PO: ADMIN / SUPPLY CHAIN – DISPUTE ARISING FROM A PAY FREEZE

[TrueBlueTerrier]

No: 618
Ref: 601
Date: 17 September 2013

TO: ALL BRANCHES WITH POSTAL MEMBERS


Dear Colleague

POST OFFICE: ADMIN / SUPPLY CHAIN – DISPUTE ARISING FROM A PAY FREEZE

Formal Trade Dispute Arising from a Pay Freeze

Further to LTB 594, dated 6th September, I have now written to Paula Vennells, Post Office Chief Executive, advising that, due to the Post Office’s policy of a pay freeze for our Admin and Supply Chain members, a formal trade dispute now exists between us. A copy of this letter is associated with this LTB.

Ballot Timetable: Industrial Action (Strike Action)

In view of the prevailing trade dispute, the Postal Executive has, today, endorsed a ballot timetable which will lead us to serving notice for industrial action later this month with the ballot closing in October.

Membership Verification Process

Branches are urged to ensure that all membership changes arising from the verification process are returned to Claire Bowers by close of play Monday, 23rd September. Any enquiries regarding this activity should be addressed to cbowers@cwu.org or 020 8971 7361.

Yours sincerely


Andy Furey
Assistant Secretary




Dear Paula

FORMAL TRADE DISPUTE – INDUSTRIAL ACTION BALLOT – ADMIN AND SUPPLY CHAIN GRADES

You will have seen my last communication to our Admin and Supply Chain members, which was a home mailing, associated with LTB 594, dated 6th September 2013.

I note that you have failed to take the opportunity to refute or to withdraw from your pay freeze position that you have decreed in regard to the Admin and Supply Chain grades for, at least, 2014. It follows that your unilateral decision taken without any formal negotiations has created a formal trade dispute.

Subsequently, a ballot timetable for industrial action has been endorsed at today’s Postal Executive meeting. Obviously, there is an intention to proceed with this ballot; however, before I do so, I wish to provide you with an opportunity to avoid further conflict.

Accordingly, to avoid a dispute, I will require confirmation that you are willing to enter into formal negotiations without delay, with the joint objective of delivering, for 2014, an above inflation pay agreement for all Admin and Supply grades. To put this into perspective, the Treasury forecast for 2014 is an average RPI of 3.1%. Additionally, the August spot RPI inflation rate is 3.3%; so, these figures provide a clear indication as to what our members will be expecting as a consolidated, pensionable pay increase.

Turning now to the issue of “affordability;” in a recent Post Office communication to our Crown members, there was a spurious claim, seemingly advanced, that affordability is an issue. The specific comment is as follows:

“We will make consolidated pay offers going forward but only when it is affordable and this applies to all parts of the business.”
(The underlining of ‘only’ is my emphasis)

It is impossible to understand why a consolidated, pensionable pay rise is not “affordable,” especially when your Report and Accounts, only published in August, declared an operating profit for 2012-13 of £94 million. Additionally, as we are both aware, the profit target for the current financial year has been set at £102 million. Ipso facto, there is absolutely no question that the Post Office can afford to provide my members in Admin and Supply Chain an inflation-busting pay rise for 2014.

In conclusion, the ballot for industrial action will proceed in the absence of you confirming the Post Office will negotiate a pay agreement for 2014 that meets with our aspirations. There is fundamentally no way that our members in Admin and Supply Chain can stand by and do nothing whilst the Post Office attacks and devalues our members’ pensionable earnings. Ergo, your actions have instigated this trade dispute.

Yours sincerely



Andy Furey
Assistant Secretary