CWU's sell doesn't add up

[MinisterofCucumber]

Dave Ward and Bob Gibson are trying to sell this proposal as being the best way to retain full time status for the jobs that will be left after automation is introduced.

I am arguing that this proposal is all about bringing in conditions that will make privatisation possible and so meet the 31.12.10 deadline for full market opening of the EU postal sector:

http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/post/index_en.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The parts of this agreement that support my view are:

unlimited delivery spans

"we want to bring everybody's actual performance up to the level of the top 10 per cent performance"

and

"Both parties are fully committed to all elements of this national agreement and neither will sanction any local negotiations which seek to change the principles or spirit of this agreement and/or make their deployment less effective and/or delay implementation."

Why have these things been included in the agreement?

[Big Daz]

I thought this site hated local negotiations and saw them as the root of all evil

There has been a lot of strong words said against localisim.

[dvbuk55]

I thought this site hated local negotiations and saw them as the root of all evil

There has been a lot of strong words said against localisim.

You would have to assume then that ALL local negotiations that would not embody the spirit of the agreement would not be honoured BUT who is to say what the spirit of the agreement is and what would be declared as a delay in implementation and is the top 10% local or national - I mean I would imagine one division would be hard pushed to make it.

[belle smith]

I thought this site hated local negotiations and saw them as the root of all evil

There has been a lot of strong words said against localisim.

I thought the CWU did as well.....upto 2007 they did, then they learned a new tune.

[belle smith]

"Both parties are fully committed to all elements of this national agreement and neither will sanction any local negotiations which seek to change the principles or spirit of this agreement and/or make their deployment less effective and/or delay implementation."

Why have these things been included in the agreement?

So for every one who thinks they will be negotiating a maximum delivery span locally....no you wont!

[Cliff Clavin]

NO,,,,

[belle smith]

NO,,,,

Could you expand on that?

[Lincox]

On this 10% millarcy, is this not an ever increasing target to meet, because if I have my arithmetic correct, once the desired target is set at less than 50% of similar offices, then the target can never be attained by the majority of offices in that cluster, unless the target is a set unchangeable achievable aim. So again a bloomer from CWU for allowing such an open ended clause to be entered into this agreement.

[fishtank]

On this 10% millarcy, is this not an ever increasing target to meet, because if I have my arithmetic correct, once the desired target is set at less than 50% of similar offices, then the target can never be attained by the majority of offices in that cluster, unless the target is a set unchangeable achievable aim. So again a bloomer from CWU for allowing such an open ended clause to be entered into this agreement.

The real worry is how much pressure will be placed upon DOMs to get their offices into that elusive top 10?
Or alternatively and just as worrying....what will be the financial incentive.
Will we see a whole new level of the management bonus culture with all the chaos that will bring?