The truth from RMT.

[brothermagrew]

Articulate to the point of the issues discussed during the interview and better still non bumbling and going of in a tangent.

[postmanx]

Very Good - Bob`s the man for the job

hope you are watching CWU

[baldrick]

The RMT have real clout, good organisation and a leader who means what he says.
It took me 2 hours to get to and from work today as the RMT Underground members
are on strike for 48 hours over much the same issues we are having with RM.
Although it's a bit of a nuisance I support the RMT 100%. They have brought London
to a virtual standstill - our vans and lorries were stuck in the gridlocked traffic too.

[Big Daz]

When it comes to politics Bob is as bad as BIlly.

Dosent grasp the big picture our Bob dosent, the last thing we needed was another left party all it did was split the vote leaving the right to get in

In certain situations we need less parties on the left of Labour, I hope something can be agreed upon in time for the next European elections in 2014 as if not Griffin and Brons will have a much easier ride in keeping their MEP places.

[Big Daz]

My concern is not Labour who I would be very happy to see lose the next GE,epecially as I belong to a rival political party.

Its Bob Crow the politican, not Bob Crow the TU GS I feel didnt have his thnking cap on. Bob is the convenor of No 2EU and its in that capacity that I have issues with him. As RMT GS you can fault the man for beinga strong GS who dsoent take no shite from the employers.

The BNP could have been stopped and Bob Crows little outfit had that as a major priority but its chosen route did not work. The differences in policy between Green party and No2EU are small enough that No2EU would have seen many of the things they stand for being dealt with in the EU by the Green Party. A situation was created through the crap at westminster and New Liebour replacing old/real Labour that allowed the BNP to stand a chance of getting a MEP.

RESPECT did have their thinking caps on and realised the only way to stop the BNP was for one of the smaller parties needed to get more votes than the BNP and the way to do it was to get a big enough vote share going to one political party rather than being spread around at least four so they stood aside for the GP man as they belived he was best placed to stop the BNP which was born out by all the polls and the actual result.


The Leader of Respect said


I am proud of the contributions that Respect members made by supporting Green candidates in the West Midlands and North West. In the North West, with BNP leader Nick Griffin on the brink of a breakthrough, the choice was surely clear. For those who would not give their vote to Labour, the Green candidate – Peter Cranie – was more than a credible alternative. A left-wing Green candidate, with a principled record of opposition to racism, deserved our support.

The results are in, and Peter Cranie was less than 5,000 votes away from stopping Nick Griffin's election. Yet almost 50,000 votes were cast for the Socialist Labour Party and No2EU. Together they amounted to just 3% of the vote – nowhere near enough to make a positive impact. The plain fact is that had even a minority of that left wing vote gone to the Greens we would not be waking up to the fact that the North West is sending a fascist to the European parliament.

[Big Daz]

The Greens will get up to three seats based on the current system.

Brighton Pavillion

Norwich South

The third one i think is Lewshiam.

The GP is rapidly improving its vote, but is still some way off getting a good amount of MP's.

[dvbuk55]

I have to agree with the poster who thought that any political agenda was secondary to the wishes of the membership - the CWU leadership are far too involved in politics and too little involved with the issues for which they are paid.

[Ernie Shoe]

I have to agree with the poster who thought that any political agenda was secondary to the wishes of the membership - the CWU leadership are far too involved in politics and too little involved with the issues for which they are paid.

Hear, Hear!!!!

[Big Daz]

I have to agree with the poster who thought that any political agenda was secondary to the wishes of the membership - the CWU leadership are far too involved in politics and too little involved with the issues for which they are paid.

Which is why we need a dedicted political officer at National level so the GS can get on with his or her job of running the CWU.

Of course with less responsibities for the role of GS some will oppose it in case it meant less wages for the role of GS.

[dvbuk55]

I have to agree with the poster who thought that any political agenda was secondary to the wishes of the membership - the CWU leadership are far too involved in politics and too little involved with the issues for which they are paid.

Which is why we need a dedicted political officer at National level so the GS can get on with his or her job of running the CWU.

Of course with less responsibities for the role of GS some will oppose it in case it meant less wages for the role of GS.

What we don't need is any involvement in politics, so far it has cost us millions, the involvement of the CWU in the part privatisation brought no response from the PLP, only the back bench revolt saved the day and that would have been a given from the true labour/socialists. Too many people use the the union for political ambition and involvement we don't need any more jumping on the bandwagon. It would be better to have a politically free union with funds to spread around wherever it does most good to whomever does most good - and I am talking home grown causes not somewhere in the back of beyond that looks good to the press officer and serves no purpose whatsoever to the r & f.

[Big Daz]

Nobody is made to pay into the political fund, if you dont like how its used then dont pay into it.

If your not interested in the CWU political activties then dont pay into the political fund.

Whilst we have a separate and voluntary fund, I do not see any problems with the CWU being engaged in the political arena.

Dont pay in then it wont cost you a single penny, it really is that incredibly simple!!

[Big Daz]

To clarify I would like to see a politically active CWU that is not alligned to any political party.

Whilst politicians make decisions and pass laws that affect us in the world of work surley its barmy not to be politically active using a voluntary fund?

To just sit back and hope for the best isnt going to be of any use to man or beast is it?

[IWW Fellow Worker]

To clarify I would like to see a politically active CWU that is not alligned to any political party.

And as soon as we have that, I'll only be too happy to opt back in.

[dvbuk55]

To clarify I would like to see a politically active CWU that is not alligned to any political party.

Whilst politicians make decisions and pass laws that affect us in the world of work surley its barmy not to be politically active using a voluntary fund?

To just sit back and hope for the best isnt going to be of any use to man or beast is it?

Why do you want the union to be involved in politics? It isn't really about the money, but I would question that all the money donated and monies spent on political activities is raised by the political levy - and would stop paying that levy force the union to sever its ties with politics altogether? - if so I'm all for stopping the levy.

To sit back and hope for the best? - we all have the benefit of a vote and can exercise that in elections, I object to people using the union as a vehicle for political ambition and using money raised from the membership for that end. Surely there are local labour party organisations that people become involved with who aren't remotely connected to any union and have no recourse to union funding or outside sponsorship.

[Big Daz]

Trade Unionism and politics have been entwined for the last 109 years, I would like that to continue for another 109 years via a voluntary political fund not does not pay any money to any political party. However there may be some who do wish to give money to certain individuals or political parties so the political fund must be two funds one for general political campaigning and another for donations/affilations to political parties. All members must be asked if they wish to pay into one or both of the political funds or neither.

Lets be clear on how political activties are paid for, the law says it must come from a political fund which is voluntary to pay into if CWU are doing otherwise then they are very silly or just plain incompetent. If was proven the law had been broken I dread to think what the consequences would be. The political fund exists at National Regional and branch level which means there are three pots of money for political activties. I would doubt very very much if branches are using general fund money to finance political activties.

The political fund at levels must be democratic with rank and file membership particpation essential.

Example of this is that under a PF that is for donations/affilations to political parties there must be widespread support for the criteria that is used to determine who gets money and who dosent. What say do the rank and file get at the moment?

I have no roots in the union movement to lose I am a convert to the cause which happened over the space of more than a decade.

Im not in favour of a union that limits itself purley to the workplace when the laws passed by politicans impact on the workplace/workers. The right to unpaid release for union reps is enshrined in law with learning reps and safety reps getting paid release by law. What happens if the government of the day decides to alter that and that alteration is negative? Do we sit back and let them get on with because we do not have a political fund or do we roll up our sleeves and get stuck in? What if we wish to alter some laws that relate to the workplace or TU rights and regulations?

Should activity in the political arena relate purely to the workplace/workers/trade unions rather than general stuff as well, is a important question/debate that the CWU needs to have with its members.


The law says we must have a ballot every ten years on keeping or ditching the political fund, the resulting ballot and the costs incurred and related to it is a complete waste of time and money when the flipping thing is voluntary anyway!!

If we did not have a political fund we would do more harm than good to ourselves!!!

An all powerfull national political officer is not what I have proposed, national political officer is a idea to deal with the the concerns raised that not enough time is being spent by those higher up on IR issues/ spending to much time on political issues. Therefore a big seperation of political stuff from the role of GS into a new post who works to the democraticlly made policy of those who pay into the political fund should be debated.

We already have regional political officers working along side regional secretaries and the same at branch level. I am a branch political officer I hold not a single IR post or any other post in the CWU at any level. I have no authority to engage mangement on behalf of the CWU members only the people in the political arena.
Reform is what I belive would benefit the CWU political fund and CWU political activity for the benefit of the members.

I dont quite understand the own personal agenda/comment.

I have one agenda as a political officer in the CWU and that is the CWU agenda in sorting out our issues within Royal Mail using the political arena wereas IR reps use the normal IR/workplace proceses.

That is a agenda I pursue in my own time as I get no release to do the job of political officer.

I like to post my own personal view points/political agenda or anything else it could be called on this site for debate.

At the moment Im trying to get my MP a front bench Tory who might be the opposite number to Pat McFadden but who is a shadow DBIS minister to accept that Mandy is telling a load of porky pies about the CWU and the state of Royal Mail. :mfo

Now that you have all been enlightened Im off to bed to dream of the day we see democratic reform of the political fund/activity and we the members decide rather than the powers that be if affilating to labour is of any use to us.