YOU REAP WHAT YOU SOW

[pokos27]

the union and management did nothing about dsa.
and our conditions have been eroded over time.
Yet its still a better job than working in tescos.
Blame our lying polititians for being screwed by the EU dictacks.

[Martin Walsh]

The CWU balloted the members in the same way it balloted members in industrial action ballots and previous national agreements. The way forwards was rejected the first time and as was the attendance procedure first time around.

Now postal ballots never have as high a turn out as a workplace ballot but it is the fairest way to decide. Now people vote yes and no for various reasons some because they dont want further strike action , some they think it was the best agreement under the circumstances and was explained to every local rep at briefings and to area reps at a two day national briefing in Bournemouth. In terms of those voting no there was many reasons why some choose to vote no. However as someone who was part of the campaign which defeated the way forward first time around the campaign against that agreement had divisional and Branch support widespread throughout the union.

Whereas in this case there was no widespread campaign against the agreement yes some Branch"s recommended no but there was not a massive campaign outside of that and yes most posters on here were against it but this site cannnot lead a massive campaign as the union structure decides via branch and divisional recommendations what they recommend to their members. Depending whether the branch has the support of the members they reprsent will decide how many members go behind the recommendation of the branch.

Now the rules of the CWU allow for the PEC to also make a recommendation to the members. But automatically it is CWU members who decide whether to put a cross in the yes box or the no box. The box with the most crosses decides whether the agreement is a yes vote or a no vote.

Its funny how everyone does not mind how many people do not vote when we are balloting for strike action and are happy with a yes vote but then moan when a yes vote for an agreement has the same percentage voting.

Now lets dispel the other myth there was no plan b , of course if the agreement had gone down there were two options for the CWU and likewise two options for Royal Mail. The CWU options would have been to understand the reasons for the rejection and then attempt to get Royal Mail to change their business plan which would have been less than easy. Or to re-ballot for strke action in order to try and force them via strike action to change their plan. Equally Royal Mail two choices would have been are they willing to concede some of their golden ticket issues like door to door,automation and saturdays or were they going to introduce their business plan by executive action ?

At no stage was there any chance of Royal Mail not wanting to introduce their business plan which included sequencing ,saturdays, door to door and the revisions and the mail centre closures.

[POSTMAN]

Now lets dispel the other myth there was no plan b

Uh oh! Time to put your tin hat on Dingo.

[fishtank]

Now lets dispel the other myth there was no plan b

Uh oh! Time to put your tin hat on Dingo.

Same old....same old.
Why bother?

[BELIAL]

Now lets dispel the other myth there was no plan b

Uh oh! Time to put your tin hat on Dingo.

Oh for f***s sake

[Cut Off King]

Now lets dispel the other myth there was no plan b

Thats the funniest thing that I have read on here for months, you'll be asking us to strike next......

[Big Daz]

A ballot for IA is governed by the law of the land, if its done in accordance with the law of the land then all is well and good.

Once there is a yes vote for IA a OPG/mbr dose not have to take part in any action called.

When there is a yes vote for a proposed agreement between employer and union then the workforce are bound by it whether they like it not. On that basis turnout is very important, especially if it concerns a major change agreement.

All im after is to be able as a local rep to have a decent mandate in place when it comes to implementation of major change, have I got that with BT2010? No I havent and it makes the job of local rep a lot harder !!!!

Perhaps turnout can be looked at in the review of the workings of the CWU.

[Big Daz]

There was no plan B as you cant have one untill the reasons behind a no vote are fully explored and the PEC along with the DGS(p) Dave Ward and the postal officers have sat down together and thrashed one out based on the feedback following a no vote.

[POSTMAN GATTUSO]

2 many dingos out there sniffing ass,been there heard the s**t 20 years off it ,cmon dingo lets hear the bull.

[Martin Walsh]

2 many dingos out there sniffing ass,been there heard the s**t 20 years off it ,cmon dingo lets hear the bull.

Pehaps you want all of those with a different view and opinion to the norm on these site to leave you to a love in , most have already left the site, if thats what you want then fair enough , you can continue to moan on your own making the site a lot worse for it.

Now Daz and others there was a plan b , the problem is if you tell someone your plan b then a lot no longer want to listen to your plan a .

Now Daz your question tell me what the answer is , a work place ballot would be good but could not be overseen by independent auditors so will be risk of claims of unfair balloting etc.

But maybe given the fact some on here would rather have me not on the board than continue to have a moan on your own but my advice is you dont ever achieve anything by moaning on the net or in the canteen or by your frame you achieve something by getting organised and fighting for what you believe is right that may mean arguing with your area rep , divisonal rep and of course arguing with your manager , DSM etc

[fishtank]

Now Daz and others there was a plan b , the problem is if you tell someone your plan b then a lot no longer want to listen to your plan a .

So it's better to "encourage" members that the plan on the table is the only way forward?
....and a vote based on this assumption is,in your eyes a clear mandate for change?

dingo once wrote...

Well look if you reject the deal , you have no pay rise and no supplement and no thousand pounds, no improvement in mtsf , no process for dealing with mail centre or rdc closures , no process for dealing with standards , or geo route , no process for dealing with later saturdays. However you might for a time get your 1.67 door to door items ( not sure for how long )

...or no plan b.

[Martin Walsh]

Fishtank where in that quote did I say there was no plan B ? The fact is if you reject something your left with current terms. However the point I was making is that Royal Mail`s business stategy was based on the plan and they were not going to walk away from it just because the members had rejected it.

We would have been left with either trying to re-negotiate the agreement and the talks had been going on for over 4 months and all agruements on every issue had been made and re-made or re-balloting the members in pursance of a new agreement. Royal Mail would have been left with either backing down on things which they stated were absolutes like Door to Door , sequencing and longer Saturdays and the revisons.

Or Royal Mail would have had to introduce their plan by executive action.

As it happened the members of the CWU who decided to vote , voted yes. As the quote goes , Success has many authors but failure has none.

[fishtank]

Fishtank where in that quote did I say there was no plan B ?

Semantics dingo...nothing more.
The fact is that you and others on this board along with Dave and Bob and the whole roadshow/circus encouraged members to believe that there was no other viable way forward with the negotiations...that a final position had been made and that rejection of the deal would result in no further concessions.
That is a "no plan b" scenario dingo no matter which way you slice and dice it.

That is why so many members didn't vote...that is why those who did vote yes mostly did so with a heavy heart and most now regret it and that is why you now have in your lap the most unpopular ratified agreement in the history of the union.
It is toxic dingo....and it will eventually poison all who touch it.

[Martin Walsh]

Fishtank that's a load of rubbish you obviously were not around for the way forward ! It sounded the end of keggie and hogan and a number of pec members ! It split the union and membership for years after ! This outrage over this agreement does not come close to what happened in the aftermath of the way forward

[fishtank]

Fishtank that's a load of rubbish you obviously were not around for the way forward ! It sounded the end of keggie and hogan and a number of pec members ! It split the union and membership for years after ! This outrage over this agreement does not come close to what happened in the aftermath of the way forward

You're right there is little outrage.....if only there were i would have more confidence moving forward.
Outrage can be a positive force for change as it has proved in the past.

This deal will not split the union...this deal has completely neutered the Union....it is a much more insidious death that awaits the CWU.
Death by Apathy.