One absolute sure and solid reason to NOT vote yes!

[spoodoo]

we had union guy coming round every single one of us telling us all about how the deal is great etc ,,, he went round EVERY one of us! desperation or what? I joined the royal fail for the hours that they offered me was the only reason ! ,FED UP POSTY .

[MinisterofCucumber]

we had union guy coming round every single one of us telling us all about how the deal is great etc ,,, he went round EVERY one of us! desperation or what? I joined the royal fail for the hours that they offered me was the only reason ! ,FED UP POSTY .

Did anyone tell him to f**k off?

[spoodoo]

DUNNO BUT SURELY THATS WRONG TRYING TO PERSUADE PEOPLE IE BRAINWASHING THEM!

[TrueBlueTerrier]

DUNNO BUT SURELY THATS WRONG TRYING TO PERSUADE PEOPLE IE BRAINWASHING THEM!

No - people who either agree or disagree with the offer are entitled to try and convince others of their views. If we do not allow people we disagree with to put their point of view across then how can we call ourselves a Democratic Union/Society.

[belle smith]

DUNNO BUT SURELY THATS WRONG TRYING TO PERSUADE PEOPLE IE BRAINWASHING THEM!

No - people who either agree or disagree with the offer are entitled to try and convince others of their views. If we do not allow people we disagree with to put their point of view across then how can we call ourselves a Democratic Union/Society.

I disagree teebs.

[fishtank]

DUNNO BUT SURELY THATS WRONG TRYING TO PERSUADE PEOPLE IE BRAINWASHING THEM!

No - people who either agree or disagree with the offer are entitled to try and convince others of their views. If we do not allow people we disagree with to put their point of view across then how can we call ourselves a Democratic Union/Society.

It would entirely depend if he was abusing his position as union rep.
What's the saying "with great power comes great responsibility"

[TrueBlueTerrier]

DUNNO BUT SURELY THATS WRONG TRYING TO PERSUADE PEOPLE IE BRAINWASHING THEM!

No - people who either agree or disagree with the offer are entitled to try and convince others of their views. If we do not allow people we disagree with to put their point of view across then how can we call ourselves a Democratic Union/Society.

It would entirely depend if he was abusing his position as union rep.
What's the saying "with great power comes great responsibility"

Agreed no one should abuse his position - but the trouble is identifying when you have a rep who is committed to the CWU and his own members, and all that encompasses, and someone who is trying hard to climb the greasy poll for his own reasons.

I guess it comes down to gut instinct.

[opgpat]

The judge summed it up thus-

Mr Justice Sir Christopher Holland said he had made his judgement based in the light of the airline's financial position.

"If the crew [numbers] materially and fairly contribute to the preservation of BA and more importantly for present purposes job security and pay, how can I condemn the less-than-extreme changes as unreasonable?"

You didn't read my post atall?!? The changes BA want to make and which have been declared legal, as far as I can see, are changes to NUMBERS of staff on long haul flights and NEW contracts for future employees. That DOES NOT represent a change to CURRENT CONTRACTS!!! That's why there is no viable claim. What RM want to do is CHANGE our contract (unwritten)!!! OK I'll grant you finish times on SAT might not be upheld though I think there is a good chance. But the d2d payment being taken away is clearly illegal and extended delivery past a safe 3 1/2 hrs is also totally unreasonable and dangerous for staff. Any judge, mad though they are, would agree on thoses simple points.

[pcb]

opgpat: Point of contractual law: "Business efficacy"
There are some limited circumstances where the employer may be taken to have an "implied right to change a contract. In such cases despite the fact that there is nothing inthe contract allowing for change, the courts may imply into the contract a right to vary it. They will do this to give the contract what they describe as "business efficacy", meaning anything necessary to ensure that the business to which the employment contract relates continues. This can involve changes in the work practices to take account of changedd market conditions.

Ensure we have all the relevent information before putting this in front of a judge.

[opgpat]

No ref to say where that comes from so what are we to make of it???

Yes we know employers can make small changes but anything substantial according to EMPLOYMENT LAW needs to be ratified via national or direct agreement. WHY DO YOU THINK UNIONS EXIST?!?!?!? Most of what they do is terms and conditions now if employers can do what they want WHY DO WE PAY OUR SUBS?!?!?

THEY CAN'T TAKE AWAY OUR D2D MONEY WITHOUT BREAKING THE LAW - FACT.
Late Sats is debateable but might well be decided unreasonable as it represents a MAJOR change to family life for 100,000people
Ext deliveries it 80% likely to go our way especially with the H&S implications.

[pcb]

My previous posts should suffice with regards to me telling the truth. Ref Labour ResearchDepartment Booklet 03
The issue is this if no vote union Fxxked.
D2D payment adhoc meaning 43 weeks per year not paid whilst on leave/sick.
D2D could be taken up by rival firm winning contract, what then Royal Mail keep paying you! don't think so!

[opgpat]

I think you'll find judges sitting in the High Court - or any other - don't use Labour Party booklets as guides on the law and legal precedent.

d2d - we get paid for what we do. That's all most want. No d2d means no payment, no problem, I'm more than happy with that. You can do a few hrs OT to make up for that. Vote Yes and we have EIGHT d2d for NOTHING. I'd rather loose ALL d2d than do 8 for RM for nowt while they get hundreads of millions from the contracts for managers bonuses. No way, I'm no muppet. If the union are fooked so be it. We will still stand tall and fight and keep our current pay and current d2d setup of paid per item. TBH if the union ARE fooked what diff will it make if this is the deal they think is good for us? Maybe we need to employ Unite instead of CWU to represent us.

[Tman]

THEY CAN'T TAKE AWAY OUR D2D MONEY WITHOUT BREAKING THE LAW - FACT.
Late Sats is debateable but might well be decided unreasonable as it represents a MAJOR change to family life for 100,000people

If it was as easy as that to argue that things should remain the same, how come MCs have lost Sunday nights and the work/hours transferred to Sunday days without a whimper from the CWU?
That represents a big change in money and hours for the affected MC staff, but no protests or legal challenges have been made.
I think you're reading the rule books and seeing what you want to see, rather than accepting that things aren't ever that cut and dried in the world of employment laws.
Why don't you get some proper legal advice and see if anything could be done?

[opgpat]

Because the CWU are useless twats? They are in the pockets of RM?

Changing shifts around for shift workers is hardly anologous to taking away monies for work still done and extending the limits on heavy outside work to beyond what is reasonable or safe. I can't afford to hire a lawyer, at this time all we can do is look at the law and think about the most likely outcome. It's not rocket science, judgements are made in light of the clear language that frames the law. Maybe someone can find info on where a court has found in emploees favour in similar circumstances?

[opgpat]

Acas (the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service) offers free, confidential and impartial advice on all employment rights issues.