Royal Mail workers to go on strike in November

[TrueBlueTerrier]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24555387" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Royal Mail workers have voted to go on national 24-hour strike on 4 November.

The vote, which the Communication Workers Union (CWU) said was four-to-one in favour, would be the first national strike at Royal Mail in almost four years.

It says it is holding the strike to protect workers' terms and conditions at the privatised Royal Mail.

The CWU said it was hoping to agree a settlement in the next two weeks which would avert the strike.

Royal Mail staff were given free shares in the company, in an attempt to improve labour relations.

On Tuesday, Royal Mail confirmed that full-time staff would receive 725 shares, worth £3,545 at Tuesday's close.

The shares, which had their first full day of trading, are currently at 475p - below their 489p high, but well above their sale price of 330p.

'Negotiation'
The CWU's deputy general secretary, Dave Ward, said: "Postal workers have spoken very clearly that they care about their jobs, terms and conditions far more than they care about shares.

"We have said from the beginning that we want an agreement and we still do. We have offered the company a two-week period to reach an agreement and having already had many hours of negotiation, this is achievable if there is a will."

The union said it wanted to forge a long-term, legally binding agreement that protected postal workers' job security, pay and pensions to avoid what it said could become a "race to the bottom" in employment terms.

The Royal Mail said in a statement that it was "very disappointed" by the announcement.

It pointed out that 63% of union members had voted in the ballot, and that although 78% of those voting had backed the strike, that left a majority of the workforce that did not support the industrial action.

Royal Mail said it would do all it could to minimise the impact of any industrial action on customers' mail.

Damage
The Direct Marketing Association, which represents the advertising mail industry, said the strike would damage "tens of thousands" of companies, charities and others.

Its executive director, Chris Combemale, said: "Commercial users account for the biggest percentage of Royal Mail's turnover. Any disruption to service would quickly lead businesses to take their custom elsewhere, which is an outcome that would not benefit the postal workers that CWU represents."

The CWU fears the possible franchising of individual offices or delivery rounds, as well as the potential introduction of a cheaper workforce on two-tier terms and conditions.

The ballot involved 115,000 postal workers in Royal Mail and Parcelforce, but not the Post Office, which is a separate business.

CWU says it represents all non-managerial staff in Royal Mail Group working as delivery people, sorting staff, drivers, administration and back-office roles.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Rename the month Noworkvember bad pun

[Shambles]

Rename the month Noworkvember bad pun

You gave it ya best shot...that's all that counts

[trythat]

Rename the month Noworkvember bad pun

Send the RM board a card similar to the one we received in the last week or so.

[Red Robbo]

I smell a deal on the table, the Union only had to show it had the backing of its members for strike action

[fishtank]

Rename the month Noworkvember bad pun

We could work this in with Movember and turn up on the picket line dressed as Mexican revolutionaries with Zapata moustaches.
I like themed picket lines.

[Brain Fury]

I smell a deal on the table, the Union only had to show it had the backing of its members for strike action

Well half of them anyway.

[disheartened]

I smell a deal on the table, the Union only had to show it had the backing of its members for strike action

Wish I had your confidence,i think Royal Mail want this fight,they will let us strike for a few one dayers hoping for a increase of employees who break the strike each time,looks like i'll be getting some of me savings out from my mattress

I do have faith in our union,who will get us a deal and there will be some who wont like it,negotiations will be tough.

[fishtank]

I smell a deal on the table, the Union only had to show it had the backing of its members for strike action

Well half of them anyway.

That's poor by your standards.
Just a cheap statistical swing with a blunt hammer.
What percentage of members voted no?

[Brain Fury]

I smell a deal on the table, the Union only had to show it had the backing of its members for strike action

Well half of them anyway.

That's poor by your standards.
Just a cheap statistical swing with a blunt hammer.
What percentage of members voted no?

I'm taking your first line as the nearest I'm ever likely to get to a compliment on this board - unless you just forgot to type "even" between "poor" and "by".

It's not really a statistical swing - it's a fact. Going on strike is a positive act and less than half the membership voted to do that. You don't need to vote for a negative. I've seen plenty of threads about a non vote being a no vote and saying that a big positive vote was needed to strengthen the union's negotiating position. Against the background of privatisation and the apparent outrage about assorted issues that I read about on here there must be disappointment at the result even if there is an attempt to put a brave face on it. It seems from some of the other threads tonight that there is. I don't know if it will make any difference because RM management must be well aware that a good proportion of those that weren't willing to vote in favour of a strike will be equally unwilling to cross the picket line at least at first.

[fishtank]

You don't need to vote for a negative.

Well yes you do really if you don't actually want there to be a strike when a simple majority of votes cast is all that's needed for a positive.A non vote is a nothing vote,it's neither an active endorsement of strike action or an active rejection of strike action so it's disingenuous for either camp to hoover them up.

I would of course have liked a 100% turnout but it's broadly in line with past national IA ballot results and the 78-22 ratio of votes cast is a very strong result especially as you'll probably agree when taken alongside what has to be the largest and most expensive "No Campaign" the business has ever run,the £300 cash bribe and the fact that members now have a shareholding in a semi-private business.

All that considered I am far from disappointed,In fact I'm very impressed with the membership's show of strength and resolve.

[clashcityrocker]

All that considered I am far from disappointed,In fact I'm very impressed with the membership's show of strength and resolve.

And if he's happy, I'm happy.

[Brain Fury]

You don't need to vote for a negative.

Well yes you do really if you don't actually want there to be a strike when a simple majority of votes cast is all that's needed for a positive.A non vote is a nothing vote,it's neither an active endorsement of strike action or an active rejection of strike action so it's disingenuous for either camp to hoover them up.

I would of course have liked a 100% turnout but it's broadly in line with past national IA ballot results and the 78-22 ratio of votes cast is a very strong result especially as you'll probably agree when taken alongside what has to be the largest and most expensive "No Campaign" the business has ever run,the £300 cash bribe and the fact that members now have a shareholding in a semi-private business.

All that considered I am far from disappointed,In fact I'm very impressed with the membership's show of strength and resolve.

I hear what you say - I don't agree but I'm sure you'll live with that. I saw another thread where you referenced the 2009 ballot. I remember thinking that was a pretty poor result too but I think at least then the vote in favour of a strike was over 50% (just). I didn't make any difference then and i don't think it will make much difference now. I genuinely thought it would be a stronger mandate.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

its a stronger mandate than this Prime Minister got at the GE.

[Brain Fury]

its a stronger mandate than this Prime Minister got at the GE.

True but that's not the point. A GE is totally different to a strike ballot and can't be used a comparator for the low positive ballot result. An increasing proportion of the electorate have no faith or interest in politics and think that it has no bearing on their lives. Are we saying that posties feel the same about the CWU, the strike and their pay and t&cs?