The same reason for most people it's an act of financial irresponsibility not to pay into a pension that might be worth something in 30-40 years*.clashcityrocker wrote:How can it be an act of financial irresponsibility to refuse shares that might be worth something in 3/5 years time?
No but it does mean that any financial sacrifice you make for the cause has to be judged on the impact it has on your means.clashcityrocker wrote:Does having money make you a faux revolutionary? Strummer? Tony Benn?
Lincox wrote:Lets imagine you are a full timer and you receive shares to value of £2200 and by some remarkable turn round in the company,s fortunes in 3 years time they have leapt to £4000. You cash them, pay 20% tax on £2200 so net gain £3560.
Over 3 years the annual gain in income is £1187. You vote No in the strike ballot and the No,s win the ballot.
Result of this is that x amount of jobs are axed and Royal Mail have pulled the plug on the MTSF Agreement. Having worked 10 years you are entitled to Statutory Redundancy Pay of 1.5 weeks pay for each year of service, so you end up with a lump sum of approx £4000-£4500 as against the current MTSF agreement of approx £15000-£17000.
This is one of the risks that a NO Vote could compromise and all for what.
Other risks are No Long term security agreement. Gradual reduction in hourly rates. Second tier workforce on inferior conditions. Franchising of different parts of the business.
This is why I refused these free shares as they are a token gesture in order to promote the NO vote, and only those with blinkered vision can think otherwise. £2000 will not create a workforce that endears itself to a company that in return accepts bullying and harassment as an everyday part of modern commercialism.
nataddick wrote:Lincox your argument is totally flawed but then you did preface it with 'Let's Imagine..........'
The vast majority of RM employees (with the exception of the 368 or so) have chosen not to opt out of the free shares. This substantial group of 'disenfranchised' workers have chosen to exercise their right to benefit from the free shares as a somewhat late and poor substitute for the Colleagueshares that vanished shortly before they were due. A lot of employees including myself feel that the shares are a right to which they are entitled.
The ballot is a separate issue and I do not believe the free shares affected voter's intentions in any way. Is it you that has fallen for the management ploy?
I have voted Yes because I believe in backing the CWU (to do otherwise would be suicidal) - The outcome of the ballot has been decided by now by those that have already voted ( those that waiver over the next couple of days won't make a difference)
I think we all hope that returning a strong Yes vote will strengthen the CWU's negotiating position and thus result in an
improved deal. The outcome is is no way affected by member's holding of free shares - backing the Union is key whether you hold free shares or not.
Is it not the case now this happens no one kicked up a fuss in the union as I see it anyone who can make a point and strike for their terms and conditions and for the good of all. You can refuse all the shares you want ( goes to the roland hill fund) but it will not change the direction of the company and our say in this the industrial action ballot if you have not voted YES do so refusing shares will not make a difference! Refusing Shares is like standing on an island of thin ice it will melt and you will sink with it. I would rather hold this ship to ransom and get a deal if not set it course into an iceberg and then sink it!Lincox wrote:Lets imagine you are a full timer and you receive shares to value of £2200 and by some remarkable turn round in the company,s fortunes in 3 years time they have leapt to £4000. You cash them, pay 20% tax on £2200 so net gain £3560.
Over 3 years the annual gain in income is £1187. You vote No in the strike ballot and the No,s win the ballot.
Result of this is that x amount of jobs are axed and Royal Mail have pulled the plug on the MTSF Agreement. Having worked 10 years you are entitled to Statutory Redundancy Pay of 1.5 weeks pay for each year of service, so you end up with a lump sum of approx £4000-£4500 as against the current MTSF agreement of approx £15000-£17000.
This is one of the risks that a NO Vote could compromise and all for what.
Other risks are No Long term security agreement. Gradual reduction in hourly rates. Second tier workforce on inferior conditions. Franchising of different parts of the business.
This is why I refused these free shares as they are a token gesture in order to promote the NO vote, and only those with blinkered vision can think otherwise. £2000 will not create a workforce that endears itself to a company that in return accepts bullying and harassment as an everyday part of modern commercialism.
cloherty1976 wrote:Your get a certificate in 3 years when they are released unless you leave via retirement or ill health. These are standard rules and no conspiracy..
Just bin it when you get it as it might be propaganda..nudenut wrote:cloherty1976 wrote:Your get a certificate in 3 years when they are released unless you leave via retirement or ill health. These are standard rules and no conspiracy..
Whatever
