London Dispute Update

[DGP1]

You really couldn't make it up, we've been saying that the appearance is London gets everything and the rest of us get shafted and we get posters coming on here who just reinforce those appearances HQ really needs to sort this out or they will lose what little support they do have

[fishtank]

Now if the issues of London cannot be resolved and Royal Mail move ahead with complusory redundancies then there is a national dispute as that is the policy of the CWU where ever it takes place in Scotland , Wales. Belfast or the North or South West.

So obviously if there is no resolution on London issues...there will be no national talks.
If London get their issues resolved...the rest of the country get theirs.
I don't mind being used as a bargaining chip dingo but the question is...
With the London issues resolved....what's our bargaining chip?

How much support can we expect to receive from the LDC over imposed later start times in Rochdale or bullying managers in Dundee?....or will these just become scare stories again?

[Martin Walsh]

Fish I think London"s track record is that we produce yes vote after yes vote regardless of the issues. In the 2003 National No Vote the only Division in the UK who got a yes vote in this overall No vote was London. London also got a yes vote in the London Weighting.

Believe me fish there has been no debate in the talks about us using you or the national issues as a leverage for the London postion. It has not been disucssed fact.

Now I can assure you if we resolve the London issues and cannot resolve the national issues London will support the call for a national dispute and will produce.

Pehaps others who shout a lot and I am not refering to you can also say they will produce.

[fishtank]

Now I can assure you if we resolve the London issues and cannot resolve the national issues London will support the call for a national dispute and will produce.

I appreciate that and believe me i am more worried about the rest of the country "producing" than i am about London.
The difference is,instead of just blaming the rest of the country for "apparent" weakness...i would rather get to the bottom of why they feel the way they do and address that issue and in my opinion the problem lies within the union's organisational structure and some of those tasked to deliver that organisation.

[dvbuk55]

Well as I see it there is no correlation between the London issue, which seems to be solely concerned with "people issues" and has not embraced the colleague shares, pensions, bullying and workload issues that plague the rest of us which are also, at least in our eyes, NOW issues, but have largely been ignored.

[drb]

There is no doubt about the fact that HQ have not caught up with,and to be honest is struggling to do so. I know I have been banging on about it on every thread here,but I do regard new blood reps as important as any dispute. The fact remains is that issues AFTER the interim agreement have not been resolved,(thats why the interim agreement to some was a "climb down"). The part timers issue for example,(resourcing agreement), has not been disagreed with. Where are the disagreements on this matter? Obviously there is not much help from the divisional or area reps,(although I do find it odd that most of them are not doing anything).

Have the local reps the knowledge and support to actually register disagreement? If not how are we organising training and recruiting new reps?. Why have HQ only one national organiser? I do know there where 2 travelling to different branches but those positions are now gone.

Have we on this forum tried to put back the committee's in our offices? Do we actually care? Are we to wait for the "army" to stroll in and make everything alright or are we to be more "pro active"? The question would be that if this where to happen then what is the point of paying national officers. Yes a restructure is required,at HQ to branch level,but what are we replacing and with whom?

This thread was about an area of the country that has had compulsory redundancies imposed and IS getting treated differently then others. Organise and communicate is required here.

In terms of other offices problems we should start a new thread called "How is your disagreement going". Perhaps register disagreement on all the issues in our offices,and put proper pressure on our divisional reps to resolve them. Perhaps a "disagreement template" in the downloads section here?

However our issues on this thread in regards to not supporting a potentially serious threat to our job security should not be questioned.

[DGP1]

Again, you just don't get that the appearance is London is complaining over something that the rest of the country has already suffered, lots of other MCs have closed without a peep from the CWU leadership (and in some cases with the agreement of some in the union). The 'How's your disagreement' thread line is very funny, in my office we where thrown to the wolves, given bugger all support and just made to get on with the absolute balls up they made of the office. But then it's all everybody elses fault for being weak

[drb]

Let me get this right,DGP1. You are saying that "you where thrown to the wolves"? In what way? (I'm not doubting you,just clarifying).

I have seen a few MC's close,no doubt about it. However not on the terms of the London situation. In fact a lot of those MC closures where voted on.

[DGP1]

No back up drb from anybody,we're just a small office so it was easy to break the IA (shipping in staff from all over to...........well I don't know what they did because they certainly didn't go out....or prep frames). There was no talk of anybody helping us, we just had to do it ourselves which meant we where left with the crap that our office has become.

ps. Our last revision was put in by EA and hasn't been fixed even though Pegasus has now said that most duties are over.

[Martin Walsh]

No DGP you dont get it. London had 10 mail centres in 1994 now we have 3 no other region has seen the amount of mail centre closures London has and we never went on strike to save bricks and mortar.

Royal Mail now want to close two of the three remaining mail centres and reduce the one remaining mail centres staffing levels by over 57 percent. This will lead to compulsory redundancies.

No other mail centre clousure programme has seen the numbers of surplus staff that London will have with no place for those staff who wish to remain in the industry. Again no other mail centre closure programme has seen this. Normally the staff move with the work.

So when Oldham and Stockport closed staff had the option to go to Manchester with the work , when Liverpool closed they had the option to go to Warrington , when Crewe closed they had the chance to go to Warrington. When Oxford closed and Reading closed they had the chance to go to Swindon , when Coventry and Milton Keynes closed they had the chance to go to the new South Midlands mail centre.

The difference is when East London close , when South London close and when the Mount has to reduce jobs by 57% there are no jobs available for them. They face complusory redundnacies. Thats why London now has 10 seperate units having voted for strike action. Now those are why the situration in London is such a big issue. Thats why the rest of the CWU carried the policy at CWU annual conference.

This is not about safeguarding London Mail Centres as the union has already told staff in South London it will be closing its is about making sure that everyone who wants to remain in Royal Mail can do so with a reasonable duty within reasonable travelling time of their home address.

[DGP1]

Dingo, you can say all these things but it remains that everybody outside London think you are only getting what the rest of us have already suffered, until you can change that opinion then you are very unlikely to gain much support.

Just a question - Does London NEED 3 MCs or could it work with just the one?? Is your argument one of jobs or operational ability??

[mailmonkey]

Obviously there is not much help from the divisional or area reps,(although I do find it odd that most of them are not doing anything).

This is not true.

They are actively forcing revisions through in offices which are opposed to it.

And they're working bloody hard at it!

[dvbuk55]

There are jobs they just don't want to take them and as for people wanting to stay in the industry....................great if the works there,,,,,,,no doubt the steel workers, miners, car workers and dozens of smaller industry employed people also wanted to stay in their industry but if the work ain't there it ain't.

[drb]

The first thing about disagreements is to show reasons as to why not. So for example here is the employers head of disagreement :

We believe under the spirit of BTA that we can make 80 hours savings due to declining mail revenue

and yours would be :

Any savings under the BTA would be performed after using the revision tools,(IWT,Duty Modeling tool,Geo route). We would also use the 6th step process and vote accordingly on all six.
We also note under the BTA agreement that the elements of the Interim agreement is still active. Therefore all part timers should be made to full time on all vacancies under the Way Forward/Stoke agreement.
We would also require to peruse your calculations on the hours you have proposed.
We would also require a second meeting 7 days from the date of this reply under the IR framework,in which we would then move to stage 2.
We would also require a cessation of all bullying and harassment on unachievable workloads immediately.

yours sincerely

..........



If the above did not happen in your offices...why? What has this to do with compulsory redundancies? Are you interested in getting involved? PM me anytime and I will get you the training. However I will be supporting,(as I would any office or division) such awful tactics.

In terms of the work not being there. May I see the calculations please? I can show you a decline in stamped mail. I can also show you an increase in packets. However I can also show a mis-calculation on cleared Mail centres on a daily basis. I can also demonstrate a decline in "revenue" but not volume.

[Danelectro]

We would also require a second meeting 7 days from the date of this reply under the IR framework,in which we would then move to stage 2.
.

But mailmonkeys point is that by the time it gets to stage three the area rep gets involved and tries to force
your hand and usurp the local rep and get and it signed off,maybe those masons you say are running Royal Mail
are in the union aswell my H&S rep just signed off stuff in my office last week that aint getting done
i told him this before the assessment but he still signed it off,too many senior reps are not fussy what
they agree to and in fact have a fantastic knack of keeping members and reps at arms length