A question for Dingo, Lovejoy or The Truth:

[rhino49]

One of the biggest stumbling blocks in all of this is simply the lack of trust that exists - I am not happy about the income from dtd's that I would lose but if I could trust RM's methods to calculate it into traffic and reduce the walk to a manageable size to compensate then I would be okay with it.

It is likely that we will go to later starts so why worry about an early start allowance when you can have a lie in. Can we trust RM's vision of new duty times and spans to give us finishing times that we can rely on - or will we go into the office every day not knowing what time we can expect to finish?

Given that the longer saturday will come in can we trust RM not to abuse that fact and pile every item possible into a "clearing the end of the week excercise" Targeted dtd's for a specific saturday delivery are a definite nono as the 100% call rate means no respite and the only way any customer should expect sort of service is if they are paying a premium rate (i.e. first clas post) for delivery on that day.

Can we therefore trust RM to accept that the longer saturday should mean we are going to get more saturdays off? Or will it soon become not possible because of logistical problems, and will the result if we do get them be more work for those on duty because of lapsing those duties that are off, thereby making the saturday working be the worst physical experience of the week?

Many of the services and facilities we use as families and individuals on saturdays are staffed and run by people who are used to saturday working - it is a normal working day for the retail sector, pubs, sports stadiums - even many utility and other delivery services offer a saturday service. The main problem may now be that the other halves of posties who work through the week and finish early on a saturday at present may well be employed in one of those other saturday services and will not now get the coverage of family needs that they were able to get previously - so do we extend the family friendly hand to those staff and leave those without family commitments to carry the can?

The biggest question of trust though, is whether we trust RM to stand by it's promises to consult and negotiate with our union and even more to abide by the agreements that are made locally and nationally. They have, on many occasions over the years, said one thing and done another, and that is the outstanding cause of the "us and them" sickness that pervades our business. If we trusted our employer we could then begin to trust and rely on each other and lose all the baggage of jealousies between part and full timers and the different parts of the business that rely on but don't really care about each other or the problems they create by only looking after themselves.

If Royal Mail show that we can trust them then that will be of somewhat more value than a dtd payment or a promised bonus.
Sadly, unless they start educating the management side of the business to the benefits of this philosophy I doubt that I will see any improvements in the remainder of my working life with them.

[Cut Off King]

So the national union will just 'go back in with acas and re-negotiate'

I'll tell you what I won't respond to this because its unbelievable.

I don't see why RM would not renegotiate, after all, this is only a provisional agreement- until the membership have voted, there is NO agreement with RM.

You seem to bestow upon RM the devine right to throw away the last 4 months and start E.A again

Thats what they tried last time, and look at the responce they got , First LOCAL I/A then ( eventually when HQ caught up ) NATIONAL I/A.

RM didn't come to ACAS because they wanted to, It was because they were forced to. They know that they cannot hope to get a stable company without carrying the workforce with them. Also, as pointed out by one of the three wise men,striking near an election would put us in a MORE powerful position that in the run up to XMAS !

Niether side wants another strike - thats why ( dispite they're grumbling ) RM would enter into negotiations again

We're NOT talking about throwing away the whole 4 months of neg. , we're talking about refining certain aspects of the agreement. i.e. - D2D's / delivery spans / making sure that NO ONE is paid any less that they are now.

Now thats not too much to ask is it?

[fishtank]

if this agreemnet gets voted in we have to use it to our advantages, that means reps and offices being strong and demanding the agreement is adhered to.

And that would take a national union that was organised and prepared to back ALL it's divisions not just the ones who shouted the loudest.
And that would take divisions that were organised and prepared to back ALL their branches not just the ones that shouted the loudest.
And that would take branches that were organised and prepared to back ALL their units not just the ones who shouted the loudest.
That is top down trade union organisation and unfortunately NOT the CWU way.

The CWU way is for HQ to blame divisions for not being strong enough and divisions to blame branches for not being strong enough and branches to blame units for not being strong enough.

End result weakness throughout the chain,weak agreements,members draining away,divide and conquer by management and finally the slow lingering,inevitable,terminal decline of the union

[Straight4ward]

Lovejoy, thanks for the reply.

Clutching at straws here, and don’t know if the sums would add up, but is it possible that if total £1000 lump sum payable to delivery staff for the acceptance of the new revision process were scrapped and this money was used to fund the current arrangement for D2D payments until such time as they could be presented to us in a sleeve as has been mentioned on here?

Staff in Mail Centres and other parts of the business could retain their lump sum. D2D payments could continue until the much easier way of prepping them became available. Then the infamous £20.60 supplement could kick in for effectively delivering one extra flat per delivery point. Might this remove some of the hostility to the present proposal? We will still get hit in the pocket but at least the workload would be a lot easier to handle.

[Cut Off King]

This is only a provisional agreement- until the membership have voted, there is NO agreement with RM.

So why didn't the CWU ask Its members FIRST, what they thought about the proposed deal instead of running ahead and anouncing with RM that a deal had been agreed?

THERE IS NO AGREEMENT UNTIL THE MEMBERSHIP HAVE VOTED

Only then will we have a definative answer to whether the dissagreement is solved or not.

[DirtyHarry]

The overwhelming opinion at last weeks briefing was that whatever your thoughts on the deal there is no option B.

That is disgraceful. Why is there no "option B" in case the membership are fully compis mentis and vote NO to this abysmal agreement?
Also, who's less than bright idea was it to have a no "option B" to fall back on?

The CWU and RM management, well in bed together it seems, and we are paying a heavy price for it.

[fishtank]

So the national union will just 'go back in with acas and re-negotiate'

I'll tell you what I won't respond to this because its unbelievable.

Am i alone in thinking this statement is incredible.

What did you THINK would happen if the membership rejected the PROPOSED agreement?
Or did the idea not even cross your mind.

[numan]

The overwhelming opinion at last weeks briefing was that whatever your thoughts on the deal there is no option B.

How on earth does anybody go into talks without a plan B? What was the union's original position in these talks? Or are we led to believe they got exactly what they wanted?

[TrueBlueTerrier]

One option B to me would be make the delivery supplement non Pro Rata - OK I would loose up to £3 a week on the current offer but I was going to loose (£42-£21.60) approx £20 a week anyway.

The delivery side of deliveries is the same whether full time or part time so why should I as a FT get more of this supplement than a PT.

I personally think that Callers Office work is harder than Delivery so I won't begrudge them getting the supplement but I am sure they could bring in skills related supplement as well and make the Delivery Supplement available only to deliveries. The current plan is making it a Delivery Office Supplement which is a different animal entirely.

Also under flexibility do MC and Distribution staff get it paid pro rata if they have to work in a DO. Do workers in a combined DO/MC who work inside all get it or only those filling an inside DO role. All questions that I have not yet found an answer to.

[Lounge Lizard]

Put the lump sums into D2D Payments. 20.60 for doing 700 address points while the fellow next door only does 200 and gets the same payment as me. Lovejoy the figures don't add up.

It all depends how you look at it.
The '700' and '200' posties presumably both work at the same pace and for the same number of hours, so why oh why should one have been paid about £1,100 a year more than the other ?

[fishtank]

Put the lump sums into D2D Payments. 20.60 for doing 700 address points while the fellow next door only does 200 and gets the same payment as me. Lovejoy the figures don't add up.

It all depends how you look at it.
The '700' and '200' posties presumably both work at the same pace and for the same number of hours, so why oh why should one have been paid about £1,100 a year more than the other ?

It will be interesting to see how this can be managed with respect to indoor workload.
With 1 door to door the difference in prep would be 500 items and you would expect workload to reflect this.
But with 3 items the difference would be 1500 items.Would indoor workload reflect this to?

[Night Tonic]

As many of you know, I have made strong criticisms of the union on here (and gained no friends in so doing) but I am no fan of the CWU and thats the way it is. However (oddly) I am with Lovejoy and Truth on this, there is no option B. There are always alternatives (ie suicide to living) but it doesn't make it a sensible or logical choice and we face unprecedented change, not just in RM but in the entire business. "I want to join another union" and "have it out with the leaders" is all wasted piffle and lacks understanding of just how hard both sides have worked on this to protect jobs and gain more cwu involvement. Everyone is entitled to vote as they wish but you also have to weigh up the consequences of whatever choice you make.

[banner18]

I think the pro rata element has to be based on some of the workload being taken off part timers, i.e. full timers prepping them for part timers etc..
Otherwise this is completely unfair.
I think most people believe that even if that was the plan, it would be unlikely to be fulfilled on all occasions and the poor old part timers would just be expected to take up the slack. These things need clarifying....

[Cut Off King]

Put the lump sums into D2D Payments. 20.60 for doing 700 address points while the fellow next door only does 200 and gets the same payment as me. Lovejoy the figures don't add up.

It all depends how you look at it.
The '700' and '200' posties presumably both work at the same pace and for the same number of hours, so why oh why should one have been paid about £1,100 a year more than the other ?

It will be interesting to see how this can be managed with respect to indoor workload.
With 1 door to door the difference in prep would be 500 items and you would expect workload to reflect this.
But with 3 items the difference would be 1500 items.Would indoor workload reflect this to?

Managers will ignore that fact and continue to bully people into working in their own time. Do you think that delivery spans will change week to week depending on whether you have 1 x 500 D2D items OR 5 x 500 D2D items? No I don't think so either. You'll simply have to do the extra in your own time OR be conducted for failing to meet standards.

[AnotherLimey]

So the national union will just 'go back in with acas and re-negotiate'

I'll tell you what I won't respond to this because its unbelievable.

If you really want a debate PM me your office and I can see my reps and hopefully they can get someone up to you for a face to face debate.

That almost sounds like a threat, i'd be up for a face to face debate as you call it, i may suprise you with the strengh of my arguments though.