Lovejoy's ACAS promise

[MinisterofCucumber]

Lovejoy said:

"On the plus side the process will be overseen by ACAS to ensure that both sides abide by any agreement that is reached."

However, I emailed Peter Harwood, ACAS's Chief Negotiator, on 27.03.10 with a query about the proposed agreement. He sent me this reply on 28.03.10:

"The wording of the agreement is the responsibility of the parties not Acas. I will forward your email to the company to respond.

Regards,

Peter Harwood
Chief Conciliator."

If ACAS won't be drawn on the wording of the agreement, it is highly unlikely they would get involved in a dispute about the interpretation of this wording.

[lovejoy]

Lovejoy said:

"On the plus side the process will be overseen by ACAS to ensure that both sides abide by any agreement that is reached."

However, I emailed Peter Harwood, ACAS's Chief Negotiator, on 27.03.10 with a query about the proposed agreement. He sent me this reply on 28.03.10:

"The wording of the agreement is the responsibility of the parties not Acas. I will forward your email to the company to respond.

Regards,

Peter Harwood
Chief Conciliator."

If ACAS won't be drawn on the wording of the agreement, it is highly unlikely they would get involved in a dispute about the interpretation of this wording.

So because ACAS wouldn't reply to an email from somebody who had no part in the negotiations and for all they knew could have been anyone you think that they won'y continue to be involved?

[Dogs of War]

LOVEJOY any word of the 20.60 going into my 40 hours, so they don't take it off me in 3 years.

[Guevarista]

Quote from the ACAS website:

'Agreements reached through Acas facilitated mediation are not intended to be legally binding or enforceable,
but binding in honour only...'

Well, that should put all of our minds at rest, then!

[padraig1965]

The wording of the agreement is the responsibility of the parties not Acas. I will forward your email to the company to respond.

[MinisterofCucumber]

Lovejoy said:

"On the plus side the process will be overseen by ACAS to ensure that both sides abide by any agreement that is reached."

However, I emailed Peter Harwood, ACAS's Chief Negotiator, on 27.03.10 with a query about the proposed agreement. He sent me this reply on 28.03.10:

"The wording of the agreement is the responsibility of the parties not Acas. I will forward your email to the company to respond.

Regards,

Peter Harwood
Chief Conciliator."

If ACAS won't be drawn on the wording of the agreement, it is highly unlikely they would get involved in a dispute about the interpretation of this wording.

So because ACAS wouldn't reply to an email from somebody who had no part in the negotiations and for all they knew could have been anyone you think that they won'y continue to be involved?

Lovejoy,

ACAS did reply to me and I quoted Peter Harwood's reply.

I have provided Postman with copies of the correspondance for proof purposes.

[POSTMAN]

For the record,well 2 records,It is not only Lovejoy saying the ACAS thing and also dvbuk55 is not the only one questioning the agreement.

[Dolphinboy]

Lovejoy said:

"On the plus side the process will be overseen by ACAS to ensure that both sides abide by any agreement that is reached."

However, I emailed Peter Harwood, ACAS's Chief Negotiator, on 27.03.10 with a query about the proposed agreement. He sent me this reply on 28.03.10:

"The wording of the agreement is the responsibility of the parties not Acas. I will forward your email to the company to respond.

Regards,

Peter Harwood
Chief Conciliator."

If ACAS won't be drawn on the wording of the agreement, it is highly unlikely they would get involved in a dispute about the interpretation of this wording.

So because ACAS wouldn't reply to an email from somebody who had no part in the negotiations and for all they knew could have been anyone you think that they won'y continue to be involved?

I dont know who you are Lovejoy but it sounds like you are clutching at straws.
The ACAS reply seems very clear to me once the negotiations are done so are they.

[fishtank]

I dont know who you are Lovejoy but it sounds like you are clutching at straws.
The ACAS reply seems very clear to me once the negotiations are done so are they.

Even the agreement itself agrees.

Given our intention to change the nature of the relationship between Royal Mail and CWU and build trust across the organisation the parties will continue to be supported through the initial stages of deployment by the independent facilitator, Roger Poole and Peter Harwood, Chief Conciliator of ACAS

ini·tial (i nis̸h′əl)
adjective
having to do with, indicating, or occurring at the beginning

[keo]

Why don't most of the members on this site just take a breath and stop berating Lovejoy & Co. for their input to the forums!!
Without these guys YOU lot would be a whole lot more in the dark than you could possibly imagine!!
Just because someone has a different perspective of the deal than you does not give you the right to totally berate them for passing on the info they have at hand!
Thanks Lovejoy for the info.

[MinisterofCucumber]

Lovejoy,

You have claimed that ACAS did not reply to my email.

You may have been confused by my initial post. Do you now agree that ACAS did reply to my email?

[axeman]

keo mate we are indeed being treated like mushrooms by ward & co ................seems they picked up the use of bullshit from there partners at royal fail

[lovejoy]

Lovejoy,

You have claimed that ACAS did not reply to my email.

You may have been confused by my initial post. Do you now agree that ACAS did reply to my email?

I didn't mean they didn't reply to ur email, I meant because they didn't reply to you with specifics / give details etc. Sorry I should have been clearer.

So to clear any confusion do u actually think ACAS not giving you details means that they won't continue to involved? Sadly if you, me or anyone outside of the talks email acas all we will get is a bland email like the one sent to you.

[Lincox]

This whole debate is rather like whether you have faith in religion. Looking at the latest fiascos in the Roman Catholic Religion I would say that I have about as much faith in them as I do Royal Mail. I am on the side of MM. Unless someone can actually prove beyond any possible doubt that the Turin Shroud is the genuine article then I will continue to have my doubts. And whilst the 2010 and Beyond Agreement continues to throw up so many differences of opinion, it is plainly obvious that this is open to opinion and we all know how RM use this to their advantage. So I am sorry Lovejoy, at the moment your attempts to convert people are falling on stony ground and your arguments against some fairly testing questions are at the best, very weak. I appreciate you probably have the faith that most religious people have and are genuine in your attempts to preach from the CWU bible.

[pickaname]

Lovejoy,

You have claimed that ACAS did not reply to my email.

You may have been confused by my initial post. Do you now agree that ACAS did reply to my email?

I didn't mean they didn't reply to ur email, I meant because they didn't reply to you with specifics / give details etc. Sorry I should have been clearer.

So to clear any confusion do u actually think ACAS not giving you details means that they won't continue to involved? Sadly if you, me or anyone outside of the talks email acas all we will get is a bland email like the one sent to you.

didnt think it was bland. tell me acas wont be policing the interpretation of the agreement which is very disappointing, considering we were told they would be. is somone telling porkiy pies?