Quick question regarding strike ballot...

[lekker]

That's interesting.

So lets say at my office 75% are in the CWU and of those 40% vote yes, 30% vote no and 30% don't bother. A significant majority wouldn't have voted yes but the office would be out on strike.

Hardly seems fair does it?

The post in question for your delectation and delight Andy

[TrueBlueTerrier]

That's interesting.

So lets say at my office 75% are in the CWU and of those 40% vote yes, 30% vote no and 30% don't bother. A significant majority wouldn't have voted yes but the office would be out on strike.

Hardly seems fair does it?

Yes it does
I'll just quote my post which was only 2 above yours but did address your questions

Non union members can make their own minds up whether to strike or not thats how they vote on the issues.

The CWU is the recognised national body that represents their own members so RM deal directly with them. People are given the choice of joining them and having a say in the policies of the CWU, or not joining and having no effect.

If you decide not to join the CWU you are saying, as part of the consequences of your decision, you do not want them representing you therefore by default you are saying you accept whatever RM propose.

Would it be fair if CWU members who paid their subs, attended meetings and came to a decision only then to be voted down by people who by default have already accepted the opposing view. If you want a vote or a way to voice your opinion - join the Union its pretty cheap.

[Ahebban]

That's interesting.

So lets say at my office 75% are in the CWU and of those 40% vote yes, 30% vote no and 30% don't bother. A significant majority wouldn't have voted yes but the office would be out on strike.

Hardly seems fair does it?

It is equally true that a significant number didn't vote no!

Statistics can be interpreted to bolster any position you choose to hold. One of the downfalls of being in a democracy is how you use your vote is YOUR decision. If you choose to waste it by not voting at all that is your right. Opposing opinion can always make claim that the 'silent majority' is actually support for their position, irrespective of whether it is, based not on fact, but purely on numbers.

The CWU is no different to any other organisation in having difficulty mobilising its members to place a cross in either the 'YES' or 'NO' box. Whilst frustrating for CWU HQ people do not register a vote for many reasons.

It will be interesting to compare balloting on the impending dispute in comparison to 2007. Given the complexity and ambiguous nature of the 2007 National Agreement any new Agreement must not be left open to such interpretation. If the lessons of 2007 are to be learned they need to adhered to quickly. Local Reps need to bed fed information quickly and routinely to keep office members engaged, especially when it is possibly still 6-7 weeks away before the result is known.

Apathy is the killer disease of any voting process. Hopefully the seriousness of the current situation will galvanise members to vote positively and in large numbers to send a clear message both to the CWU leadership and RM.

[axeman]

: FYI I am actually in the Union.

Ah! but what union ......unite ?

[lekker]

: FYI I am actually in the Union.

Ah! but what union ......unite ?

That's not a union - it's a pathetic excuse What other union would let their members undermine a legitimate strike? Or worse let them victimise activists of another union? They are a sick joke who get their improvements on our backs

I feel like a dog with fleas

[CourtneyCox]

: FYI I am actually in the Union.

Ah! but what union ......unite ?

That's not a union - it's a pathetic excuse What other union would let their members undermine a legitimate strike? Or worse let them victimise activists of another union? They are a sick joke who get their improvements on our backs

I feel like a dog with fleas

Yes when they were the CMA at least they did not pretend to be a Union.

[andy2007]

Most people in the country didn't vote for the labour party - but they form the government. In a democracy the majority VOTE counts. So don't whinge about a vote not being fair because not everyone who could vote , did vote.

I don't understand. Who's claiming that a vote of not being fair, because not everyone who could vote, did vote?
Those who are ELIGABLE to vote, get a vote. Those who AREN'T ELIGABLE won't have the opportunity to vote. Therefore, the vote is fair. Or are you suggesting that everyone should be able to vote. Including: non-members, Managers, members of the Public, MPs, etc.?
They will all be affected by the outcome, won't they?

It is quite simple really and you must have missed the post by FellChair which i maybe should have quoted. In it he says that if you add together those who vote "no" and those who don't bother to vote and they outnumber those who voted "yes" then it is unfair that an office is asked to strike. My post merely pointed out the flaw in this line of thinking.

See next post

Oops! Sorry, I didn't make the connection.

I forgot to look back over the earlier posts, when I clicked on the link, to go to the newer ones.

[andy2007]

: FYI I am actually in the Union.

Ah! but what union ......unite ?

Perhaps he was actually asking on behalf of someone else.

Besides. It was a perfectly reasonable question, which we've all answered: If you're not in the Union, you don't get a vote. Simples!

[FellChair]

Perhaps he was actually asking on behalf of someone else.

Besides. It was a perfectly reasonable question, which we've all answered: If you're not in the Union, you don't get a vote. Simples!

Aye, thanks for all the quick answers!

Quite a few people in my office wanted to vote but aren't in the union so I can tell them what they need to do now!

[FellChair]

: FYI I am actually in the Union.

Ah! but what union ......unite ?

It's MI5's top intelligence officer at it again!!

[andy2007]

Yes Fellchair. Just tell them to join up ASAP if they want to vote in the Ballot. There's still time to get everything sorted before the Ballot Papers are sent out for the National Ballot.

[axeman]

Ah ha ! now iv'e got it one other refers to 'agent yorkie' so your in the 'in crowd' then

[Tman]

Don't drag me into it Agent. You were crass enough to insult the bloke for no reason so then fight your own battles.

[Midge]

That's interesting.

So lets say at my office 75% are in the CWU and of those 40% vote yes, 30% vote no and 30% don't bother. A significant majority wouldn't have voted yes but the office would be out on strike.

Hardly seems fair does it?

So, in a General Election:

50% of the electorate stick their heads in the sand and don't vote.

Of the other 50%, just 50% vote for The Blue Party, some 25% vote for the Not Quite So Blue (Tinged A Bit Pink) Party, and the other 25% vote for the Yella Fellas.

We still get a Blue Party government, even though only 25% of the electorate voted for them.

It's what we call Democracy.

No-one has yet managed to invent a better way to decide things.

As for those who think it below them to join the union:

No payee? No votee!

SIMPLZ!

[FellChair]

So, in a General Election:

50% of the electorate stick their heads in the sand and don't vote.

Yes but in a general election you have the RIGHT to vote, whether you do or not is another matter.

My point was that there were lots of postmen who would want to vote but couldn't. Anyway, how they get to vote has been established now.