Should we strike to show our opposition to privatisation?

[jockstrapp]

I just voted "don't care" because I couldn't give a monkeys about this job anymore, I start at my time and finish at my time completed or not, not one minutes o/t, don't give a f#ck about the customers (except the people who gave xmas tip). As for striking........hell will freeze over before I strike for this union again they have screwed me twice now there will not be a third time.

[Lounge Lizard]

Of course we should be out on strike. We have no alternative! :dcfo

but after last time there simply wouldn't be the support for the strike,
and the public wouldn't support us much - until a few years time when rural areas get just two deliveries a week and it's too late.

[post_bitch]

why would it jsut be rurals that get 2 deliverys why not

monday wednesday friday - 2 in a van - any cut offs done by a small team on the extra days completeing all the cut offs

one or two guys out with all specials each day

massive savings to be made there

[pickaname]

Privatisation can only be good.

We have the chance to remove the tossers who have ruined the business over the last 10 years.

[Sippin40oz]

How can we go on strike? Legally we are only able to withdraw our labour from our employer ( Royal Mail Letters / Greene / whoever, whenever ), but what you propose is to strike against our shareholder ( HM Govt. ) selling it's shares....if you want recognised support for a strike you will not get it, and if you did, you can bet even more draconian anti-union legislation would be drafted....the NUM took on Thatcher & EVERY union LOST, what you suggest would lead to the same result.

I wont pretend to understand the legal requirements for the strike but there has been talk from other unions about country wide striking as a protest against government budget cuts. Think the loudest supporter of this was Bob Crow of the RMT / TUC? If your statement is correct maybe we could we go down the route of using the changes in our pension scheme's ownership / administration as our strike reason? Thats something that effects us directly so surely that would be a reasonable excuse in the eyes of the law?

I guess there is the obvious apathy to the idea due to the ineffective strikes in the past. The public are probably quite dismissive of strike when we are fighting for our own pay but i dont think it would be the same if its something that affects them directly. But we could use our voice to try to get our story in the papers! Only then will the public see the reason why they should oppose the privatisation such as higher prices, reduced services etc. At the moment everyone seems to forgoten about the RM privatisation so at least we could try to get some publicity and bring the issue into the spot light.

The biggest problem in my eyes is that most posties seem to have given up! We are likely to get screwed over the most out of privatisation so if we are not willing to fight it what chance have we got to get the public to fight it?!

[Typhoon]

After the last deal.

No.

Never again, lost money striking last time.

Lost money through the 'deal of the century'.

Lost my faith in the CWU.

[post_bitch]

wasnt it royal mails "plan" that they will lose faith in the union?

or did they just dig there own demise

[perstop tray]

I have said before and will keep saying i will only go on strike if the cma does
I will not save a bosses butt for them to do my job while i am on stike to save theirs and give them the chance to earn afortune aswell

[suz67]

I just voted "don't care" because I couldn't give a monkeys about this job anymore, I start at my time and finish at my time completed or not, not one minutes o/t, don't give a f#ck about the customers (except the people who gave xmas tip). As for striking........hell will freeze over before I strike for this union again they have screwed me twice now there will not be a third time.

[baleout]

Go on Strike and get shafted again ?! I don't think so.

Someone explain to me why privatisation would be so bad. At least it would clear out the current shite management.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

At least it would clear out the current shite management.

Along with posties who don't fit the new ethos, or if you no longer can keep up to the physicality of the new job. Of course if TNT do take over then FT will be an endangered species, in fact contracts above 15 hours may be endangered.

They do have a history - http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/communit ... t=TNT+part" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Under the plans, mail deliverers and sorters working 25 hours or more per week will lose their jobs, while staff working 15 hours or less can stay, but may need to work more flexibly.

[packmule]

fool me once , fool me twice ............ 3 times ???? I don't think so .

Billy , Dave go forth and multiply

Thats the only chance you've got to increase membership and get a following. between thew two of you you have killed the CWU

[POSTMAN]

We wouldn't be striking for Billy,Dave,the union,that wanky union rep you've got,we would be striking for ourselves,our future.

[smokerjim]

We wouldn't be striking for Billy,Dave,the union,that wanky union rep you've got,we would be striking for ourselves,our future.

But as I've said earlier here ( and has been said elsewhere ) in this case that would be political action - any IA would need to be T&C action ( B&H, length of attendance, delivery spans, whatever ), and thats what the last IA was about, yet what happened was a ( very ) minor pay increase, loss of some allowance, a bung of money we were due anyway brought forward a couple of months, and a promise of a bigger bung of money for massive whole sale changes ( including the loss of lots of MCs and many jobs ), but were any of our demands actually met other than vague, wishy washy & weasle words of "aspirations" and "hopes" in the agreements?

Most everyone here was up for the fight, and put the time in on the gates, made the sacrifices, the negotiators got royally rolled over, and the silent, apathetic mass of employees saw the size of the bungs and no further....if we did go on IA against privatisation ( whatever the public T&Cs reason ), I doubt I could trust RM not to try to roll the negotiators over for fun or pride, I doubt I could trust the negotiators to have a some bottle & tell RM to stop buggering about, and I KNOW I could not trust the silent apathetic mass of employees to not sell us all down the river even as we stare down the barrel of the gun!!!

[PingPong]

We wouldn't be striking for Billy,Dave,the union,that wanky union rep you've got,we would be striking for ourselves,our future.

But as I've said earlier here ( and has been said elsewhere ) in this case that would be political action - any IA would need to be T&C action ( B&H, length of attendance, delivery spans, whatever ), and thats what the last IA was about, yet what happened was a ( very ) minor pay increase, loss of some allowance, a bung of money we were due anyway brought forward a couple of months, and a promise of a bigger bung of money for massive whole sale changes ( including the loss of lots of MCs and many jobs ), but were any of our demands actually met other than vague, wishy washy & weasle words of "aspirations" and "hopes" in the agreements?

Most everyone here was up for the fight, and put the time in on the gates, made the sacrifices, the negotiators got royally rolled over, and the silent, apathetic mass of employees saw the size of the bungs and no further....if we did go on IA against privatisation ( whatever the public T&Cs reason ), I doubt I could trust RM not to try to roll the negotiators over for fun or pride, I doubt I could trust the negotiators to have a some bottle & tell RM to stop buggering about, and I KNOW I could not trust the silent apathetic mass of employees to not sell us all down the river even as we stare down the barrel of the gun!!!

That sums it up for me.