National strike.....will you deliver....

[spoodoo]

If we get a no vote well all end up part time anyway !

[BELIAL]

Whats this 35 hour a week thing all about? Im on a full time contract and cant afford to lose out on 5 hours pay a week. Is this going to happen?

Definitely management material

[DaveF14]

The aim is to get a reduction in hours to a 35 hour week without a reduction in pay.

That will never happen. Surely. 7 hour day. Claim overtime cause your round wouldnt of changed. More money in your pocket. Cant see them agreeing to that?

[DaveF14]

Whats this 35 hour a week thing all about? Im on a full time contract and cant afford to lose out on 5 hours pay a week. Is this going to happen?

Definitely management material

Meaning?

[BELIAL]

Whats this 35 hour a week thing all about? Im on a full time contract and cant afford to lose out on 5 hours pay a week. Is this going to happen?

Definitely management material

Meaning?

Try eating more oily fish

[DaveF14]

Whats this 35 hour a week thing all about? Im on a full time contract and cant afford to lose out on 5 hours pay a week. Is this going to happen?

Definitely management material

Meaning?

Try eating more oily fish

whats your problem?

[kwikpost]

Whats this 35 hour a week thing all about? Im on a full time contract and cant afford to lose out on 5 hours pay a week. Is this going to happen?

our rep told us it's 35hr week with no loss of pay they are after.

[Martin Walsh]

A shorter working week means no loss of pay and your hourly rate goes up which helps part timers as well.

We have had two reductions in the working week in the last 30 years both 90 mins reductions one in 1988 IWM and another under the way forward in 2000. The deal was that each office absorbs 60 mins of that reduction.

The other issue we have is that we still have paid meal breaks so for the average 5 day week that means that they work appox 37 hours however a signiifcant number of delivery staff dont take their break and in mail centres a number have time bonus breaks from previous RRP over and above their meal relief . So food for fault is that we give up paid meal reliefs to increase the hourly rate again. Legally we are entitled to a break so if indivduals will still have their break.

[dvbuk55]

Whats this 35 hour a week thing all about? Im on a full time contract and cant afford to lose out on 5 hours pay a week. Is this going to happen?

Definitely management material

Meaning?

Try eating more oily fish

[chunk]

AGREE ROBUST DEFINITIONS OF ACCEPTABLE WALK re time, drops and distance
HAVE AN INDEPENDENT BODY TO TEST WALKS
INTRODUCE CLOCKING IN AND OUT
STOP LAPSING ETC
I want some stability in my office
arguments/heated discussions with management are a daily occurrences in mine, if its not me its someone else.
I am not against change as such just cant understand how carrying more mail and walking faster is a modernization .

If somebody in government thinks they can crush the union and then pursue their agenda they have miscalculated.

[k979aaa]

AGREE ROBUST DEFINITIONS OF ACCEPTABLE WALK re time, drops and distance
HAVE AN INDEPENDENT BODY TO TEST WALKS
INTRODUCE CLOCKING IN AND OUT
STOP LAPSING ETC
I want some stability in my office
arguments/heated discussions with management are a daily occurrences in mine, if its not me its someone else.
I am not against change as such just cant understand how carrying more mail and walking faster is a modernization .

If somebody in government thinks they can crush the union and then pursue their agenda they have miscalculated.

Clocking in and out will end a lot of the Charley's cutting up the job and some of the abuses of management! As for lapsing if all duties were properly tested instead of some twonk with a laptop to play with peoples lives things may well get better if all managers were banned from reciveing bonuses!.

[andy2007]

Neither did I. Who said they did

You did, when you said:
If anyone thinks that their only option is to choose between better pay or protecting jobs and the service then they are already beaten. That is the choice presented to you by management ,it is not the only option.
If you fall into into the trap of playing the game by a set of rules fixed by RM then you will lose one way or another. Mr Crozier must be laughing his socks off at how easy it is to dupe some of us, like taking candy off a baby

What I was saying. Was that we should be fighting to protect our service, and our working conditions. Pay is of little consequence, compared to what so many are going through right now. And God only knows, what they have in store for us in the future, if we don't make a stand now.

What you said. Was that anyone (me, for example) who thinks that their only option, is to choose between better pay, or protecting jobs and the service, are already beaten.

If I (and many others like me) were already beaten, because we think that we should be targeting ALL our resources on protecting the service, working conditions, and jobs. Instead of using them to try to bet a pay rise. Then you must know about some deal, that we haven't heard about. Where RM want to give us everything else we want, if we agree to a pay freeze. Or am I missing something here?

[BELIAL]

I think the thing you may be missing is an understanding of the nature of the negotiating process. Specifically RM managements use of the technique of agenda setting.
Agenda setting is a simple but effective way of stacking the odds and is used by all skilled negotiators. If you can pick the timing and location of a conflict and then set the rules to define that conflict you maintain control and increase your chances of a successful outcome.
A few examples from this dispute;
Scotland,test the water with EA a patchy union response seems like RM might be on to a winner.

Go for gold, London ,massive onslaught of EA bullying and intimidation designed to provoke all out conflict in the area. Objectives, isolate the London membership and break the backbone of the union.

Overall hit the workforce with a vast array of attacks on their conditions but never mention the real term cut in their pay.

So you see I never did say RM were offering to improve your conditions in return for a pay cut. What I said was RM were defining the terms of the conflict and offering you a choice of what you could fight for,and that if you accept their definition then chances are you will be worse off. You will have been neatly managed out of your position of strength by fighting the wrong battle.
In essence your division between service /jobs/conditions and pay is a completely false partition that works entirely for RM's benefit. After all,if we take your standpoint to it's extreme logical conclusion we should all work for nothing as long as walk spans stay at 3.5 hrs and the USO is maintained, I think RM could live with that.
So sorry Andy no secret deal that I know of.

[andy2007]

Sorry, you're right. I did misunderstand.

So am I right in thinking, that the intention is to ask for more than we expect to get, and then end up with something in the middle, that would be better than we'd get, if we "laid our cards on the table"?