Whats the Agreement? Lets have the REAL debate

[lovejoy]

Everyone is beating around the bush, attacking the PEC, but what is the agreement we would all settle for. Lets have a real debate.

I'd be happy with something along these lines - JUST MY VIEW

Lets break down the key issues

Pay
Pensions
Later Starts / Network changes
Efficiency scheme
Sunday Collections
Strings attached to original offer

An acceptable agreement for me on all of the above would go something like

Pay
I think we are heading for a 2/3 year pay deal. For the immediate April pay award I would accept an inflation matching rise backdated to April of course.

Pensions
I will accept no changes to the current benefits i enjoy and have earned. Any proposed changes to new entrants should be put to a ballot of all ension scheme members

Later starts / Network changes
I am realist and later starts are on the way in. On that basis I think the allowances must be captured. RM want to give us grandfather rights. We should demand that the money goes into our basic pay. That way i can (a) never be touched (b) add to the cash value of any pay rise we get and (c) put more money into our pensions

Efficiency scheme
We all know that Royal Mail will look for savings on a constant basis now. We can either sit back saying no to all proposals and fighting non-stop or we can look to make 'feasible' changes and capture the money into our pay. I want a savings agreement with a very simple formula and one that Royal Mail have no way of wiggling out of. The scheme should be national and not local. Local agreements on pay/bonuses lead to regional pay - the last thing we want

Sunday Collections
Given that the regulator has given the green light to this we may be in trouble there. All weekend jobs should be protected and any SA payments saved by Royal Mail should be used to bolster / increase the pay award thus offering a permanent compensation to anyone who loses out

Strings
The 22 strings cannot be resolved by Sept 4th. I would like to see a timetabled set of negotiations (say 6 months). Any changes that are agreed would obviously benefit Royal Mail so some of that money should also be captured and put into basic pay.

[BELIAL]

Everyone is beating around the bush, attacking the PEC, but what is the agreement we would all settle for. Lets have a real debate.

I'd be happy with something along these lines - JUST MY VIEW

Lets break down the key issues

Pay
Pensions
Later Starts / Network changes
Efficiency scheme
Sunday Collections
Strings attached to original offer

An acceptable agreement for me on all of the above would go something like

Pay
I think we are heading for a 2/3 year pay deal. For the immediate April pay award I would accept an inflation matching rise backdated to April of course.

Pensions
I will accept no changes to the current benefits i enjoy and have earned. Any proposed changes to new entrants should be put to a ballot of all ension scheme members

Later starts / Network changes
I am realist and later starts are on the way in. On that basis I think the allowances must be captured. RM want to give us grandfather rights. We should demand that the money goes into our basic pay. That way i can (a) never be touched (b) add to the cash value of any pay rise we get and (c) put more money into our pensions

Efficiency scheme
We all know that Royal Mail will look for savings on a constant basis now. We can either sit back saying no to all proposals and fighting non-stop or we can look to make 'feasible' changes and capture the money into our pay. I want a savings agreement with a very simple formula and one that Royal Mail have no way of wiggling out of. The scheme should be national and not local. Local agreements on pay/bonuses lead to regional pay - the last thing we want

Sunday Collections
Given that the regulator has given the green light to this we may be in trouble there. All weekend jobs should be protected and any SA payments saved by Royal Mail should be used to bolster / increase the pay award thus offering a permanent compensation to anyone who loses out

Strings
The 22 strings cannot be resolved by Sept 4th. I would like to see a timetabled set of negotiations (say 6 months). Any changes that are agreed would obviously benefit Royal Mail so some of that money should also be captured and put into basic pay.

So to summarise ,you are happy with more work for less pay and a six month moratorium on IA while everyone gets used to being stitched up. I'll have to think on that for a while.

The dogs dead and the fleas are jumping. IMHO we are being prepped for a big sellout/fudge. Sincerely hope i'm totally wrong.

[wakkono]

dont agree with retained allowances i lost mine when i voluntry picked a duty 2 years ago i do the same job as all the other rurals but get paid £12 a week less i cant see thats fair all the allowances should be lost to everyone but put into basic pay instead

[lovejoy]

Everyone is beating around the bush, attacking the PEC, but what is the agreement we would all settle for. Lets have a real debate.

I'd be happy with something along these lines - JUST MY VIEW

Lets break down the key issues

Pay
Pensions
Later Starts / Network changes
Efficiency scheme
Sunday Collections
Strings attached to original offer

An acceptable agreement for me on all of the above would go something like

Pay
I think we are heading for a 2/3 year pay deal. For the immediate April pay award I would accept an inflation matching rise backdated to April of course.

Pensions
I will accept no changes to the current benefits i enjoy and have earned. Any proposed changes to new entrants should be put to a ballot of all ension scheme members

Later starts / Network changes
I am realist and later starts are on the way in. On that basis I think the allowances must be captured. RM want to give us grandfather rights. We should demand that the money goes into our basic pay. That way i can (a) never be touched (b) add to the cash value of any pay rise we get and (c) put more money into our pensions

Efficiency scheme
We all know that Royal Mail will look for savings on a constant basis now. We can either sit back saying no to all proposals and fighting non-stop or we can look to make 'feasible' changes and capture the money into our pay. I want a savings agreement with a very simple formula and one that Royal Mail have no way of wiggling out of. The scheme should be national and not local. Local agreements on pay/bonuses lead to regional pay - the last thing we want

Sunday Collections
Given that the regulator has given the green light to this we may be in trouble there. All weekend jobs should be protected and any SA payments saved by Royal Mail should be used to bolster / increase the pay award thus offering a permanent compensation to anyone who loses out

Strings
The 22 strings cannot be resolved by Sept 4th. I would like to see a timetabled set of negotiations (say 6 months). Any changes that are agreed would obviously benefit Royal Mail so some of that money should also be captured and put into basic pay.

So to summarise ,you are happy with more work for less pay and a six month moratorium on IA while everyone gets used to being stitched up. I'll have to think on that for a while.

The dogs dead and the fleas are jumping. IMHO we are being prepped for a big sellout/fudge. Sincerely hope i'm totally wrong.

Belial , like i said mate just an opinion. Seen some of your posts over the last few days. Plenty of shouting from the rooftops and we'll fight them on the beaches attitude. Lets see you real thoughts. Whats the deal for you on an issue by issue basis? It fine us lot saying lets just stay out or saying no to everything but the PEC have to make REAL decisions about our futures and the futures of the postal industry.

I look forward to hearing your detailed ideas and thoughts

[dvbuk55]

"Belial , like i said mate just an opinion. Seen some of your posts over the last few days. Plenty of shouting from the rooftops and we'll fight them on the beaches attitude. Lets see you real thoughts. Whats the deal for you on an issue by issue basis? It fine us lot saying lets just stay out or saying no to everything but the PEC have to make REAL decisions about our futures and the futures of the postal industry.

I look forward to hearing your detailed ideas and thoughts"




Are you right to say that the PEC have to make REAL decisions about our futures? Oddly enough I thought we elected them to decide what to put to the membership for us to decide our own futures - any proposal will go to the membership to decide not the PEC - they take advice.

In order for us to decide the issues we would need to know what is on the table and at the moment we don't. I wouldn't be too keen on telling RM what our thoughts on a deal are - it's like telling a car salesman what you would be prepared to pay. Let them make the offer - then we decide.

Though it does no harm to big up what we are prepared to DO - rather like telling the salesman there are other garages.

[lovejoy]

"Belial , like i said mate just an opinion. Seen some of your posts over the last few days. Plenty of shouting from the rooftops and we'll fight them on the beaches attitude. Lets see you real thoughts. Whats the deal for you on an issue by issue basis? It fine us lot saying lets just stay out or saying no to everything but the PEC have to make REAL decisions about our futures and the futures of the postal industry.

I look forward to hearing your detailed ideas and thoughts"




Are you right to say that the PEC have to make REAL decisions about our futures? Oddly enough I thought we elected them to decide what to put to the membership for us to decide our own futures - any proposal will go to the membership to decide not the PEC - they take advice.

In order for us to decide the issues we would need to know what is on the table and at the moment we don't. I wouldn't be too keen on telling RM what our thoughts on a deal are - it's like telling a car salesman what you would be prepared to pay. Let them make the offer - then we decide.

Though it does no harm to big up what we are prepared to DO - rather like telling the salesman there are other garages.

Of course any deal goes to the membership to vote on but the fact is that most members vote with the PEC. 99.9% of members i spoke to say they voted no to the Way forward but it went through didn't it dispite many branches campaigning against it!

I think you are missing the point I am trying to make. I have no problem bigging up what we are prepared to do but an easy way out is to just attack other people. Like I said it is just a view. Would be nice to hear some other views / alternatives rather than just the same old points.

I can clearly see that some people don't want to accept certain things. But lets hear what you will accept...... Or would you rather just criticise without putting your own head out there???

[dvbuk55]

I may well have missed the point.

However before I say what I will accept I'd prefer to see whats on offer - I could want a Jag and be offered a mini - I might want a mini and be offered a Jag.

But at the end of the day it will be a personal choice - right or wrong.

[lovejoy]

I may well have missed the point.

However before I say what I will accept I'd prefer to see whats on offer - I could want a Jag and be offered a mini - I might want a mini and be offered a Jag.

But at the end of the day it will be a personal choice - right or wrong.

sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it! (maybe in the back of your Jag )

I'm off to watch the super greens beat Leicester (hopefully)

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Lovejoy i think you breakdown is exactly what I was thinking would be the minimum acceptable deal.

However, please, please , please get rid of those colleagueshares. Don't want them, don't agree with them and they will be worthless when it comes to the so called dividend.

Agree with the efficiency savings but they should be efficiency not just changing FT to PT duties, lapsing duties etc, all you do then is loose the efficiency by paying docket a false and very expensive way of doing business I think.

[rathbonepostie]

Lovejoy, I agree with some of your suggestions, but not others.

I think we have to throw out any idea of new entrants having different pension rights to the rest of us - that would create a two-tier workforce (people on different rates for the job), just as the allowances issue would.

The big issue I don't agree with you on is efficiency savings. If the job is to take less time, then let's have a shorter working week and/or longer holidays rather than lose jobs. I don't think we should be in the business of selling jobs.

The strings CAN be resolved, we should simply say no. The idea of leaving them on the table for further negotiation leaves us in limbo with the potential of trying to get people to fight them 6 months or so down the line. Also management would be likely to introduce them in some offices unilaterally where they think they can get away with it. Lets shoot them down now.

Bottom line, we have not caused Royal Mail's problems and we should not pay for them.

[lovejoy]

Lovejoy, I agree with some of your suggestions, but not others.

I think we have to throw out any idea of new entrants having different pension rights to the rest of us - that would create a two-tier workforce (people on different rates for the job), just as the allowances issue would.

The big issue I don't agree with you on is efficiency savings. If the job is to take less time, then let's have a shorter working week and/or longer holidays rather than lose jobs. I don't think we should be in the business of selling jobs.

The strings CAN be resolved, we should simply say no. The idea of leaving them on the table for further negotiation leaves us in limbo with the potential of trying to get people to fight them 6 months or so down the line. Also management would be likely to introduce them in some offices unilaterally where they think they can get away with it. Lets shoot them down now.

Bottom line, we have not caused Royal Mail's problems and we should not pay for them.

I agree that we have not caused any of Royal Mails problems 100%. But to push the idea that 'we should simply say no' is going to get us nowhere. The campaign by CWU has been based around the line we are not against change but we want to shape it!

The no movement attitude would lose the support of the majority of our members.

Personally I would fight and even strike to protect the rights of new entrants and avoid the introduction of a 2 tier workforce. Sadly I think we can safely say that is not the case for many members. I have actually been at briefings where Dave Ward has told of WTL sessions he has attended that members openly say they are only worried about the people now and not in the future.

On the issue of losing jobs, this is the same union leadership that oversaw 30,000 headcount reductions through SDD and pay and major change. I would go as far as to say the CWU know they will lose members. Its all about how they go and more importantly improving the terms and conditions of those who want to stay

[dvbuk55]

I may well have missed the point.

However before I say what I will accept I'd prefer to see whats on offer - I could want a Jag and be offered a mini - I might want a mini and be offered a Jag.

But at the end of the day it will be a personal choice - right or wrong.

sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it! (maybe in the back of your Jag )

I'm off to watch the super greens beat Leicester (hopefully)

I certainly want to choose from a variety what sort of cake I'm getting and not have someone decide I'm having the flavour of the week.

And you are going to have to explain the super greens - they aren't giant brussels are they.

[lovejoy]

I may well have missed the point.

However before I say what I will accept I'd prefer to see whats on offer - I could want a Jag and be offered a mini - I might want a mini and be offered a Jag.

But at the end of the day it will be a personal choice - right or wrong.

sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it! (maybe in the back of your Jag )

I'm off to watch the super greens beat Leicester (hopefully)

I certainly want to choose from a variety what sort of cake I'm getting and not have someone decide I'm having the flavour of the week.

And you are going to have to explain the super greens - they aren't giant brussels are they.

the super plymouth argyle - although not so super today!

you'll have to get a jag because you'll never fit so much cake in a mini

[dvbuk55]

I may well have missed the point.

However before I say what I will accept I'd prefer to see whats on offer - I could want a Jag and be offered a mini - I might want a mini and be offered a Jag.

But at the end of the day it will be a personal choice - right or wrong.

sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it! (maybe in the back of your Jag )

I'm off to watch the super greens beat Leicester (hopefully)

I certainly want to choose from a variety what sort of cake I'm getting and not have someone decide I'm having the flavour of the week.

And you are going to have to explain the super greens - they aren't giant brussels are they.

the super plymouth argyle - although not so super today!

you'll have to get a jag because you'll never fit so much cake in a mini

If you'd read one of my previous posts you'd see that I already have two jags on the drive - though it's still a tight fit - I keep the cake room in the villa in Spain!!

How'd the super cabbages do?

[AndyK]

Pay
I think we are heading for a 2/3 year pay deal. For the immediate April pay award I would accept an inflation matching rise backdated to April of course.

Likewise

Pensions
I will accept no changes to the current benefits i enjoy and have earned. Any proposed changes to new entrants should be put to a ballot of all ension scheme members

Royal Mail created the problems there should be NO change NOT for anyone.

Later starts / Network changes
I am realist and later starts are on the way in. On that basis I think the allowances must be captured. RM want to give us grandfather rights. We should demand that the money goes into our basic pay. That way i can (a) never be touched (b) add to the cash value of any pay rise we get and (c) put more money into our pensions

its well documented on this site that later starts are nothing more than :lfo bullshit, however the early shift payment should be put into basic pay, this would be less for staff that currently receive it because not all staff get it so it would be shared with them.

Efficiency scheme
We all know that Royal Mail will look for savings on a constant basis now. We can either sit back saying no to all proposals and fighting non-stop or we can look to make 'feasible' changes and capture the money into our pay. I want a savings agreement with a very simple formula and one that Royal Mail have no way of wiggling out of. The scheme should be national and not local. Local agreements on pay/bonuses lead to regional pay - the last thing we want

Any new saving scheme which would be unlikely needs to be based on hours saved not duties.

Sunday Collections
Given that the regulator has given the green light to this we may be in trouble there. All weekend jobs should be protected and any SA payments saved by Royal Mail should be used to bolster / increase the pay award thus offering a permanent compensation to anyone who loses out

sound about the best we can hope for.

Strings
The 22 strings cannot be resolved by Sept 4th. I would like to see a timetabled set of negotiations (say 6 months). Any changes that are agreed would obviously benefit Royal Mail so some of that money should also be captured and put into basic pay

. NO and NO to all of them there bollocks.