What is your Branch Recommending?List.

[andy2007]

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?

Who said anything about asking for more money?
Sadly, you seem to be labouring under the same misaprehension as the negotiating team. That we're more interested in money, than our T&Cs and H&S.

Going back to the table, after finding out what our priorities actually are. Would achieve a great deal (no pun intended), and could potentially get us an acceptable deal. You see: 4 Months of negotiating for more money, has been wasted time. If we'd been kept in the loop from the beginning, they would have known how important it is to us, to protect our T&Cs. But it's not too late.

As for going back out on Strike. Why are so many people, so convinced that, that would happen?
Strikes are a last resort, when everything else has failed. It is not, and should NEVER even be considered until all other avenues have been exhausted!!!!!

Please don't misunderstand me. I'm not having a dig at you. In fact, I've always respected you for standing up for what you believe is right, even in the face of derision. But please bear in mind, that there are many of us, who hold different views. And we're just as passionate about them.

[jimmythepost]

Hi,

Manchester recommend a yes vote, just to update your list

Jimmy

[LJR]

As said my Branch Portsmouth ect are recommending a NO and that suprised many i have talked to as they thought they would go for a yes but the reccomdation is just that and no more! If this deal is good for YOU vote yes! If good for your mates vote yes! If not then vote NO and ignore branch as we always do anyway whatever they think.

[goinpostal]

With this agreement we have an opportunity to;-
Increase full time jobs.
We have an opportunity to shape the success of the industry through vastly improved agreed revision processes.
We have an opportunity to increase the amount of Saturdays our members can have off across the forthcoming years.
We have an opportunity to safeguard our future.
We have an opportunity to increase basic pay year on year.

Is that not enough?

The deal won't necessarily increase full time jobs and overall it will see thousands go.

The deal undermines i mean "revises" the industrial relations framework (and promises to do the same with the CWU structures!!) and weakens the union.

In terms of Saturdays, at best we have the opportunity to work 10 hour saturdays, with D2D and later starts in exchange for one in four off "for a majority" of staff not all. What if its a 45 to 55 split?

The deal safegaurds nothing and prepares RM for privatisation.

Many if not most lose pay for the first two years at least if not more.

Vote no!

[shepherdess]

i am a rep in liverpool and my branch did not ask me about the feeling in my office so why are they recomending we vote yes when 80% of my del office are against it

[BELIAL]

i am a rep in liverpool and my branch did not ask me about the feeling in my office so why are they recomending we vote yes when 80% of my del office are against it

Puzzling isn't it ,hardly a shining example of a modern inclusive democratic organisation. Maybe you should check out the score with other reps in your area and see where you go from there.

[lovejoy]

i am a rep in liverpool and my branch did not ask me about the feeling in my office so why are they recomending we vote yes when 80% of my del office are against it

Puzzling isn't it ,hardly a shining example of a modern inclusive democratic organisation. Maybe you should check out the score with other reps in your area and see where you go from there.

A lot will depend on how your branch made the recommendation.

Some branches call all local reps in.

Some just use the committee (branch sec, area reps etc).

Sounds like your maybe used the branch committee?

[BELIAL]

Well reps is better than a committee ,but why not involve as many members as possible and call an EGM ? Surely a more democratic option? Might even help to shore up membership numbers by increasing participation.

[Big Daz]

i am a rep in liverpool and my branch did not ask me about the feeling in my office so why are they recomending we vote yes when 80% of my del office are against it

Puzzling isn't it ,hardly a shining example of a modern inclusive democratic organisation. Maybe you should check out the score with other reps in your area and see where you go from there.

A lot will depend on how your branch made the recommendation.

Some branches call all local reps in.

Some just use the committee (branch sec, area reps etc).

Sounds like your maybe used the branch committee?

Local IR reps from the D.O's and the MC for my branch, surprised that some branches dont do this.

[BELIAL]

Local IR reps from the D.O's and the MC for my branch, surprised that some branches dont do this.

A lot of things go on in other branches that may more than surprise you. But I'll ask you the question too, Why not open up the decision on the recommendation on "the most important vote" to the widest possible group of branch members?

[Big Daz]

Because you then getting mbrs to make a recomendation to themselves and in my D.O you cant even get mbrs to drive 20 mins up the road to attend a mbrs meeting about the proposals on weekday night when there is no work the next day.

Meetings were held in various locations across the branch area due to the geographical size of the branch.

[fishtank]

Because you then getting mbrs to make a recomendation to themselves and in my D.O you cant even get mbrs to drive 20 mins up the road to attend a mbrs meeting about the proposals on weekday night when there is no work the next day.

Meetings were held in various locations across the branch area due to the geographical size of the branch.

Perhaps rather than members recommending to themselves or Branch blindly following the HQ line,the real solution would have been to send out the agreement with no recommendation whatsoever.
Or do we believe that members cannot decide for themselves?

[johnnyp]

Well reps is better than a committee ,but why not involve as many members as possible and call an EGM ? Surely a more democratic option? Might even help to shore up membership numbers by increasing participation.

Our branch done this last week and even had Dave Ward and a PEC member who was involved in the negotiations in attendance, other then myself no other person from my office attended to ask questions and debate the agreement,when only a few weeks before they were mouthing off that they never see our area rep,it was the same old faces,which annoys me as this was a good chance for members to have there say face to face with a few of the big boys.

[lovejoy]

Well reps is better than a committee ,but why not involve as many members as possible and call an EGM ? Surely a more democratic option? Might even help to shore up membership numbers by increasing participation.

Our branch done this last week and even had Dave Ward and a PEC member who was involved in the negotiations in attendance, other then myself no other person from my office attended to ask questions and debate the agreement,when only a few weeks before they were mouthing off that they never see our area rep,it was the same old faces,which annoys me as this was a good chance for members to have there say face to face with a few of the big boys.

Same old story johnnyp!

[BELIAL]

Because you then getting mbrs to make a recomendation to themselves and in my D.O you cant even get mbrs to drive 20 mins up the road to attend a mbrs meeting about the proposals on weekday night when there is no work the next day.

Meetings were held in various locations across the branch area due to the geographical size of the branch.

No slight intended BD ,but why would members travel for 20 mins, to listen to how they should vote, and then be denied any say in the outcome of the recommendation. You can't use the failings of the status quo as a defense against change . As for members making a recommendation to themselves ,well you sort of contradict your first point completely . Either not many attend and therefore recommend to others,or lots attend and recommend to themselves but according to you that won't occur. For the sake of argument if it did occur , what is wrong with the participation of the greatest possible number in the decision making process at the earliest possible stage? Genuine question by the way