there's a fight coming

[smokerjim]

Off the directgov website
If you continue to take part in protected industrial action for more than 12 weeks your rights are different. If you are dismissed for taking part after the end of the 12 weeks your dismissal will only be unfair if, at the time of your dismissal, your employer has not followed reasonable steps to settle the dispute with the trade union.

The $64,000 question is what is the definition of "reasonable steps"? Is it actively working with the union reps to reach a mutually agreeable compromise,( imho reasonable ) or is it walking into a meeting refusing to negotiate away from the original position for weeks on end ( RM's default negotiations strategy )?

[ElvisGaddafi]

I won't swear, as I usually get pulled up or censored in some way, but let's face it guys and gals, one way or another we're all intercoursed!

[jack straw]

but WE NEED a change at the top as Billy and Dave did not work last time and will fail us again

Hooray. Now at last everyone is starting to realise that the change needed is with those 2 people. They've sold us down the line many times, but nobody ever stands against them to bring them down. They are paid £1000s a week to sit in Wimbledon doing nothing. FACT. Remember that when you're slogging around on a rainy Saturday morning and they are tucked up in bed. :dcfo :ncfo

[Lincox]

Like getting rid of Septic Bladder of FIFA fame

[arnold cheshire]

july 2nd HAYE v KLITSSHOW should be a good fight

[jafferpants]

Does anyone with a legal background or access to legal advice, know what the legal stance is with an employer sacking it,s workforce and then re-employing them on inferior terms. Would this not constitute compulsory redundancy and a new job offer which is not deemed as suitable alternative employment, which if challengeda form in an industrial tribunal could mean RM have to pay out redundancy terms under the MTSF.

All they will do i issue what is known as a form 188, (a new contract of imployment). If you sign it ok, if not you are looking for a new job and it's perfectly legal.

[flaminmoses]

spot on there, that's exactly what they will try and do, problem is..... how do we stop them????

we strike.
sit round the table with royal mail and ACAS and try to sort it out.

we then call off the strike.

if talks break down its then down to ACAS to decide who is being reasonable.

repeat the loop till the government get a kicking in the commons

[smokerjim]

spot on there, that's exactly what they will try and do, problem is..... how do we stop them????

we strike.
sit round the table with royal mail and ACAS and try to sort it out.

we then call off the strike.

if talks break down its then down to ACAS to decide who is being reasonable.

repeat the loop till the government get a kicking in the commons

I like that, sounds like a great plan....I have just a couple of problems with it, and these problems are Billy, Dave, PEC, etc

[dohnut]

No way I would do this job on minimum wage, not walking about for 4 hours in all weather conditions for £6.15 an hour if it comes to that the can get :vcfo

[Lincox]

Jaffer, I dont think they can reduce wages to minimum at the stroke of a pen. They would effectively be forcing us to walk and sue for constructive dismissal. If 120,000 cases were put forward at an industrial tribunal, it would be a very strong willed tribunal panel, to find against us.

[fishtank]

Jaffer, I dont think they can reduce wages to minimum at the stroke of a pen. They would effectively be forcing us to walk and sue for constructive dismissal. If 120,000 cases were put forward at an industrial tribunal, it would be a very strong willed tribunal panel, to find against us.

TUPE protects against that.
Any new employer has to honour existing contracts however there is no hard and fast timescale for TUPE protection....just that any changes should not be as a result of the takeover.
It will be a much more insidious and stealthy destruction of our terms and conditions in my opinion.