Agreement update

[Big Daz]

My D.O revison is now out to ballot and Im counting the ballot papers Wednesday. The total number of members being balloted is 50 out of 65 OPG's.

Im expecting a no vote, but thats nowt to worry about so long as the turn out is good.

Democracy is the key factor here for me, the principle that major change must be mandated by a ballot of CWU members

[dvbuk55]

Never once suggested HQ do not deserve criticism.......In fact I have vocally given it. That post is probably an example of the point I am making........Somebody makes a point then someone else comes at it from another angle (that suits them) and manipulates what has been said to get a cheap shot in. What does that do for a balanced debate? Nothing.

Well what point exactly are you trying to make Lovejoy? That we shouldn't talk about the elephant in the room. It's time that HQ and the senior reps realise they are seriously out of touch with the R&F. As for cheap shots? Make a target and sure as hell you're going to get incoming - if people can't stand the heat the kitchen door is always open.

[dvbuk55]

My D.O revison is now out to ballot and Im counting the ballot papers Wednesday. The total number of members being balloted is 50 out of 65 OPG's.

Im expecting a no vote, but thats nowt to worry about so long as the turn out is good.

Democracy is the key factor here for me, the principle that major change must be mandated by a ballot of CWU members

I think you meant a fair ballot BD - one where both sides of the story are told and not hijacked by people who want the vote to be only one way.

[lovejoy]

I work in an average MC,and by my reckoning 80% of members are purely in the union "because everybody else is",i think this is reflected in the low turnout in even the most important votes,re the last dispute,let alone local votes(lucky to get more than a handful,and always the same faces).The point i am making is that most of the people i work with,and around are sheep,and i think RM and the CWU know,and exploit this for their own means(whatever they may be).When anybody dares to speak out against either of these 2 then they are labeled "troublemakers",or have i missed the point AGAIN?

Funnily enough, yes you have ha :)

Speaking out is one thing, constant attacking, manipulation and bascally low level bullying is not debating or having a different view.

I know for example if I post a view on here with regards to lets just say revisions replies will include angles such as "bought off", "sound like a manager", "what is your motive?" etc etc. If somebody was to reply saying I think you are wrong because of A, B or C then no worries and you can have a reasoned debate (as I do with many posters via PM). In real life as soon as somebody gets personal they lose the argument - not it seems on RMC.

[Lincox]

Hi Lovejoy, nice to hear from you. From my view point, if it was not for Royal Mail Chat no one would have a clue what is going on in different parts of the country. Why oh why are our illustrious leaders more concerned with something that might happen in eighteen months two years time or even longer, or not at all, rather than getting to grips with the horrendous situations that are occurring right now, up and down the breadth of the uk. That is why this site is so important and it would pay all of the union management structure, and the lower representatives to get involved and hear some real stories around the country and get their buts off their seats and go to those places and get the real gist of the problems being faced together with those sites that are reportedly running smoothly, in order that this soap opera can be sorted out once and for all.

[lovejoy]

Never once suggested HQ do not deserve criticism.......In fact I have vocally given it. That post is probably an example of the point I am making........Somebody makes a point then someone else comes at it from another angle (that suits them) and manipulates what has been said to get a cheap shot in. What does that do for a balanced debate? Nothing.

Well what point exactly are you trying to make Lovejoy? That we shouldn't talk about the elephant in the room. It's time that HQ and the senior reps realise they are seriously out of touch with the R&F. As for cheap shots? Make a target and sure as hell you're going to get incoming - if people can't stand the heat the kitchen door is always open.

It's always easy to fire the shots when you are not in a position to take any back.....i.e not a member, not a rep and cowering behind a keyboard.

Its far harder to get up and challenge HQ at the rostrum and in person like DIngo and many others do on a regular basis. If people truly want their opinions respected then get involved in your branch, help your local rep, maybe become a local rep, influence from within. That wasn't aimed at your Dvbuk - just at anyone who wants to change things

[dvbuk55]

When things get personal? This site is an anonymous forum - therefore people aren't attacked - opinions may be. Perhaps there is a thin skinned element out there. However, there are issues that are glossed over by these posters. The decoupling of the pensions issue and the failure to hold a ballot as promised in 2007 and then the subsequent acceptance of the poorer pension scheme and the retirement age increased to 65. Now let me ask a salient question on the pensions issue and see if any of the senior reps can answer - What pension scheme do the leadership have, a final salary scheme? and how much of the subs are paid into the scheme to offset the deficit annually. On the issue of finances has there been any cut backs as promised or is it still a fill your boots whilst the goings good.

[lovejoy]

Hi Lovejoy, nice to hear from you. From my view point, if it was not for Royal Mail Chat no one would have a clue what is going on in different parts of the country. Why oh why are our illustrious leaders more concerned with something that might happen in eighteen months two years time or even longer, or not at all, rather than getting to grips with the horrendous situations that are occurring right now, up and down the breadth of the uk. That is why this site is so important and it would pay all of the union management structure, and the lower representatives to get involved and hear some real stories around the country and get their buts off their seats and go to those places and get the real gist of the problems being faced together with those sites that are reportedly running smoothly, in order that this soap opera can be sorted out once and for all.

Hi mate - just a whistle stop....The wife and daughter watching x factor was too much for me!!

Your point is spot on but this is where the confusion sits......This site is very important in terms of circulating info and offering support and that should be its main aim in my view.

The trouble is though that because you dont get information then you automatically think (as you would) that its HQs fault.

Since the agreement there have been countless LTBs, briefings, Div reps meetings, clarifications, Area delivery reps meetings, reports etc.......This information should be circulated on an almost rolling basis by your branch. Some branches are excellent but some not so and this is why areas suffer!

I don't think senior reps would be best coming on here for a few of the industry to be honest - I think they should actually visit the workplaces (as many do).

[hubbahubba]

I work in an average MC,and by my reckoning 80% of members are purely in the union "because everybody else is",i think this is reflected in the low turnout in even the most important votes,re the last dispute,let alone local votes(lucky to get more than a handful,and always the same faces).The point i am making is that most of the people i work with,and around are sheep,and i think RM and the CWU know,and exploit this for their own means(whatever they may be).When anybody dares to speak out against either of these 2 then they are labeled "troublemakers",or have i missed the point AGAIN?

Funnily enough, yes you have ha :)

Speaking out is one thing, constant attacking, manipulation and bascally low level bullying is not debating or having a different view.

I know for example if I post a view on here with regards to lets just say revisions replies will include angles such as "bought off", "sound like a manager", "what is your motive?" etc etc. If somebody was to reply saying I think you are wrong because of A, B or C then no worries and you can have a reasoned debate (as I do with many posters via PM). In real life as soon as somebody gets personal they lose the argument - not it seems on RMC.

Maybe you and other union figures DO get unjustified flak sometimes,but I haven't commented on any of your posts before,so where the "constant attacking" you keep getting certainly isn't from me?! My point was that most union members are just going with the flow,and any that stray from the beaten track of CWU mantra are UNFAIRLY branded troublemakers,is this not a fair point?When 2010 was being thrashed out,we had a series of local meeting where we were told"there is no plan B",RM are going to push this through whatever,so you might as well vote yes and get a few quid out of it.Half the people i spoke to didnt even know what the strikes were about FFS!The clue is in the name COMMUNICATION Workers Union....It helps when that communication is clear,and in the interests of the members who pay the subs.........................

[lovejoy]

When things get personal? This site is an anonymous forum - therefore people aren't attacked - opinions may be. Perhaps there is a thin skinned element out there. However, there are issues that are glossed over by these posters. The decoupling of the pensions issue and the failure to hold a ballot as promised in 2007 and then the subsequent acceptance of the poorer pension scheme and the retirement age increased to 65. Now let me ask a salient question on the pensions issue and see if any of the senior reps can answer - What pension scheme do the leadership have, a final salary scheme? and how much of the subs are paid into the scheme to offset the deficit annually. On the issue of finances has there been any cut backs as promised or is it still a fill your boots whilst the goings good.

The HQ pension schemes are currently under review for exactly the same reasons ours were - deficit etc.

On the HQ cutbacks the postal department review is underway and I believe this will result in a reduction of officers at HQ - and rightly so with a shrinking membership.

The Union structure has to change - both for financial reasons and also so it serves the priorities of the membership. For the first time in ages I feel the Union are moving this forward.

[dvbuk55]

Never once suggested HQ do not deserve criticism.......In fact I have vocally given it. That post is probably an example of the point I am making........Somebody makes a point then someone else comes at it from another angle (that suits them) and manipulates what has been said to get a cheap shot in. What does that do for a balanced debate? Nothing.

Well what point exactly are you trying to make Lovejoy? That we shouldn't talk about the elephant in the room. It's time that HQ and the senior reps realise they are seriously out of touch with the R&F. As for cheap shots? Make a target and sure as hell you're going to get incoming - if people can't stand the heat the kitchen door is always open.

It's always easy to fire the shots when you are not in a position to take any back.....i.e not a member, not a rep and cowering behind a keyboard.

Its far harder to get up and challenge HQ at the rostrum and in person like DIngo and many others do on a regular basis. If people truly want their opinions respected then get involved in your branch, help your local rep, maybe become a local rep, influence from within. That wasn't aimed at your Dvbuk - just at anyone who wants to change things

You never cease to amaze me lovejoy with the tales of derring do at the rostrum. I have to say that I have addressed issues in another place from a rostrum and so it holds no mystery for me. Now lets get to the being involved lovejoy. Lets not get all misty eyed about being part of the union team shall we - you and I and many other posters on here know how closed shop getting nomination and acceptance is and yes truly there are people who are elected purely because no one else is interested not because they are gifted.

[lovejoy]

I work in an average MC,and by my reckoning 80% of members are purely in the union "because everybody else is",i think this is reflected in the low turnout in even the most important votes,re the last dispute,let alone local votes(lucky to get more than a handful,and always the same faces).The point i am making is that most of the people i work with,and around are sheep,and i think RM and the CWU know,and exploit this for their own means(whatever they may be).When anybody dares to speak out against either of these 2 then they are labeled "troublemakers",or have i missed the point AGAIN?

Funnily enough, yes you have ha :)

Speaking out is one thing, constant attacking, manipulation and bascally low level bullying is not debating or having a different view.

I know for example if I post a view on here with regards to lets just say revisions replies will include angles such as "bought off", "sound like a manager", "what is your motive?" etc etc. If somebody was to reply saying I think you are wrong because of A, B or C then no worries and you can have a reasoned debate (as I do with many posters via PM). In real life as soon as somebody gets personal they lose the argument - not it seems on RMC.

Maybe you and other union figures DO get unjustified flak sometimes,but I haven't commented on any of your posts before,so where the "constant attacking" you keep getting certainly isn't from me?! My point was that most union members are just going with the flow,and any that stray from the beaten track of CWU mantra are UNFAIRLY branded troublemakers,is this not a fair point?When 2010 was being thrashed out,we had a series of local meeting where we were told"there is no plan B",RM are going to push this through whatever,so you might as well vote yes and get a few quid out of it.Half the people i spoke to didnt even know what the strikes were about FFS!The clue is in the name COMMUNICATION Workers Union....It helps when that communication is clear,and in the interests of the members who pay the subs.........................

I never said YOU were constantly attacking anyone. Far from it - your points are well made and fair!!

I also would never attack someone for not agreeing with HQ - As i have fallen into that category on many occasions.

Communications need to improve - but some of that falls to Regions / Divisions and branches - not just HQ. It is very easy for your rep or branch to just blame hq to avoid pulling weight themselves!

[lovejoy]

Never once suggested HQ do not deserve criticism.......In fact I have vocally given it. That post is probably an example of the point I am making........Somebody makes a point then someone else comes at it from another angle (that suits them) and manipulates what has been said to get a cheap shot in. What does that do for a balanced debate? Nothing.

Well what point exactly are you trying to make Lovejoy? That we shouldn't talk about the elephant in the room. It's time that HQ and the senior reps realise they are seriously out of touch with the R&F. As for cheap shots? Make a target and sure as hell you're going to get incoming - if people can't stand the heat the kitchen door is always open.

It's always easy to fire the shots when you are not in a position to take any back.....i.e not a member, not a rep and cowering behind a keyboard.

Its far harder to get up and challenge HQ at the rostrum and in person like DIngo and many others do on a regular basis. If people truly want their opinions respected then get involved in your branch, help your local rep, maybe become a local rep, influence from within. That wasn't aimed at your Dvbuk - just at anyone who wants to change things

You never cease to amaze me lovejoy with the tales of derring do at the rostrum. I have to say that I have addressed issues in another place from a rostrum and so it holds no mystery for me. Now lets get to the being involved lovejoy. Lets not get all misty eyed about being part of the union team shall we - you and I and many other posters on here know how closed shop getting nomination and acceptance is and yes truly there are people who are elected purely because no one else is interested not because they are gifted.

Can you explain to me how it can me a closed shop and yet have no interest at the same time? At local level if you wanted to be a rep then your members are the ones who vote you in/out - no nomination needed!

[BELIAL]

Like it or not LJ it's a resource ,use it or lose it

[dvbuk55]

When things get personal? This site is an anonymous forum - therefore people aren't attacked - opinions may be. Perhaps there is a thin skinned element out there. However, there are issues that are glossed over by these posters. The decoupling of the pensions issue and the failure to hold a ballot as promised in 2007 and then the subsequent acceptance of the poorer pension scheme and the retirement age increased to 65. Now let me ask a salient question on the pensions issue and see if any of the senior reps can answer - What pension scheme do the leadership have, a final salary scheme? and how much of the subs are paid into the scheme to offset the deficit annually. On the issue of finances has there been any cut backs as promised or is it still a fill your boots whilst the goings good.

The HQ pension schemes are currently under review for exactly the same reasons ours were - deficit etc.

On the HQ cutbacks the postal department review is underway and I believe this will result in a reduction of officers at HQ - and rightly so with a shrinking membership.

The Union structure has to change - both for financial reasons and also so it serves the priorities of the membership. For the first time in ages I feel the Union are moving this forward.

That lovejoy is music to my ears - and can I say that is probably the first time any suggestion from someone as senior as you has actually come forward to suggest that all is not well in the state of Denmark, the finances need to be regularised without Royal Mail assistance, which probably will not happen on privatisation and the wishes of the membership and not the parlous state of Royal Mails mismanagement need to be addressed.