Members Auditors Report

[fishtank]

To: All Branches

Dear Colleagues

Members Auditors Report

Please find enclosed as a pdf file a copy of the Members Auditors Report to the 2009 CWU Accounts.

Branches are advised that this has been reproduced in line with Rule 11. Members’ Auditors that reads as follows:-

1 There shall be two lay Members’ Auditors elected by Annual Conference to examine the accounts and report to Annual Conference. A lay Memebrs’ Auditor shall not hold any other national position.

2 The lay Members’ Auditors shall be entitled to submit recommendations arising from their examination of the accounts of the Union to the NEC. The NEC shall consider such recommendations and report its conclusions to Annual Conference.

Branches are asked to ensure that they bring a copy of this report with them to Annual General Conference 2010.

Any enquiries regarding this LTB should be addressed to the Senior Deputy General Secretary’s Department on telephone number 0208 971 7237 or email address sdgs@cwu.org.

Yours sincerely


Tony Kearns
Senior Deputy General Secretary

Attachment 1

10LTB431.doc

[fishtank]

MEMBERSHIP
In 2009 we had 11,000 new members and 30,000 leavers. For the first time we have less than 200,000 working members with a figure of 196,800 in April 2010. The impact of the Royal Mail 2010 agreement is still to come and will reduce the figure significantly further.
We are losing full time members in recognised companies and where we do replace leaving members often the new recruits are part time or in non-recognised companies or both. We effectively have to recruit twice as many joiners than leavers for our income to stand still.
Realistically this is not going to happen. Even if the overdue initiative to have dedicated Postal Organisers results in every non member in Royal Mail Group joining the union this will only off set the head count reduction planned by the business.


ACTION TO BE TAKEN
We have to face facts we have a union designed for 300,000 members but we actually have 200,000 members. We have no option but to plan and budget accordingly.
We have certain items of expenditure prescribed by rule. Some items of expenditure are conference policy and other items of expenditure we do because we have always done them.
At a time when income is being drastically reduced can we have ring fenced areas of expenditure while other areas suffer disproportionate cuts? If we do; have we ring fenced the right areas. Or do we need to look at the organisation as a whole from top to bottom and re-define our priorities?

[brothermagrew]

PDF version of same:

Members Auditors Report 2009.pdf

[Patrick Clifton]

MEMBERSHIP
The impact of the Royal Mail 2010 agreement is still to come and will reduce the figure significantly further.

Strange choice of words. Are they expecting a huge backlash to the agreement? If so, why did they push so strongly for a 'yes' vote? If the agreement was that good, nobody should have been required to be told yes and they should not be expecting 'the figure to reduce significantly further'

ACTION TO BE TAKEN
We have to face facts we have a union designed for 300,000 members but we actually have 200,000 members. We have no option but to plan and budget accordingly.
We have certain items of expenditure prescribed by rule. Some items of expenditure are conference policy and other items of expenditure we do because we have always done them.
At a time when income is being drastically reduced can we have ring fenced areas of expenditure while other areas suffer disproportionate cuts? If we do; have we ring fenced the right areas. Or do we need to look at the organisation as a whole from top to bottom and re-define our priorities?

So will the management of the union, like many of the postal workers it represents has been forced to accept, be taking a reduction in their wage?!

*Not directed to Fishtank, just in reply to the story *

[clashcityrocker]

MEMBERSHIP
The impact of the Royal Mail 2010 agreement is still to come and will reduce the figure significantly further.

Strange choice of words. Are they expecting a huge backlash to the agreement? If so, why did they push so strongly for a 'yes' vote?

Job losses

[TrueBlueTerrier]

MEMBERSHIP
The impact of the Royal Mail 2010 agreement is still to come and will reduce the figure significantly further.

Strange choice of words. Are they expecting a huge backlash to the agreement? If so, why did they push so strongly for a 'yes' vote?

Not expecting I think they are experiencing it, most especially from Deliveries if the rumour mill is right.

[stokes11eg]

'Or do we need to look athe the organisation from top to bottom'? of course they do, one ofthe reasons behind the mass exodus is the leadership! They have done irreparable damage to the C.W.U..

[Lounge Lizard]

"In 2009 we had 11,000 new members and 30,000 leavers. For the first time we have less than 200,000 working members with a figure of 196,800 in April 2010" so at this rate there will be NO members after a further NINE years except that "The impact of the Royal Mail 2010 agreement is still to come and will reduce the figure significantly further." so this means it will be much less than nine years before there are no members.
'Rats' and 'sinking ship' spring to mind.