (RDCs and VOCs ) has held a meeting with branch`s around the country to state do not agree savings. In fact Divisonal reps are having to do a weekly proforma on where each mail centre and Delivery office are in the framework . If Branch`s and Local reps are not holding the line then its not through a lack of policy its more likely a lack of backbone.

Look this is not about whether your office can do a deal or not whether the savings can work or not its about whether you have a full time job in the future. Its weather you have a mail centre in your area and its whether we defeat Royal Mail`s slash and burn modernisation plans. How they have the nerve to call it Modernisation when 40% of the work will not arrive until after 10 oclock in a delivery office is beyond me as it will mean no work including firms will be delivered until the second batch has been walksorted hence with a two o clock last letter it equals a part time delivery model.

Dvbuck I agree that comms is hit and miss in different branch`s and Divisions. Before 1992 the union had over 700 different branch`s within the CWU and in my own opinion we were weaker for it. When we introduced branch amalgamation in 92 along with the industrial relations framework we decided to move to 90 Branch`s based on postcodes and a divisonal set up.

The division I come from this made us stronger and we built unity especially in industrial action which had not existed previously but I reliase other branchs cover a huge geographical location and sometimes comms could be improved. Personally I am a great believer in de centralisation and allowing more rescouces to the regions and branch`s in order for them to communicate with the members more effectively of what is happening both nationally and in the division.

I also believe the PEC not the officers should produce a monthly report. I am not in favour of an indivdual like pete keenyside doing it becasue its just one indivudal out of 17 voting members of the PEC.and it is based on his opinion and his beliefs. I have no issues with Pete and understand the reasons why he has produced the report but the PEC shoud now produce one based on the collective voice of the PEC. This will assist in the PEC holding to count the National Officers who are non voting members of the PEC and will inform the membership better.

Hi, dingo. Unfortunatly, over the years. our union rep, has suggested we take what's on offer,usually after meetings,
he will slink round the office, and when asked by many of us,what to do--the answer is take what's on offer. our own fault perhaps, for nor clarifying wether or not this was H'Q's view, or his own. i guess the point I am trying to make is that
a lot of the so called 'local 'agreements have been snuck in by default,obviosly if you rep. suggests you take a certain
route, you assume this mandate has come from the top.If too many reps behave like this, then perhaps they are more
resposible for division amomngst the Areas than even R.M.
Perhaps it is time for NO decision, however small, to be made without a national ballot being in place.

[dvbuk55]

Perhaps the failure is in the system. It would perhaps be beneficial if a rep had to attend courses and was vetted by a committee of local members to make sure the person is suitable and not just applying in the hope of making his own life better and not the members lives. I must say I have found that there is a tendency for reps to be well aware of those things that affect them and seem reluctant to engage in any dialogue that doesn't directly affect them.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Perhaps the failure is in the system. It would perhaps be beneficial if a rep had to attend courses and was vetted by a committee of local members to make sure the person is suitable and not just applying in the hope of making his own life better and not the members lives. I must say I have found that there is a tendency for reps to be well aware of those things that affect them and seem reluctant to engage in any dialogue that doesn't directly affect them.

Thats not a bad idea an election preceded by a board of local active and experienced members who could indicate a preference on the election address of each candidate. However, I would go further, I would get approximately 1-3% of the membership and ask them to assess the actions, advice and communication skills of the incumbent. This should be done without the rep being aware who has been selected. But they should be advised of the overall assessment good or bad so that they can improve their skill set or pass on any "best practice" to other reps.

[dvbuk55]

Perhaps the failure is in the system. It would perhaps be beneficial if a rep had to attend courses and was vetted by a committee of local members to make sure the person is suitable and not just applying in the hope of making his own life better and not the members lives. I must say I have found that there is a tendency for reps to be well aware of those things that affect them and seem reluctant to engage in any dialogue that doesn't directly affect them.

Thats not a bad idea an election preceded by a board of local active and experienced members who could indicate a preference on the election address of each candidate. However, I would go further, I would get approximately 1-3% of the membership and ask them to assess the actions, advice and communication skills of the incumbent. This should be done without the rep being aware who has been selected. But they should be advised of the overall assessment good or bad so that they can improve their skill set or pass on any "best practice" to other reps.

Spot on - just like a job interview really - after all it's our subs that perpetuate this system and so we should really have a choice - and I might add there should be a system of regular local office union meetings to discuss the matters at hand - it is my contention that the rep merely carries out the wishes of the local membership and should not decide issues without the memberships agreement.

[rockytony67]

True blue and dvbuk, you make some great points, but you are operating on the assumption that there is a line of people wanting the reps job, you only have to read the post's on this site to see how many offices do not have reps.

Dvbuk as for meetings you are quite correct, I always held meetings and had a show of hands before any decisions were made in the office, but then you run into the problem of RM not allowing you to have meetings on the premises(when it suits them) so you have to chase people to meet outside the office in there meal relief, anyone who's done it will tell how much of a pain in the arse it is(and remember the rep will still have to do his duty and get no IR time from RM)

Everything the pair of you have said is correct and should happen, but I packed the reps job in 5 years ago and not one person in an office of 60 people has come forward to take it on, boards and course's are great, but you need volunteers first.

[dvbuk55]

True blue and dvbuk, you make some great points, but you are operating on the assumption that there is a line of people wanting the reps job, you only have to read the post's on this site to see how many offices do not have reps.

Dvbuk as for meetings you are quite correct, I always held meetings and had a show of hands before any decisions were made in the office, but then you run into the problem of RM not allowing you to have meetings on the premises(when it suits them) so you have to chase people to meet outside the office in there meal relief, anyone who's done it will tell how much of a pain in the arse it is(and remember the rep will still have to do his duty and get no IR time from RM)

Everything the pair of you have said is correct and should happen, but I packed the reps job in 5 years ago and not one person in an office of 60 people has come forward to take it on, boards and course's are great, but you need volunteers first.

rockytony you have hit on the one flaw in plan - and there is the rub - what we need is a cohesive plan by HQ to recruit suitable reps - then defend them when the going gets tough. Pity you gave up, there is of course a good deal of personal time required as well as any relief and every credit to those prepared to do it.

[mitzi]

you could always become the rep yourself and then you wouldnt have to suffer self serving individuals.

[dvbuk55]

you could always become the rep yourself and then you wouldnt have to suffer self serving individuals.

I'm 63 and too old now - what is needed is a concerted effort to get younger members interested in representing the membership.

[johnnyp]

you could always become the rep yourself and then you wouldnt have to suffer self serving individuals.

I'm 63 and too old now - what is needed is a concerted effort to get younger members interested in representing the membership.

Youre never to old mate remember youngsters will look up to and learn from our older members,you may still have alot to offer my friend.