Why I'll be voting no...

[Member 34]

Just in case this agreement doesn't get approved by CWU members, I thought it would be handy to have a thread containing our reasons for voting no.

That way any CWU reps and Royal Mail managers can see exactly where they are going wrong!


I will be voting no because of the lack of a limit on delivery spans.

Local agreements are as good as no agreements in weak offices, and let's make no mistake, if managers thought it would make savings, they would have us out delivering for our whole duty.
I don't trust them to be responsible with our health and safety as far as delivery spans are concerned.

[tojobevred]

as a rep please dont put me in same breath as a dom and anyway i will vote no and my office will

[Godric]

i will be voting NO because i choose to vote NO because the deal is a absolute stinker, i will be losing money and i will be expected to work harder, thanks to Billy, dave & PEC

[graemeathompson]

i'll be voting no because this is classic devide and conquer tactics from royal mail.
so sad our union lackeys have jumped on their gravy train.

[welshy808]

I'll be voting no as I'll be working a hell of a lot harder for a lot less.
I'll be voting no as the AG stood by the side of me prepping his D2D is getting s**t on.
I'll be voting no as I liked to spend quality time with my family on Saturday.
I'll be voting no as I don't see why I should pay my own lump sum bribe.
I'll be voting no as I've not been shown these agreed workload tools and how they help me i.e. Pegasus walk rate etc.
I'll be voting no as I'm expected to take a hit for the business but all Manager from Crozier down get paid bonuses for doing a s**t job

[Ghostmaker]

Succinctly put . . . and precisely sums up the views of the 65+ delivery postpersons in my office.

J.

[brispost]

I will be voting no for all the reasons stated and also the lack of any limit for prepping d2d. Although they say that this time will be incorporated in the workload errrr i think not. It may all sound fine in a draft form but the reality is very different on the shop floor. Managers will bully the not so strong staff into using there own time which in turn means those members of staff will start well before they should giving rm their time.............. seen it all before, about time the union, when making agreements, make sure there are no grey areas, Apart from being a crap agreement (what are our union leaders thinking of) this is "Way forward" all over again leaving everything open to interpretation giving bullying managers the justification they need.

[kanuuuuuu]

I will be voting no for all the reasons stated and also the lack of any limit for prepping d2d. Although they say that this time will be incorporated in the workload errrr i think not. It may all sound fine in a draft form but the reality is very different on the shop floor. Managers will bully the not so strong staff into using there own time which in turn means those members of staff will start well before they should giving rm their time.............. seen it all before, about time the union, when making agreements, make sure there are no grey areas, Apart from being a crap agreement (what are our union leaders thinking of) this is "Way forward" all over again leaving everything open to interpretation giving bullying managers the justification they need.

hmmm regarding the time to prep d2ds - I understand your suspicions but can you really vote against something because something else "might" happen, nothing would ever get done if this was the case. Theres no real grey area here, they clearly state time will be made for prepping and delivery of d2ds.

[numan]

I will be voting no for all the reasons stated and also the lack of any limit for prepping d2d. Although they say that this time will be incorporated in the workload errrr i think not. It may all sound fine in a draft form but the reality is very different on the shop floor. Managers will bully the not so strong staff into using there own time which in turn means those members of staff will start well before they should giving rm their time.............. seen it all before, about time the union, when making agreements, make sure there are no grey areas, Apart from being a crap agreement (what are our union leaders thinking of) this is "Way forward" all over again leaving everything open to interpretation giving bullying managers the justification they need.

hmmm regarding the time to prep d2ds - I understand your suspicions but can you really vote against something because something else "might" happen, nothing would ever get done if this was the case. Theres no real grey area here, they clearly state time will be made for prepping and delivery of d2ds.

Tell me how sufficient time can be made for the prepping and delivery of D2Ds when there is no limit on how many we are going to get?

[kanuuuuuu]

I will be voting no for all the reasons stated and also the lack of any limit for prepping d2d. Although they say that this time will be incorporated in the workload errrr i think not. It may all sound fine in a draft form but the reality is very different on the shop floor. Managers will bully the not so strong staff into using there own time which in turn means those members of staff will start well before they should giving rm their time.............. seen it all before, about time the union, when making agreements, make sure there are no grey areas, Apart from being a crap agreement (what are our union leaders thinking of) this is "Way forward" all over again leaving everything open to interpretation giving bullying managers the justification they need.

hmmm regarding the time to prep d2ds - I understand your suspicions but can you really vote against something because something else "might" happen, nothing would ever get done if this was the case. Theres no real grey area here, they clearly state time will be made for prepping and delivery of d2ds.

Tell me how sufficient time can be made for the prepping and delivery of D2Ds when there is no limit on how many we are going to get?

firstly love the name helloooo numan. secondly, I have no idea how they would do it, but they have said they will do it. If they mess it up its their problem, the fact that I can stand at my frame and prep d2d in and not have the managers challenge me about it is all I care about. If they give me too many to do and I have to cut off as they havent thought it through and accept too many contracts, again its their problem.

[numan]

Kanuuuuuu, that will also be my attitude. However, not all people have the resolve to face a battle with their DOM every morning, particularly put-upon part timers. Amongst other benefits, they pay their union fees for some kind of protection against being taken advantage of, I don't see that they're getting any with this deal.

[brispost]

I will be voting no for all the reasons stated and also the lack of any limit for prepping d2d. Although they say that this time will be incorporated in the workload errrr i think not. It may all sound fine in a draft form but the reality is very different on the shop floor. Managers will bully the not so strong staff into using there own time which in turn means those members of staff will start well before they should giving rm their time.............. seen it all before, about time the union, when making agreements, make sure there are no grey areas, Apart from being a crap agreement (what are our union leaders thinking of) this is "Way forward" all over again leaving everything open to interpretation giving bullying managers the justification they need.

hmmm regarding the time to prep d2ds - I understand your suspicions but can you really vote against something because something else "might" happen, nothing would ever get done if this was the case. Theres no real grey area here, they clearly state time will be made for prepping and delivery of d2ds.

When I said grey areas I was talking about the agreement as a whole. on the d2d issue I was putting forward the suspicions I have over shop floor level managers to conform to any agreed prep rates for whon knows how many d2d's. They think they should be prepped at the moment in your own time even after I have constantly shown them a RM document on the order of mail prep that clearly shows prepping of d2d items in duty time...... and you wonder why i'm suspicious.

[kanuuuuuu]

I will be voting no for all the reasons stated and also the lack of any limit for prepping d2d. Although they say that this time will be incorporated in the workload errrr i think not. It may all sound fine in a draft form but the reality is very different on the shop floor. Managers will bully the not so strong staff into using there own time which in turn means those members of staff will start well before they should giving rm their time.............. seen it all before, about time the union, when making agreements, make sure there are no grey areas, Apart from being a crap agreement (what are our union leaders thinking of) this is "Way forward" all over again leaving everything open to interpretation giving bullying managers the justification they need.

hmmm regarding the time to prep d2ds - I understand your suspicions but can you really vote against something because something else "might" happen, nothing would ever get done if this was the case. Theres no real grey area here, they clearly state time will be made for prepping and delivery of d2ds.

When I said grey areas I was talking about the agreement as a whole. on the d2d issue I was putting forward the suspicions I have over shop floor level managers to conform to any agreed prep rates for whon knows how many d2d's. They think they should be prepped at the moment in your own time even after I have constantly shown them a RM document on the order of mail prep that clearly shows prepping of d2d items in duty time...... and you wonder why i'm suspicious.

i dont wonder why youre suspicious but youre being asked to vote on a national agreement, if you feel youre being bullied its more of a local issue.

[brispost]

Kanuuuuuu, that will also be my attitude. However, not all people have the resolve to face a battle with their DOM every morning, particularly put-upon part timers. Amongst other benefits, they pay their union fees for some kind of protection against being taken advantage of, I don't see that they're getting any with this deal.

Fantastically well said that is exactly the point I have been trying to make but obviously not getting it across as well as you. There are indeed lots of members that managers take advantage of and some members that managers know not to upset and we need to make sure the vunerable are protected with clear agreements where there is no room for interpretation. It does not matter how good a local rep is if there is a question of interpretation managers will use their view to put pressure on, I have been a postman too long to give them any benefit.

[kanuuuuuu]

if that is the case what agreement would you actually accept knowing that youd never trust them to implement it properly anyway (and im purely talking about the d2d aspect) ?