Slave Labour?

[fishtank]

1:RM are going to do it or anything else they want for that matter anyway
2:The CWU know this and just get the best out if it that they can,and tbf they have got something,although again tbf it will be completely ignored by RM and possibly local reps.
3:The CWU can't been seen to block it,or complain about it (publicly anyway),can you imagine the headlines,'Dinosaur union puts the breaks on jobless work experience training ect woteva yadda yadda'.

Rock and hard place for the CWU,easy money for RM.

Oh and i nearly forgot... :dcfo :vcfo :ncfo

I know that's the usual excuse/reason.
I know it usually stands up.
I think in this case it's....wrong.
It's not really rock and hard place...just principle and....not.
So what?...we get called a dinosaur union...nothing new and it's not like we've got anyone to impress.
No-one out there believes in this apart from those who stand to make money off it.
It's a concession too far in my humble opinion.

[dvbuk55]

1:RM are going to do it or anything else they want for that matter anyway
2:The CWU know this and just get the best out if it that they can,and tbf they have got something,although again tbf it will be completely ignored by RM and possibly local reps.
3:The CWU can't been seen to block it,or complain about it (publicly anyway),can you imagine the headlines,'Dinosaur union puts the breaks on jobless work experience training ect woteva yadda yadda'.

Rock and hard place for the CWU,easy money for RM.

Oh and i nearly forgot... :dcfo :vcfo :ncfo

Well you have the fact that RM are going to do whatever it is they like, and what exactly is the best for the CWU members under the circumstances? As for name calling, you know what they say about sticks and stones AND about no such thing as bad publicity. As for a rock and a hard place...........that really is the point postman.....you need them to be in the hard place not taking the path of least resistance time after time after time.

[BoycottWorkfare]

Royal Mail's 100 placements of 30 hours for four weeks = 12,000 hours unpaid work.

Youth contract will create a quarter of a million placements of 30 hours for up to 8 weeks = 60,000,000 hours unpaid work.

And Work Experience is just one of the workfare schemes govt have introduced. Some of the others are six months long.

Would urge local CWU branches to download and support the union motion at...

http://www.boycottworkfare.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[wamdue]

the look on the faces of the people doing the placements, when the CWU talk themselves up will be priceless, given that unions should really be against this kind of placement.

the only thing people on placements want to hear is

"Youve done really well on your placements, so we have decided to hire you, and give you a full and proper wage"

a union rep talking about how it improves wages, and workers rights, is totally irrelevant, bordering on offensive to people on placements.

[POSTMAN]

Judging by what is in the press lately regarding this,loads of firms are now pulling out.

The CWU can't been seen to block it,or complain about it (publicly anyway)

Time to go public? Time to turn around and say 'We f****d up'?

[DGP1]

Judging by what is in the press lately regarding this,loads of firms are now pulling out.

The CWU can't been seen to block it,or complain about it (publicly anyway)

Time to go public? Time to turn around and say 'We f****d up'?

Billy doesn't make mistakes............which is very depressing

[poole]

3 million members of the public, including some of the most vulnerable in our society, who are not represented by anyone, won't view the CWU as dinosaurs if they oppose it and try to block it

[wamdue]

3 million members of the public, including some of the most vulnerable in our society, who are not represented by anyone, won't view the CWU as dinosaurs if they oppose it and try to block it

im not a CWU member, but I agree with this.

Without getting too political, people just do not believe the Tories support the working man or woman on the street, currently many of the unemployed are working people (something the Tories would like you to forget), and would truly appreciate the support of a workingmans union, on this kind of issue.

BTW Sainsburys and Waterstones have pulled out on the Work Program.

Infact the best way for the likes of the CWU to become old dinosaurs is for them to stop supporting the working man, and the basic idea of "a fair days pay for a fair days work"

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Public Interest Lawyers in Birmingham are challenging the scheme and are arguing that it contravenes the forced labour provisions in the Human Rights Act. Their man Phil Shiner said: “Some major companies are now waking up and turning their backs on compulsory unpaid labour schemes. Whilst our legal actions are against the Department of Work and Pensions, these household brands bear their own moral and social responsibility to ensure that they have nothing to do with these exploitative and ill-judged programmes.”

http://www.bitterwallet.com/sainsburys- ... heme/53788" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Unions call on UK high street giants to halt unpaid work schemes http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012 ... rk-schemes" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Phil Shiner from Public Interest Lawyers said he welcomed the withdrawal of major high street chains from "exploitative" programmes.

"Some major companies are now waking up and turning their backs on compulsory unpaid labour schemes. We have written to a number of major retailers involved in work-for-your-benefit schemes and asked them whether they intend to continue in light of what the Guardian has reported and we have brought to the attention of the courts.

"Whilst our legal actions are against the Department of Work and Pensions, these household brands bear their own moral and social responsibility to ensure that they have nothing to do with these exploitative and ill-judged programmes."

[dvbuk55]

Regardless of the morality of of the workfare scheme is it actually safe to be employing people who have no vested interest in the company? Who for example will be making security and CRB checks and at whose cost? Who will keep a check on their whereabouts when they've served their time - we all know how long it takes to discover "missing" items.

This is in my opinion yet another ill thought out scheme taken on board by Royal Mail and as usual given the unions seal of approval - is this leadership for real?

[wamdue]

Regardless of the morality of of the workfare scheme is it actually safe to be employing people who have no vested interest in the company? Who for example will be making security and CRB checks and at whose cost? Who will keep a check on their whereabouts when they've served their time - we all know how long it takes to discover "missing" items.

This is in my opinion yet another ill thought out scheme taken on board by Royal Mail and as usual given the unions seal of approval - is this leadership for real?

I assume the Work Progam people would pay for CRBs, which is actually something that may stop this becoming common place, as its a cost they may not be able to afford if they dont find people work.

Im pretty sure anyone doing Work Program will be at a sorting centre, where they can be supervised, no way they will be doing deliveries. Its not the 9 to 5 the Work Program providers normally have for placements.

[rathbonepostie]

In fact, the agreement says they may be at Mail Centres or delivery offices, and I know of workfare people on nightshift elsewhere, so there is no "normal 9 to 5" for the programme. The agreement also says Royal mail will "vet" them, I assume that means CRB.

[wamdue]

im surprised people are doing nightshift.

[andy2007]

I'm not. It's the most expensive shift for wages, so RM will be keen to get as many as possible on the night shift, to save the maximum amount of money from the free labour.

[wamdue]

not from Royal Mails POV, I meant from the Work Program POV.