London starts to make progress

[DGP1]

Northern Ireland , agreements made in BT7 , BT8 , Downpatrick and Derry or Londonderry depending on your poltical choice.

What about those offices that had changes brought in by EA? My office has had it's first meeting this week with the manager stating that there's nothing wrong with most of the duties and that he'll do nothing except conduct code the postie for performance issues.

[left739]

To the idea that London have got a good deal out of this – that is not the impression in my office. When the strike was called off for the interim deal the mood was one of anger and disappointment. We still have the most senior guys in the office having been put on reserve and doing the worst walks because their jobs were torn out by executive action and the local talks have got nowhere so far.

When we were told that the London union were trying to pressure the National Leadership to restart the strikes I never believed it would happen. Now some new form of words and appearance of movement in some offices has persuaded the London union to accept the situation but the general feeling among ordinary members is that we struck for 18 days for nothing.

RM will give a little before christmas but the feeling even from union guys is that after christmas we are in for it and unfortunately the impression I get f is that then it will be too late and people won't be up for further action.

So be angry with the union all you like but don't read it as if London have got a deal at the expense of the rest of the country - its just not true.

[dvbuk55]

Ring fencing London are not my words but the words on the Royal Mail London and CWU London post.
My reply is an answer to the person who posted that the national strikers were bleating, I merely pointed out that without that national support, London would still be striking without any negotiation.
I would suggest that the authors of these documents choose their words more carefully.

[k979aaa]

We all who work in royalmail are in this mess because of the fragmentation of our union a thousand separate agreements does not make for unity nor fraternity but only fragmentation and disillusionment!. NOW IS THE TIME FOR NATIONAL AGREEMENTS ON WORKLOAD AND PATTERNS OF DELIVERY SPANS AS WELL AS BULLYING AND HARASSMENT!.

[Martin Walsh]

Lft 739 , since the 30th November we have made some progress in London with the assistance of ACAS.

We now have agreements in SE1 , Sw16 , SW19 and N1.

Yesterday morning we met with all the managers and local reps , DSMs and Area reps of the 4 day week offices which had by executive action been put back to 5 days , some progress was made and some clairty given by both the Royal Mail director and the Divisonal reps.

In the afternoon we had a presentaton on the new delvery model and walk seqeunecing and how that fits into 2.4 of the interim agreement.

Some considerable progress has been made in EC , W1 and WC in partiucular over the resign issues.

In East London E3 have made progross, E14 which had a geo route revision imposed is having talks and E1 the area rep is getting involved with moving the issues on.

In North London we are close to an agreement in N3 , and in number of other units are close if they can resolve the issue of belated hourage.

In the Paddington area we are not making as much progress and are looking at how we can resolve this.

In the North West area we have some proposals which are close but some where we will probalby have disagreements in .

In South West London there has been some progress but further talks are underway.

South East roughly the same as South West.

We have a further review on Monday with acas , we are aware London has not made as many agreements compared to other parts of the UK in line with 2.3 . Unsurprisingly when you consider how bitter the dispute was in London.

Now K979 there will be only one National agreement on workload in delivery , spans etc but what you will never find is that Headquaters removes the right for local offices to have local negotations on how the span is done within the office , what attendances the units wants , what earnings opportunities an office wants , what mix of staff an office wants and a range of other issues.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Now if we could have a detailed report for other areas outside the M25 we could keep CWU members happy and informed.

[Big Daz]

Now if we could have a detailed report for other areas outside the M25 we could keep CWU members happy and informed.

That would require for starters Dingo's counterparts from around the country to come on RMC.

[k979aaa]

Lft 739 , since the 30th November we have made some progress in London with the assistance of ACAS.

We now have agreements in SE1 , Sw16 , SW19 and N1.

Yesterday morning we met with all the managers and local reps , DSMs and Area reps of the 4 day week offices which had by executive action been put back to 5 days , some progress was made and some clairty given by both the Royal Mail director and the Divisonal reps.

In the afternoon we had a presentaton on the new delvery model and walk seqeunecing and how that fits into 2.4 of the interim agreement.

Some considerable progress has been made in EC , W1 and WC in partiucular over the resign issues.

In East London E3 have made progross, E14 which had a geo route revision imposed is having talks and E1 the area rep is getting involved with moving the issues on.

In North London we are close to an agreement in N3 , and in number of other units are close if they can resolve the issue of belated hourage.

In the Paddington area we are not making as much progress and are looking at how we can resolve this.

In the North West area we have some proposals which are close but some where we will probalby have disagreements in .

In South West London there has been some progress but further talks are underway.

South East roughly the same as South West.

We have a further review on Monday with acas , we are aware London has not made as many agreements compared to other parts of the UK in line with 2.3 . Unsurprisingly when you consider how bitter the dispute was in London.

Now K979 there will be only one National agreement on workload in delivery , spans etc but what you will never find is that Headquaters removes the right for local offices to have local negotations on how the span is done within the office , what attendances the units wants , what earnings opportunities an office wants , what mix of staff an office wants and a range of other issues.

I never said you could not make local arrangements but that royalmail will seek too impose any agreements which are trialed in other areas under phase three of the pay and modernisation agreement 2007 after all DONALD BRYDON and his ADJUTANT PAUL TOLHURST WILL SEEK TO DO SO REGARDLESS OF ANY LOCAL AGREEMENTS!.

[fishtank]

"Now K979 there will be only one National agreement on workload in delivery , spans etc but what you will never find is that Headquaters removes the right for local offices to have local negotations on how the span is done within the office , what attendances the units wants , what earnings opportunities an office wants , what mix of staff an office wants and a range of other issues.dingo"

Local agreements weaken national agreements and cause the very division we see in the union every day.
They feed the "They have a better deal than us" attitude and give management the green light to cherry pick ideas that suit them best.
We had a national agreement of 3.5hr delivery spans and this was suppose to be unmovable.
Certain units were allowed to circumvent this to enable various attendance patterns and next thing we are being told at WTL sessions that this unit does this and that unit does that.
If units can work WITHIN a strong national agreement to reach local agreement then fine.
But NO unit should be allowed to undermine a national agreement in the way that P&M2007 was undermined.
No one is asking for a one size fits all agreement.
What we are asking for is one agreement to PROTECT all.

[Ahebban]

Local agreements are part and parcel of working life and providing they fall within the confines of National Agreements they should be encouraged as no two offices work alike. The problem with the 2007-2009 National Agreement was in itself too vague and was counter-productive for workable local agreements.

[AnotherLimey]

"Now K979 there will be only one National agreement on workload in delivery , spans etc but what you will never find is that Headquaters removes the right for local offices to have local negotations on how the span is done within the office , what attendances the units wants , what earnings opportunities an office wants , what mix of staff an office wants and a range of other issues.dingo"

Local agreements weaken national agreements and cause the very division we see in the union every day.
They feed the "They have a better deal than us" attitude and give management the green light to cherry pick ideas that suit them best.
We had a national agreement of 3.5hr delivery spans and this was suppose to be unmovable.
Certain units were allowed to circumvent this to enable various attendance patterns and next thing we are being told at WTL sessions that this unit does this and that unit does that.
If units can work WITHIN a strong national agreement to reach local agreement then fine.
But NO unit should be allowed to undermine a national agreement in the way that P&M2007 was undermined.
No one is asking for a one size fits all agreement.
What we are asking for is one agreement to PROTECT all.

Spot on Fishtank

[fishtank]

Local agreements are part and parcel of working life and providing they fall within the confines of National Agreements they should be encouraged as no two offices work alike. The problem with the 2007-2009 National Agreement was in itself too vague and was counter-productive for workable local agreements.

The very reason the 2007-2009 National Agreement was so vague was to allow scope for local agreements.
Local agreements never stay within the confines of most National Agreements for this very reason,Everyone interprets them differently and to their own benefit.
Unfortunately with the management structure we have one offices benefit is usually another offices detriment.
This idea that no two offices work alike is an interesting one.
Why?
Talking to members on this site.
Apart from geography what is the main difference between delivery offices?
Some are larger some are smaller,some in the city some more rural but mostly we do the same job.
Local Agreements are the main differences between units.

[Ahebban]

You have said it yourself in respect of DOs ... ours is predominantly an urban office on 5 days. The nearest DO is predominantly rural and works a 6 day pattern. Whilst the end result (the delivery of mail) is the same, the manner in which it is done differs by local agreement. A rigid national agreement will not allow necessary flexibility. Whilst local agreements are just that, local, it does not mean that area reps/area managers are excluded from having their input or that national guidelines are ignored. That is the point of having an agreed IR framework so that local issues are sorted at local level within the confines of national agreements. If either side choose to work outside the confines of the IR framework and national agreements then inevitably disputes will result. A good local agreement will encompass elements of national agreements that work for the benefit of members and office as a whole.

The weakness of the 2007-2009 Agreement was that it was so completely and utterly vague. At the time the CWU had been on the back foot from the moment it agreed to the suspension of action (sounds familiar? ) allowing the backlog of mail to be cleared, losing support and momentum in the process. RM never moved from what it saw as the key elements of what they wanted in a national agreement. It was a poorly constructed and negotiated agreement from the CWU members' perspective. It became necessary for the CWU to concede much, but cloud its ineptness with vague wording, and by using spin convince members that it was the best deal possible under the circumstances. One can only hope that the current negotiations learn the lessons from the 2007-2009 Agreement and finalize an Agreement that will work, seek to address the aspirations of members, be strong yet flexible to allow good local agreements for the betterment of all.

[fishtank]

You have said it yourself in respect of DOs ... ours is predominantly an urban office on 5 days. The nearest DO is predominantly rural and works a 6 day pattern. Whilst the end result (the delivery of mail) is the same, the manner in which it is done differs by local agreement. A rigid national agreement will not allow necessary flexibility. Whilst local agreements are just that, local, it does not mean that area reps/area managers are excluded from having their input or that national guidelines are ignored. That is the point of having an agreed IR framework so that local issues are sorted at local level within the confines of national agreements. If either side choose to work outside the confines of the IR framework and national agreements then inevitably disputes will result. A good local agreement will encompass elements of national agreements that work for the benefit of members and office as a whole.

The weakness of the 2007-2009 Agreement was that it was so completely and utterly vague. At the time the CWU had been on the back foot from the moment it agreed to the suspension of action (sounds familiar? ) allowing the backlog of mail to be cleared, losing support and momentum in the process. RM never moved from what it saw as the key elements of what they wanted in a national agreement. It was a poorly constructed and negotiated agreement from the CWU members' perspective. It became necessary for the CWU to concede much, but cloud its ineptness with vague wording, and by using spin convince members that it was the best deal possible under the circumstances. One can only hope that the current negotiations learn the lessons from the 2007-2009 Agreement and finalize an Agreement that will work, seek to address the aspirations of members, be strong yet flexible to allow good local agreements for the betterment of all.

As i have said i am not against local agreements when used in conjunction with a strong national agreement.
IF there are REAL differences from one D.O to another then pragmatism and flexibility must be used.
However i am not in favour of local agreements being used as a way of abdicating responsibility at national level.
I am also not in favour of allowing a vocal minority (with the blessing of the local rep) to control an entire office.
As far as the second part of your post i agree mostly however i do remember "everything can be agreed locally" being one of the ways they sold it to us.

[Martin Walsh]

Fishtank I think due to the fact that Royal Mail have this policy of standardising all offices that the freedom which other national agreements have allowed in the past will be restricted in this national agreement.

However the agreement will allow some flexibility over spans , saturdays , mix of full time/part time , earnings opportunites and attendances,. In addition when the delivery deal is done not all offices will have walk sequencing at the same time or car derived vans at the same time so allowances will have to be made.

It is impossible and would be vigioursly opposed on a scale not seen in recent years if CWU HQs introduced a national agreement which did not allow for local negotations on how it was introduced in each office. Remember there are over 99,900 people who work in delivery units in 1388 delivery offices , and 939 SPDOs. CWU Hqs cannot implement every revison by remote control as they would not have the support of the local office and it would fail.