What is your Branch Recommending?List.

[driverjoe]

Without the time to read thru ten pages, I will say that South Wales have sugggested a no vote....

sorry, but south wales have not suggested a no vote, our rep has said south wales will be recommending a yes vote to members.

[welshy808]

Without the time to read thru ten pages, I will say that South Wales have sugggested a no vote....

sorry, but south wales have not suggested a no vote, our rep has said south wales will be recommending a yes vote to members.

Does anyone have a definite answer for the South Wales Branch

Thanks
Welshy

[clashcityrocker]

Scotland number 2 Recommend a yes.

Edinburgh - they wouldn't know a class war if it ran up the Royal Mile and bit them on the arse.

[fishtank]

Scotland number 2 Recommend a yes.

Edinburgh - they wouldn't know a class war if it ran up the Royal Mile and bit them on the arse.

Stop fishing psuedo-weegie.

[hj4k]

as one of the 1st parts of the country to go out on strike last year i find this unbelievable! what was the reasoning behind a yes rocommendation as , as far as i can see , none of the issues which precipitated the action have been addressed.

[Stormproof]

as one of the 1st parts of the country to go out on strike last year i find this unbelievable! what was the reasoning behind a yes rocommendation as , as far as i can see , none of the issues which precipitated the action have been addressed.

Exactly!.........if you look at all the video's on You Tube from last years strike, money was never the issue whilst B & H by management were top of the list, so why is'nt Bullying at the top of the negotiations list. Shame on you CWU HQ

[mucker]

so why is'nt Bullying at the top of the negotiations list.

Simple Answer,they are not the one's facing B&H daily we are......

[fishtank]

as one of the 1st parts of the country to go out on strike last year i find this unbelievable! what was the reasoning behind a yes rocommendation as , as far as i can see , none of the issues which precipitated the action have been addressed.

Exactly!.........if you look at all the video's on You Tube from last years strike, money was never the issue whilst B & H by management were top of the list, so why is'nt Bullying at the top of the negotiations list. Shame on you CWU HQ

That's quite obvious Storm.
How can you sell an agreement built entirely on trust and at the same time tackle lying,cheating,bullying management.

sweep.jpg

Deceit.gif

[lovejoy]

Without the time to read thru ten pages, I will say that South Wales have sugggested a no vote....

sorry, but south wales have not suggested a no vote, our rep has said south wales will be recommending a yes vote to members.

Does anyone have a definite answer for the South Wales Branch

Thanks
Welshy

I've heard they r yet another YES...... you are missing 70-80 others off your YES list

[dvbuk55]

Without the time to read thru ten pages, I will say that South Wales have sugggested a no vote....

sorry, but south wales have not suggested a no vote, our rep has said south wales will be recommending a yes vote to members.

Does anyone have a definite answer for the South Wales Branch

Thanks
Welshy

I've heard they r yet another YES...... you are missing 70-80 others off your YES list

Yes - I wouldn't worry too much about what the branch is saying one man one vote - doesn't help too much when you get the NE Branch peddling lies though - I mean if you have to resort to lies to get a result - still thats not bothered the CWU much.

[lovejoy]

Without the time to read thru ten pages, I will say that South Wales have sugggested a no vote....

sorry, but south wales have not suggested a no vote, our rep has said south wales will be recommending a yes vote to members.

Does anyone have a definite answer for the South Wales Branch

Thanks
Welshy

I've heard they r yet another YES...... you are missing 70-80 others off your YES list

Yes - I wouldn't worry too much about what the branch is saying one man one vote - doesn't help too much when you get the NE Branch peddling lies though - I mean if you have to resort to lies to get a result - still thats not bothered the CWU much.

The NE is a Division not a branch.

I had a that one through to my office. Wasn't the most 'punchy' communication I acknowledge but then again I am yet to see one decent publication from any branch recommending a NO.

I've seen loads covering off 'how bad the agreement is' etc but not one single person/branch/division has set out an alternative to this agreement that I can see is viable.

Kick it out... Fair play.... but where then?

Back to the table?..... They've been there for 4 months. Whether we like it or not (and I don't) there is no more money.

Out on the streets..... Come on get real, areas were creaking last year after 2 days and that was hitting RM hard at peak mail times. Does anyone really think we can sustain a NATIONAL ALL FUNCTIONS strike in this environment and at this time of year?

[belle smith]

Out on the streets..... Come on get real, areas were creaking last year after 2 days and that was hitting RM hard at peak mail times. Does anyone really think we can sustain a NATIONAL ALL FUNCTIONS strike in this environment and at this time of year?

Fair point Lovejoy, I have to ask if Royal Mail decide to ignore the union again in 2 or 3 years time, as i suspect they will. How many members will vote for yet another "save the union" strike?

[lovejoy]

Out on the streets..... Come on get real, areas were creaking last year after 2 days and that was hitting RM hard at peak mail times. Does anyone really think we can sustain a NATIONAL ALL FUNCTIONS strike in this environment and at this time of year?

Fair point Lovejoy, I have to ask if Royal Mail decide to ignore the union again in 2 or 3 years time, as i suspect they will. How many members will vote for yet another "save the union" strike?

Sorry m8, I'll try to pick that point up in another thread. Dont want the take the thread off point again (my fault for responding 1st) and get told off

[dvbuk55]

Lovejoy

You and I see eye to eye on not liking this deal.

Where we differ is the what the vote recommendations should be. There is no plan B is not a reason for voting yes. There is no more money is not a reason for voting yes. Misrepresentation is not a reason to vote yes and there have been many on here to misrepresent what the deal actually is and I think you are well aware of the reasons behind that statement.

Would a No vote mean more strikes - no it would not.
Would a No vote mean that the agreement needs to be revisited and look at the clear disparity in the rewards. Yes it would.
Would a No vote bring a little more clarity to the CWU to focus on who they represent and who pays their bills - at least up to now. Yes it would.
Would a No vote give more time to finalise the revision tools and set out workshops - Yes it would.
Would a No vote make them realise that a 3 year deal is not in our best interests - Yes it would.
Would a No vote allow a Labour/Tory Government get in office and press the Pensions issue until such time as a decision is made, which has never been done with sufficient vigour. Yes it would.


There is never only the one path and it is disingenuous to say that's it take it or leave it.

[lovejoy]

Lovejoy

You and I see eye to eye on not liking this deal.

Where we differ is the what the vote recommendations should be. There is no plan B is not a reason for voting yes. There is no more money is not a reason for voting yes. Misrepresentation is not a reason to vote yes and there have been many on here to misrepresent what the deal actually is and I think you are well aware of the reasons behind that statement.

Would a No vote mean more strikes - no it would not.
Would a No vote mean that the agreement needs to be revisited and look at the clear disparity in the rewards. Yes it would.
Would a No vote bring a little more clarity to the CWU to focus on who they represent and who pays their bills - at least up to now. Yes it would.
Would a No vote give more time to finalise the revision tools and set out workshops - Yes it would.
Would a No vote make them realise that a 3 year deal is not in our best interests - Yes it would.
Would a No vote allow a Labour/Tory Government get in office and press the Pensions issue until such time as a decision is made, which has never been done with sufficient vigour. Yes it would.


There is never only the one path and it is disingenuous to say that's it take it or leave it.

We'll go around in circles for ever but I'll just say this........ can I please have some of whatever you are taking please??