facility time agreement

[MinisterofCucumber]

Minimumstandard, you have a right to time off:

"Union representatives have had a statutory right to reasonable paid time off to carry out trade union duties since 1975, and most of the current provisions come under the Trade Unions and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, introduced by the then Conservative government."

http://www.tuc.org.uk/tucfiles/108/TheF ... tyTime.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You have tried to help your employer by negotiating cover for the time off you need to carry out your union duties. If your employer refuses your request, it means that your workmates will have to cover your work while you are doing union duties. This could lead to you receiving unfavourable treatment from your workmates who will blame you because they are having to do extra work and are not getting paid for it.

You are right to go to disagreement about time off for union duties, you and your members are entitled to it.

If the CWU don't back you all the way, it will show that they are lackeys of the Labour Party who are intent on privatising Royal Mail like all potential governments who want to cut costs and redirect tax revenues to their friends.

[Midge]

Fishtank, the reality for most unit reps in delivery in Royal Mail nowadays is trying to get the time and have the energy to do TWO jobs. I spent over a decade on 'ad hoc'-only release, but now as an area rep I try to make sure all the local unit reps get formal release time. We are entitled to it by law, and should use it to make sure we have time to not only 'do the job' in 'emergencies' like Attendance and Conduct, but also reading LTBs, producing communications with members, recruiting, and everything else the job should entail.

Some of this cannot be done 'in our own time', and why should any of it? We want to have people volunteer to be reps, and most people have a life outside of work and the union.

There is a danger that some reps will get release time and not use it properly. Some full-time officials, in my experience, should go back to the day job to see what it is like, and others do 'take the piss' and like the 'easy life'. But that is no reason to expect unit reps to do union work in their own time, or to have to argue every day for 'ad hoc' time whenever time they need some.

Royal Mail aren't rushing to give unit reps release time, precisely because they know that unit reps do have a close connection to their workmates, and are the least likely to waste any release time they get. In fact, Royal Mail do their utmost to avoid having to give unit reps release. For me, as an area rep on full time that is one good reason to make sure we get them the release they need.

[fishtank]

I respect your opinion as always Midge.
My worry is the effect on member moral with longer delivery spans coming back to a delivery office to see the rep drinking coffee with management.
Members do not necessarily see the big picture you paint which if i'm honest would be the ideal scenario,they see the small picture,the rep with a smaller delivery than theirs.
Which brings me to my final point on the subject...
If a rep is obviously needed most in delivery when the members are in the office...why the need for a rep's walk?
If there is a need for formal release surely it should be taken during indoor time and not,as seems to be the case with a lot of reps...in the guise of a smaller delivery.

[dvbuk55]

Our rep has never had a formal release time. He has been a rep for more than 20 years and has filled other roles within the union. He has release ad hoc and I would trust his judgement implicity. It would be and has been a bone of contention that some reps use their position to make their life easier and may be persuaded to advocate changes that are not in the units best interests as a trade off for release time.

[pcb]

just what are yearly elections for? If a rep abuses his/her position then kick them out!

[dvbuk55]

just what are yearly elections for? If a rep abuses his/her position then kick them out!

These are delivery offices, not MCs, we probably have 50/50 ft/pt split 60/40 union non union members and apathy you could cut with a knife.
I'm not too sure how widespread the knowledge of the apathy goes - some would have you believe that this is the roaring 60/70s and nothing has changed and the union has some power...................well the experience of the average joe over the last years is..........why bother?

The management approach non union part timers with a "deal" and anyone who thinks this doesn't happen doesn't work in a modern DO. It's death by a thousand cuts.

[pcb]

Thanks for putting me straight. Respect to all fighting the good cause.

[Midge]

Our rep has never had a formal release time. He has been a rep for more than 20 years and has filled other roles within the union. He has release ad hoc and I would trust his judgement implicity. It would be and has been a bone of contention that some reps use their position to make their life easier and may be persuaded to advocate changes that are not in the units best interests as a trade off for release time.

And yet your D.O. has just 60% union membership, apathy rules, and managent get their own way making 'deals' with part-timers? Or did I miss something?

How do we turn things round? Wouldn't a serious, more prepared, more organised, less 'amateurish' approach to union organisation in the workplace be a start?

I think we also need to have a vision of what sort of role a workplace rep should play, for instance not just making their own life easier, or 'selling' the latest compromise deal to members, but actively fighting for members interests. This is a wider issue, for the CWU more generally. But surely to some degree, it is something local reps should want to be doing? And something members want their reps to do?

I know some unit reps prefer to get out on delivery ASAP, rather than confront or challenge management, because the delivery job itself is hard enough, and there is no 'slack' time left to organise 'on the job' without release.

I also know that the best new reps in my branch are the ones who want to 'make a difference'. The ones who don't fight for release, don't fight for much else either, in my experience.

[dvbuk55]

No you didn't miss a thing.

The point you make is very valid. The organisation is poor, communication is poor, member inclusion is poor. TBH any connection between a unit rep and the wider organisation seems to be more by accident than design. Some areas will obviously be better organised than others and I can only speak of the area in which I'm a member. Though I think it is clearly obvious that it suits CWU HQ to have the system as loosely based as it is. An organised workforce is much harder to handle as is evidenced by the London Division. If all areas had that workplace membership ie full timers and 90% unionised then the world would be a much better place for the members and a much harsher environment for RM and the HQ.

[fishtank]

Wouldn't a serious, more prepared, more organised, less 'amateurish' approach to union organisation in the workplace be a start?

No.
A serious, more prepared, more organised, less 'amateurish' approach to union organisation at Branch level and above would be a start....and the majority of the people involved in that already have formal release.
Trying to change the union from the bottom up is very laudable but,if not exactly futile it is so difficult and so potentially fragmented it will take the kind of time we just don't have.

Ask the membership where the faults in the union lie...is it "amateurish" local reps on Ad-Hoc release?
I very much doubt it Midge.

[dvbuk55]

Personally I believe that support from branch and above for the local rep is abysmal. The old adage goes "monkey see, monkey do" the average member sees the local rep on a limb on many an occasion without any assistance from above and then think its a lost cause already!

[brothermagrew]

With regards to CWU health and safety reps I believe the position is:

Workplace/unit safety representatives should be provided reasonable and appropriate levels of release to deal with health and safety issues. Generally this will be agreed with the line manager on an ad hoc basis. It is expected that aside from exceptional circumstances, representatives will give advance notice of their need for release. Line managers should maintain a running total of the ad hoc release agreed. Records should be kept by the line manager for 2 years to enable release to be monitored.

For Area Safety Representatives release will be negotiated with the representative's in line senior manager. Divisional Safety and IR Managers and CWU Divisional/Headquarters representatives will provide support as appropriate.

http://www.cwumerseyamal.org.uk/H&S%20R ... EEMENT.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[MinisterofCucumber]

Ad hoc is bullshit.

Why should a rep have to beg for time off to carry out union duties, a legal right?

I used to take whatever time I needed to do my union duties. When I want a piss, I take one, I don't ask my line manager for permission. Similarly, if I needed to do union duties, I never asked my line manager for permission because he couldn't refuse. I repeatedly requested cover for a number of hours per week and was always refused. My workmates had to cover my work and they tried to bully me out of the section with the help of my weak line manager. They didn't succeed because some of them were favourites who had been allowed to choose what tasks they did in the section and I knew more tasks than them.

The Union needs to initiate a campaign against favouritism.

Favouritism should be eliminated from RMG.

I will be standing for Area Rep. I advise anyone who currently gets more than their fair share of benefits or who does less than their fair share of work not to vote for me because I will take away your benefits.

[dvbuk55]

I will be standing for Area Rep. I advice anyone who currently gets more than their fair share of benefits or who does less than their fair share of work not to vote for me because I will take away your benefits.

An interesting viewpoint under the circumstances wouldn't you say.

[MinisterofCucumber]

My Branch Secretary's weasel-like messenger has told me that the Branch will only allow my nomination if I can bring more supporters along than my rival to a yet to be arranged meeting.

Last time, the weasel put the notice of the meeting on the notice board a few hours before the meeting that was held during my duty time.

I object to anyone who will not be represented by an Area Rep, such as members of a Branch Committee, having a vote on a veto of nominations for the role.

I object to having to 'jump through hoops' to get nominated. A nomination only allows you to be a candidate in an election, you still have to persuade the electorate to vote for you.

A nomination from two members should be sufficient to qualify as a candidate. I will be writing to my Branch Secretary. If the Branch objects to my nomination, they should state their reasons in writing so that I can appeal against their decision before the deadline for nominations expires.

Why does it seem my Branch Secretary is trying to help my Area Rep get elected unopposed?