Agreement to extend national talks

[bogstandard]

regarding the extended talks.
Why on earth were the membership deliberately lied to by HQ and RM, a target date was set of which 2 weeks were used to identify and agree to Mr Poole.
Diignity and Respect At Work whilst endorsed by CWU HQ, MUST, as a minimum be displayed by them and must be demanded and expected by us the members.

I stood as good a chance of being promoted through the ranks to the board of RM during this time than the negotiators did of achieving agreement during the same period.

We are entitled to be spoken to honestly and openly, our negotiators demand transparency although are unwilling to be transparent with their employers

[wranglered]

regarding the extended talks.
Why on earth were the membership deliberately lied to by HQ and RM, a target date was set of which 2 weeks were used to identify and agree to Mr Poole.
Diignity and Respect At Work whilst endorsed by CWU HQ, MUST, as a minimum be displayed by them and must be demanded and expected by us the members.

I stood as good a chance of being promoted through the ranks to the board of RM during this time than the negotiators did of achieving agreement during the same period.

We are entitled to be spoken to honestly and openly, our negotiators demand transparency although are unwilling to be transparent with their employers

and there lies the crux of the matter....CWU negotiators are on the payroll of Royal Mail...

[Martin Walsh]

Wrangled you might have personal reasons why you have an issue with the CWU but I have to say all of those involved in the negotations from the CWU have only the members intrests at heart and none are on the pay role of Royal Mail.

Members are entitled to question and criticise after union officials at all levels as we are not in a poplularity contest and it keeps indivuduals on their toes but cheap shots such as what you stated are simply out of order.

I may disagree with a number of posters on here on the issues but at least we discuss the pros and cons of the issues we disagree on rather than slag indviduals off. I know personally all the negotatiors and class a number of them as close personal friends and your remark couldt be more wrong. Yes they may have a different view on what is the right thing to agree but its based on CWU policy be that confernce , PEC policy , the delvery blueprint or the evidence which is in front of them.

Now Bogstandard I understand your anger , your right it did take too long to identify the independent chair and Dave did have to deal with the London problems which led to the London joint statement, then the delivery talks stalled and only startied making progress when acas were involved. Some of the review meetings were very intense. However in the end I think all of these issues meant that an agreement couldt be reached in that time unless we comprimised on what we wanted to achieve and that would have been wrong.

Plus I think the changes Royal Mail intend to introduce to the the workplan are probably the biggest fundremental change we have seen since the two tier letter service was introduced. The implications on what Royal Mail wish to introduce will assist in closing mail centres , rationlising RDC and advancing inward in Mail centre and making work later into delivery office. I think all our negotiators needed to discuss the implications of such a change. Remember workplan changes have in Royal Mail"s opinion have never been negotatiable.

[wranglered]

POSTMAN...
Post deleted,you are going off topic once again.
Your personal issues with the CWU should be discussed elsewhere.

[Big Daz]

dingo

Lets say I was to be elected to the PEC later this year, who would pay my wages RML or CWU?


In fact I would like to ask out of all those involved in the talks on the CWU side who are employed by CWU and who are employed by RML and if any are employed by RML are they on paid or unpaid release?

[Martin Walsh]

PEC members are paid by the union by central billing.

[wranglered]

PEC members are paid by the union by central billing.

So, looking at my old branch, how come the NEC member also receives a wage from RM for his job that is held over in case, dare I say it, he gets deselected???

Are you saying he gets paid twice?

Not including the expenses naturally...

[dvbuk55]

But enough of the unanswered questions. Dingo ignores those questions to which the answers do not fit the profile he would have us believe are in our best interests.

Lets move on to that issue which is going to prove a deal breaker - money! I'm sure dingo, who knows all the "faces" in the negotiations, will have a tit bit to feed us on what money is on offer and let's just hope it isn't thirty 50p pieces.

[fishtank]

But enough of the unanswered questions. Dingo ignores those questions to which the answers do not fit the profile he would have us believe are in our best interests.

Lets move on to that issue which is going to prove a deal breaker - money! I'm sure dingo, who knows all the "faces" in the negotiations, will have a tit bit to feed us on what money is on offer and let's just hope it isn't thirty 50p pieces.

"The universe would not be rich enough to buy the vote of an honest man."
- Gregory I, the Great (Saint Gregory)

Wishful thinking .


"Every man has his price."
- Sir Robert Walpole, 1st Earl of Orford,

Much more realistic .

[Big Daz]

PEC members are paid by the union by central billing.

So, looking at my old branch, how come the NEC member also receives a wage from RM for his job that is held over in case, dare I say it, he gets deselected???

Are you saying he gets paid twice?

Not including the expenses naturally...

Mr W

My understanding based on dingos central billing comment/reply is as follows

The NEC member in question gets paid as normal by RML. CWU reimburse RML for the cost of his wages.

That is what central billing is.

Agree or disagree?

[dvbuk55]

But enough of the unanswered questions. Dingo ignores those questions to which the answers do not fit the profile he would have us believe are in our best interests.

Lets move on to that issue which is going to prove a deal breaker - money! I'm sure dingo, who knows all the "faces" in the negotiations, will have a tit bit to feed us on what money is on offer and let's just hope it isn't thirty 50p pieces.

"The universe would not be rich enough to buy the vote of an honest man."
- Gregory I, the Great (Saint Gregory)

Wishful thinking .


"Every man has his price."
- Sir Robert Walpole, 1st Earl of Orford,

Much more realistic .

I sincerely hope that there are more followers of St Gregory than Bob Walpole when it comes to the vote.

[dvbuk55]

My understanding based on dingos central billing comment/reply is as follows

The NEC member in question gets paid as normal by RML. CWU reimburse RML for the cost of his wages.

That is what central billing is.

Agree or disagree?

I don't want to get embroiled in the whys and wherefores of who pays who - because I don't think it is a question of money, but of how the time paid for is spent and what sanctions RM can exercise if it so wished. That fact is more germane than who the paymaster is, which in this case may not be who pays the piper etc.

[cyclemech1]

It will have implications as to the whole design of a park&loop delivery.
This delivery model was designed for two drivers not one.
The single driver will constantly have to double back to the van.
This means either the non-driver will have to deliver to more calls and take more mail with him or he will be standing around doing nothing.[/quote]

I have a licence but I don't want to drive a RM vehicle.
I was taken on in this job on the understanding that I could 'confidently ride a bike in traffic' not whether I had a driving licence.
For RM to assume that everybody wants to drive one of these 'car derived vans' is arrogance in the extreme!

[dvbuk55]

It will have implications as to the whole design of a park&loop delivery.
This delivery model was designed for two drivers not one.
The single driver will constantly have to double back to the van.
This means either the non-driver will have to deliver to more calls and take more mail with him or he will be standing around doing nothing.

I have a licence but I don't want to drive a RM vehicle.
I was taken on in this job on the understanding that I could 'confidently ride a bike in traffic' not whether I had a driving licence.
For RM to assume that everybody wants to drive one of these 'car derived vans' is arrogance in the extreme![/quote]

You are right to suggest that RM assumes that everyone wants to drive a liveried vehicle for them and the CWU assumes the same - what, for example, would be the position if no-one wanted to drive, or that you could drive and refused to park and loop because you didn't want to drive. I don't know where you live but take a look outside and tell me you are dying to drive a vehicle in these conditions for no extra pay. I left my car on the drive this morning and walked to work.

[fishtank]

It will have implications as to the whole design of a park&loop delivery.
This delivery model was designed for two drivers not one.
The single driver will constantly have to double back to the van.
This means either the non-driver will have to deliver to more calls and take more mail with him or he will be standing around doing nothing.

I have a licence but I don't want to drive a RM vehicle.
I was taken on in this job on the understanding that I could 'confidently ride a bike in traffic' not whether I had a driving licence.
For RM to assume that everybody wants to drive one of these 'car derived vans' is arrogance in the extreme!

You are right to suggest that RM assumes that everyone wants to drive a liveried vehicle for them and the CWU assumes the same - what, for example, would be the position if no-one wanted to drive, or that you could drive and refused to park and loop because you didn't want to drive. I don't know where you live but take a look outside and tell me you are dying to drive a vehicle in these conditions for no extra pay. I left my car on the drive this morning and walked to work.[/quote]


I believe many of those recruited in the last few years have Postman/Postwoman with Driving in their contracts.
For them there will be no choice,the rest of us,who knows?
It certainly says nothing about driving in my contract.