CWU DUPED

[fishtank]

Another union would only be representing the same members.
Another union could only have more "teeth" if those same members had more "teeth".
And what exactly would they do with these teeth?

One of the most,if not the most important task a union has is to organise it's membership.
Blaming an apathetic membership is one thing.
Using it as a cover for organisational ineptitude is another.

[smokerjim]

the other thing that comes to mind is.. since RM is able to walk over the CWU, is there another union with more "teeth" that RM would recognise and accept as a workers representative union?...

Another union would only be representing the same members.
Another union could only have more "teeth" if those same members had more "teeth".
And what exactly would they do with these teeth?

More succinctly, why would RM ditch a sweetheart union ( and by extrapolation, a majority "sweetheart" membership ) that can't survive independently, for a firebrand / militant union that would have the means & the will to take on RM against every infringement of agreements, every act of employment law breaking, every slight to the dignity & respsect of it's members???

RM might derecognise ( eventually ) CWU if every member resigned tomorrow, and signed up to another union, but it does NOT mean RM would recognise that other union ( and if the membership was that organised & politically aware, the CWU could be as firebrand / militant as the membership wants it to be ).

[MinisterofCucumber]

We need to look at how IA has become an ineffective weapon.

It seems that management decide when IA will happen and plan accordingly.

Our Union leaders seem to be easily manipulated and are always reacting to management initiatives rather than being proactive. Individual members facing injustice are not adequately supported.

When we are provoked into taking IA, management have already planned how to keep a skeleton service going and how to spin the media so that public opinion is against us.

Senior Union leaders belong to the spoilt post-war baby boom generation who don't give a f**k about their children or grandchildren, so long as they can collect their final salary pensions and prolong their selfish lives as long as possible.

If I had my way, I would make all the senior f***ers with cushy numbers make up for not doing their fair share of work and work them so hard that they bleed through the arse.

[smokerjim]

Another union would only be representing the same members.
Another union could only have more "teeth" if those same members had more "teeth".
And what exactly would they do with these teeth?

One of the most,if not the most important task a union has is to organise it's membership.
Blaming an apathetic membership is one thing.
Using it as a cover for organisational ineptitude is another.

What needs to happen is for someone on any future negotiating teams to join in here on RMC, start threads & post updates on the negotiations, and ask for what direction talks need to go....wishlists won't be fulfilled, but suggesting a basic payrise rather than a lump sum should be achieveable, etc, etcWhat cannot be allowed is for communication blackouts to be imposed - if you don't tell us what's on the table, we can't tell you to demand more ( and we start imagining a feast on that table, not the crumbs we've been left with )

[clashcityrocker]

One of the most,if not the most important task a union has is to organise it's membership.

And it can't even organise the membership into not coming in early. Or to stop using their cars on delivery.

However it seems highly likely that the CWU will cease to exist as a stand-alone union for much longer.
What union do the membership want to see it merge with to give it more "teeth".

[fishtank]

I think Connect were the discussed option at HQ originally.

http://www.connectuk.org/connect_public/home.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Militant....it isn't.

[smokerjim]

I think Connect were the discussed option at HQ originally.

http://www.connectuk.org/connect_public/home.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Militant....it isn't.

They would be better suited to replace the CMA....but then what has HQ done recently to distinquish CWU from CMA?

[clashcityrocker]

What needs to happen is for someone on any future negotiating teams to join in here on RMC, start threads & post updates on the negotiations,

And how many regular posters are there on RMC?
That would be like letting Larry Loudmouth run the Union meeting in the DO.
And then people who aren't union members deciding union policy? People who don't work for RM deciding CWU policy?
People who have crossed picket lines deciding union policy?

It is a constantly recurring theme on here that the membership only vote yes to agreeents for the financial incentives dangled before their eyes. I have never met anyone who has said they did that. Maybe they vote yes to agreements because they think they are in their best interests to do so.

[fishtank]

It is a constantly recurring theme on here that the membership only vote yes to agreeents for the financial incentives dangled before their eyes. I have never met anyone who has said they did that. Maybe they vote yes to agreements because they think they are in their best interests to do so.

I think both options require a leap of faith i'm not prepared to make.
I will say that most members haven't read the agreement so the decision that it's in their best interests was either made without all of the relevant information....or by someone else.

[smokerjim]

What needs to happen is for someone on any future negotiating teams to join in here on RMC, start threads & post updates on the negotiations,

And how many regular posters are there on RMC?
That would be like letting Larry Loudmouth run the Union meeting in the DO.
And then people who aren't union members deciding union policy? People who don't work for RM deciding CWU policy?
People who have crossed picket lines deciding union policy?

It is a constantly recurring theme on here that the membership only vote yes to agreeents for the financial incentives dangled before their eyes. I have never met anyone who has said they did that. Maybe they vote yes to agreements because they think they are in their best interests to do so.

I agree that there are massive flaws in what I said, but if you conceed that the principle of getting quick feedback from communiques is to be applauded, then I will conceed that I can't think of any resource other than RMC that a negotiator could use as a sounding board ( unless the CWU website has a message board / forum....if it does why don't we know about it? )

In edit: Just looked at CWU site & they do have a msg board.........but it's for telecoms & financial ONLY - the likes of us ( the greater part of it's membership ) are excluded and have nothing similar, so once again, can you think of a better place than RMC for a wide ranging opinion during negotiations?

[silly suffolk]

the cwu must be more independant. area and div reps paid by the business. to many vested interests in my view. at least local reps see the hardships from the sharp end. headquarters should re connect with the membership or were all going to hell in a hand cart

[ldsposti]

headquarters should re connect with the membership or were all going to hell in a hand cart

Well if HQ needs to re-connect with the membership take a look a last months voice in reply to a letter bob gibson replied he would meet staff anytime anywhere, shall we call his bluff.

[clashcityrocker]

He may well have been at your Branch AGM in the past couple of years. If not Bob, then Billy or Dave or one of the others.
Were you?

[silly suffolk]

He may well have been at your Branch AGM in the past couple of years. If not Bob, then Billy or Dave or one of the others.
Were you?

i was. none of the above mentioned were. never seen a national officer in the workplace. see a div rep twice a year if lucky.

[Straight4ward]

Yes, but you are in "deepest Suffolk". I mean, be fair.

mailbox small.jpg