British postal union seeks to deliver management’s agenda

[dvbuk55]

It comes as no surprise and now we will get the union wannabes and apologists on here saying what would life be like without the CWU - well we would be £3 a week better off, we wouldn't have to listen to their crap, and instead of having some union bods hanging around for three months doing nothing RM would shaft us from the word go without all this pussyfooting around.

Sh, no it's secret, these talks are vital, this is the biggest deal in history, we are at a crossroads - yeah yeah yeah.

And exactly what can take TWO WHOLE DAYS to explain - well I suspect it's a case of the rubber truncheon treatment for the PEC. And how come the meetings only start on Tuesday and finish on Thursday are some on a 3 day week already?

So should there be a union or not in Rm, dvbuk55

Well that is a line for debate - should we have a union or should we have this union or are all unions now tarred with the same brush because they are hamstrung by legislation but still posture as though they had some power? Should we actually call it the Communication Workers Union or something more apt like the Non-communication Union. I am totally frustrated by the length of time this whole rigmarole is taking - is there a deal or not?

[snoddy]

It comes as no surprise and now we will get the union wannabes and apologists on here saying what would life be like without the CWU - well we would be £3 a week better off, we wouldn't have to listen to their crap, and instead of having some union bods hanging around for three months doing nothing RM would shaft us from the word go without all this pussyfooting around.

Sh, no it's secret, these talks are vital, this is the biggest deal in history, we are at a crossroads - yeah yeah yeah.

And exactly what can take TWO WHOLE DAYS to explain - well I suspect it's a case of the rubber truncheon treatment for the PEC. And how come the meetings only start on Tuesday and finish on Thursday are some on a 3 day week already?

So should there be a union or not in Rm, dvbuk55

Maybe the CWU has had its day.
So what do we do if that is the case? New union? No union? Employee representatives on the board? (John Lewis style).

Interesting points mcboing boing. Personally I always thought John Lewis style working was a fair idea. After all with the union now seeming to be in collusion with the management it appears that we already have representatives on the board putting business interests first.
The subtle difference between CWU and elected shopfloor reps is the latter would not cost us £3.00 a week for the privilege.

[rockytony67]

It comes as no surprise and now we will get the union wannabes and apologists on here saying what would life be like without the CWU - well we would be £3 a week better off, we wouldn't have to listen to their crap, and instead of having some union bods hanging around for three months doing nothing RM would shaft us from the word go without all this pussyfooting around.

Sh, no it's secret, these talks are vital, this is the biggest deal in history, we are at a crossroads - yeah yeah yeah.

And exactly what can take TWO WHOLE DAYS to explain - well I suspect it's a case of the rubber truncheon treatment for the PEC. And how come the meetings only start on Tuesday and finish on Thursday are some on a 3 day week already?

So should there be a union or not in Rm, dvbuk55

Well that is a line for debate - should we have a union or should we have this union or are all unions now tarred with the same brush because they are hamstrung by legislation but still posture as though they had some power? Should we actually call it the Communication Workers Union or something more apt like the Non-communication Union. I am totally frustrated by the length of time this whole rigmarole is taking - is there a deal or not?

Yes but if there was no union there would be no rigmarole because RM would announce there plans and that's it, or maybe you think they wouldn't behave in that way or do you?

[Big Daz]

Not, as nothing has been put toa vote and returned a majority in favour of acceptance.

Arrangements should be made to get whatever is on the table out to vote, its out turn to decide the next move!!!

[rockytony67]

It comes as no surprise and now we will get the union wannabes and apologists on here saying what would life be like without the CWU - well we would be £3 a week better off, we wouldn't have to listen to their crap, and instead of having some union bods hanging around for three months doing nothing RM would shaft us from the word go without all this pussyfooting around.

Sh, no it's secret, these talks are vital, this is the biggest deal in history, we are at a crossroads - yeah yeah yeah.

And exactly what can take TWO WHOLE DAYS to explain - well I suspect it's a case of the rubber truncheon treatment for the PEC. And how come the meetings only start on Tuesday and finish on Thursday are some on a 3 day week already?

So should there be a union or not in Rm, dvbuk55

Maybe the CWU has had its day.
So what do we do if that is the case? New union? No union? Employee representatives on the board? (John Lewis style).

Interesting points mcboing boing. Personally I always thought John Lewis style working was a fair idea. After all with the union now seeming to be in collusion with the management it appears that we already have representatives on the board putting business interests first.
The subtle difference between CWU and elected shopfloor reps is the latter would not cost us £3.00 a week for the privilege.

So who would pay for the John Lewis style reps to have release time and attend meetings.

[fishtank]

Well that is a line for debate - should we have a union or should we have this union or are all unions now tarred with the same brush because they are hamstrung by legislation but still posture as though they had some power? Should we actually call it the Communication Workers Union or something more apt like the Non-communication Union. I am totally frustrated by the length of time this whole rigmarole is taking - is there a deal or not?

Five years ago i would have shot anyone down for even suggesting such a debate but now i'm not so sure.
If CWU HQ does not realise it is neither a gravy train nor an excuse for playground politics shortly it will be doomed to die a slow death.
Membership in our office is stll relatively strong at least amongst the full-time staff but the disgust with the union is apparent.
They lost a great deal of money last year and have yet to see many of their issues addressed.
If HQ simply passes most of issues involved in this agreement down to local level the obvious question will be.
Why do we need all those inbetween.

[rockytony67]

Well that is a line for debate - should we have a union or should we have this union or are all unions now tarred with the same brush because they are hamstrung by legislation but still posture as though they had some power? Should we actually call it the Communication Workers Union or something more apt like the Non-communication Union. I am totally frustrated by the length of time this whole rigmarole is taking - is there a deal or not?

Five years ago i would have shot anyone down for even suggesting such a debate but now i'm not so sure.
If CWU HQ does not realise it is neither a gravy train nor an excuse for playground politics shortly it will be doomed to die a slow death.
Membership in our office is stll relatively strong at least amongst the full-time staff but the disgust with the union is apparent.
They lost a great deal of money last year and have yet to see many of their issues addressed.
If HQ simply passes most of issues involved in this agreement down to local level the obvious question will be.
Why do we need all those inbetween.

Who are the ones in between

[dvbuk55]

It comes as no surprise and now we will get the union wannabes and apologists on here saying what would life be like without the CWU - well we would be £3 a week better off, we wouldn't have to listen to their crap, and instead of having some union bods hanging around for three months doing nothing RM would shaft us from the word go without all this pussyfooting around.

Sh, no it's secret, these talks are vital, this is the biggest deal in history, we are at a crossroads - yeah yeah yeah.

And exactly what can take TWO WHOLE DAYS to explain - well I suspect it's a case of the rubber truncheon treatment for the PEC. And how come the meetings only start on Tuesday and finish on Thursday are some on a 3 day week already?

So should there be a union or not in Rm, dvbuk55

Well that is a line for debate - should we have a union or should we have this union or are all unions now tarred with the same brush because they are hamstrung by legislation but still posture as though they had some power? Should we actually call it the Communication Workers Union or something more apt like the Non-communication Union. I am totally frustrated by the length of time this whole rigmarole is taking - is there a deal or not?

Yes but if there was no union there would be no rigmarole because RM would announce there plans and that's it, or maybe you think they wouldn't behave in that way or do you?

Well it would appear from the highlights of the original poster the answer is YES that the union is just a rubber stamp for the changes and their role in these matters has been relegated to couching the changes in a manner acceptable to the workforce.

But really the answer to that question will be answered when we see what the original aims of Royal Mail were and what the union has managed to achieve for us - or not.

[dvbuk55]

Well that is a line for debate - should we have a union or should we have this union or are all unions now tarred with the same brush because they are hamstrung by legislation but still posture as though they had some power? Should we actually call it the Communication Workers Union or something more apt like the Non-communication Union. I am totally frustrated by the length of time this whole rigmarole is taking - is there a deal or not?

Five years ago i would have shot anyone down for even suggesting such a debate but now i'm not so sure.
If CWU HQ does not realise it is neither a gravy train nor an excuse for playground politics shortly it will be doomed to die a slow death.
Membership in our office is stll relatively strong at least amongst the full-time staff but the disgust with the union is apparent.
They lost a great deal of money last year and have yet to see many of their issues addressed.
If HQ simply passes most of issues involved in this agreement down to local level the obvious question will be.
Why do we need all those inbetween.

Five years ago ft I wouldn't have suggested it - even on the last strike, as disappointed as I was with the unions stance, I stood on the line.

However the deals we have had in recent years, the attitude of management ignored by the CWU, the apparent lack of interest by the union in shop floor affairs, the poor quality of the majority of our representation - more probably due to the lack of training, the absolute adherence to a political party which has totally ignored our position, the bumbling shambles that are the hallmark now of media appearances by our leaders, the lack of communication and when there is any information the poor quality of same, the belief that we slavishly believe the half truths that presages any agreement and then lack of honesty in the real position we are in. I feel justified in the criticism I make because in order to command respect and trust you need to earn it and once lost, is very difficult to regain.

[rockytony67]

So you accept the views of the "World Socialist web site" that the union is just a rubber stamp, but then in the next breath say

"But really the answer to that question will be answered when we see what the original aims of Royal Mail were and what the union has managed to achieve for us - or not."

You can't lose dvbuk, whatever the deal is you will criticize it, you haven't even seen it, and yet you've been moaning about it for weeks

but you still haven't answered my question should RM workers have a union or not because whatever the deal is they will have a vote on it, what's your view

[fishtank]

rockytony67 wrote
"Who are the ones in between"

If HQ is so hellbent on local negotiations AND measures that will make it difficult to resort to IA then why bother with the last 3 months
According to the original post CWU HQ simply concedes to RMs wants and wishes anyway so why do we need them.
Why don't we just ask RM what they wan't and then negotiate at a local level anyway.
BTW i'm only half serious with this post but it worries me that i am even half.

[rockytony67]

rockytony67 wrote
"Who are the ones in between"

If HQ is so hellbent on local negotiations AND measures that will make it difficult to resort to IA then why bother with the last 3 months
According to the original post CWU HQ simply concedes to RMs wants and wishes anyway so why do we need them.
Why don't we just ask RM what they wan't and then negotiate at a local level anyway.
BTW i'm only half serious with this post but it worries me that i am even half.

But you haven't answered my question, Who are the ones in between? that the union can get rid of

[fishtank]

rockytony67 wrote
"you haven't even seen it, and yet you've been moaning about it for weeks "

C'mon rockytony,You and i both know a certain poster has been drip feeding us the gory details since November.


But you haven't answered my question, Who are the ones in between? that the union can get rid of


I'm sorry did you want names and addresses.

[dvbuk55]

So you accept the views of the "World Socialist web site" that the union is just a rubber stamp, but then in the next breath say

"But really the answer to that question will be answered when we see what the original aims of Royal Mail were and what the union has managed to achieve for us - or not."

You can't lose dvbuk, whatever the deal is you will criticize it, you haven't even seen it, and yet you've been moaning about it for weeks

but you still haven't answered my question should RM workers have a union or not because whatever the deal is they will have a vote on it, what's your view

My view is that the membership will vote for whatever is recommended, right or wrong. Historically the delivery sections because they are smaller units do not vote their weight which gives MCs a disproportionate vote.

As for the agreement - I don't like the bits that have been dribbled out - but then it only really concerns deliveries in places North of Watford, London has its own agenda and MCs are hardly in the frame are they?

[rockytony67]

rockytony67 wrote
"you haven't even seen it, and yet you've been moaning about it for weeks "

C'mon rockytony,You and i both know a certain poster has been drip feeding us the gory details since November.


But you haven't answered my question, Who are the ones in between? that the union can get rid of


I'm sorry did you wan't names and addresses.

No I wanted positions held in the union that you think are not effective, in between the top and bottom