Moya's view on a 10 year agreement

[halfull]

in 3 years time my guess is we will still be delivering letters and parcels! so give us 5 or 6! whats the problem?

[daveyeff]

To look at it another way...

Imagine the luxury that a 3 year countdown to redundancy gives you. Anyone that is genuinely worried about the company's future has a 1000 days to train / plan for an alternative. Thats a lot more than for example the grangemouth workers have just got.

Perspective people.

easier said than done. some people arnt as fit or young as others,(im one) and wont have a cat in hells chance of getting employed again.

[DirtyHarry]

in 3 years time my guess is we will still be delivering letters and parcels! so give us 5 or 6! whats the problem?

The problem is, Royal Mail would love us to do it for far less pay. What appears to be happening, is that the CWU simply wants to stall them. 10 years is their golden goal, but my guess is that they will settle for 5 years.
The clock is already ticking down on Royal Mail's 3 year offer, as I believe that is backdated to last April, so we're actually only talking 2 and a half years.

[banner18]

We are the only company that delivers small packets and letters so they can't decimate our t & c's for some time. We are still a natural monopoly. As we are privatised now, this condition will now be attacked but a strike at this point is useless.

[UnhappyGremlin]

We are the only company that delivers small packets and letters so they can't decimate our t & c's for some time. We are still a natural monopoly. As we are privatised now, this condition will now be attacked but a strike at this point is useless.

Still banging the drum?
There is every point to striking now.
The fact you don't see it is a separate issue. And, a selfish one.
You don't want to strike because you don't want to lose £50. That's very short term.
I'd rather lose money now and gain the long term benefits.
Which I believe will more than make up for the losses we suffer.

[banner18]

We are the only company that delivers small packets and letters so they can't decimate our t & c's for some time. We are still a natural monopoly. As we are privatised now, this condition will now be attacked but a strike at this point is useless.

Still banging the drum?
There is every point to striking now.
The fact you don't see it is a separate issue. And, a selfish one.
You don't want to strike because you don't want to lose £50. That's very short term.
I'd rather lose money now and gain the long term benefits.
Which I believe will more than make up for the losses we suffer.

What long term benefit are you wanting? Don't you see the stupidity of the whole thing? Look, we have been privatised and at some point in the future they will water the USO down so that private operators can step in on the final mile. At that point market forces will cause our work conditions to align with whatever the market deems. If we strike then we will be out of business so that won't happen. At the moment we are a private operator but we have a monopoly on final deliveries so they cannot just do what they want to our conditions. A strike will not change them altering the law on the USO and ending royal mail's monopoly in all areas and thus getting their own way. We have been out manouvered in the past and now it is inevitable so what is the point in losing pay along with this? You are fighting Royal mail when the true enemy is the government who pull all the strings and have all the power and have steadily put us into this position.

[Brain Fury]

We are the only company that delivers small packets and letters so they can't decimate our t & c's for some time. We are still a natural monopoly. As we are privatised now, this condition will now be attacked but a strike at this point is useless.

Still banging the drum?
There is every point to striking now.
The fact you don't see it is a separate issue. And, a selfish one.
You don't want to strike because you don't want to lose £50. That's very short term.
I'd rather lose money now and gain the long term benefits.
Which I believe will more than make up for the losses we suffer.

What long term benefit are you wanting? Don't you see the stupidity of the whole thing? Look, we have been privatised and at some point in the future they will water the USO down so that private operators can step in on the final mile. At that point market forces will cause our work conditions to align with whatever the market deems. If we strike then we will be out of business so that won't happen. At the moment we are a private operator but we have a monopoly on final deliveries so they cannot just do what they want to our conditions. A strike will not change them altering the law on the USO and ending royal mail's monopoly in all areas and thus getting their own way. We have been out manouvered in the past and now it is inevitable so what is the point in losing pay along with this? You are fighting Royal mail when the true enemy is the government who pull all the strings and have all the power and have steadily put us into this position.

I have been wondering the same thing. I understand the concerns about t&cs and the desire to protect them but we don't live in a bubble anymore if our labour costs are more than our competitors and therefore our prices are higher too then ultimately we will lose business and thus jobs. I know it's a depressing thought but I don't see how the tide can be held back.

[UnhappyGremlin]

We are the only company that delivers small packets and letters so they can't decimate our t & c's for some time. We are still a natural monopoly. As we are privatised now, this condition will now be attacked but a strike at this point is useless.

Still banging the drum?
There is every point to striking now.
The fact you don't see it is a separate issue. And, a selfish one.
You don't want to strike because you don't want to lose £50. That's very short term.
I'd rather lose money now and gain the long term benefits.
Which I believe will more than make up for the losses we suffer.

What long term benefit are you wanting? Don't you see the stupidity of the whole thing? Look, we have been privatised and at some point in the future they will water the USO down so that private operators can step in on the final mile. At that point market forces will cause our work conditions to align with whatever the market deems. If we strike then we will be out of business so that won't happen. At the moment we are a private operator but we have a monopoly on final deliveries so they cannot just do what they want to our conditions. A strike will not change them altering the law on the USO and ending royal mail's monopoly in all areas and thus getting their own way. We have been out manouvered in the past and now it is inevitable so what is the point in losing pay along with this? You are fighting Royal mail when the true enemy is the government who pull all the strings and have all the power and have steadily put us into this position.

I have been wondering the same thing. I understand the concerns about t&cs and the desire to protect them but we don't live in a bubble anymore if our labour costs are more than our competitors and therefore our prices are higher too then ultimately we will lose business and thus jobs. I know it's a depressing thought but I don't see how the tide can be held back.

You know what? You may very well be right.
It may be impossible to hold back the tide, or even slow it down.
But I'd rather try and lose, then allow myself to get shafted without the availability of KY jelly.

I genuinely believe that there is a lot to win, and I'll fight for it.
Then, if/when those who fought win some long term benefits, the rest of you who stood by and refuse to help themselves, can benefit from the rest of the striking posties pain.

[martin the green]

just think:-
how many bonus checks moya can get in 10 years,
how many 11% pay rises with all their perks that mp's will get

[redneck]

As the CWU exec have stated we want a 'groundbreaking' deal to match the groundbreaking attack on a (former) public service. Other people are making fortunes out of this botch, we deserve our share of the cream as the real workers on the streets. What we've been offered so far is a very fragile deal for us, which has to be challenged before the race to the bottom begins.

[fishtank]

I understand the concerns about t&cs and the desire to protect them but we don't live in a bubble anymore if our labour costs are more than our competitors and therefore our prices are higher too then ultimately we will lose business and thus jobs.

The competition cannot undercut us because they do not carry the same economies of scale that we do.Rival couriers are not particularly cheaper than us over the majority of our parcel streams and that is with them already paying the bare minimum to their staff.As far as I'm aware TNTs prices for their end to end business are roughly in line with our bulk prices and even at that their margins are tight paying minimum wage.At the moment we are operationally profitable across the entire business so there is no need for us to enter into a race to the bottom over terms and conditions.

However two things could screw that up and force RM into a major overhaul of its labour costs.The first is the impact that large scale end to end competition might have on our operating margins in places where we make our largest profits and secondly investor greed for profits/dividends,4%-6% might keep a pension fund happy but it won't cut it for a hedge fund.
I don't think Moya will be happy to see the likes of TCI hovering about because I really don't think RM wants to get involved in a race to the bottom,not yet anyway.

[barbario]

Is this TCI hedge fund the blue chip company Vince Cable wanted. No....oh well,that's another thing the Union got right that our Vince got wrong.

[Martin Walsh]

The CWU are not looking for a 10 year deal , the fact is the CWU do not want an end date be that 3 years , 5 years or 7 years. The fact is we want no end date and a review which is a renegotiation which also has legal notice period in place so any change has to result in Royal Mail giving advance notice and a renegotiation taking place.

Moya Greene is wrong Royal Mail have a lot longer business plan then 3 years , they have been closing Mail centres a lot longer , they have been running out world class mails for over 6 years and using delivery best practise and paragon for well over 5 years.

What the CWU are asking for is fair. It speaks volumes that all they are currently offering is 3 years and then your terms and conditions fall off a cliff , sacrificed for the profiters to make more money at our expense.

[LinChong]

A. Moya: Three years – the offer we have made to the CWU* – is a significant commitment. Our business plan is three years. The Government’s comprehensive spending review is three years. It’s a long time in business.

Business gets long term commitments from the public sector when it's in their interest. PFI contracts are long term, typically lasting 25 or 30 years.

Moya will get the boot but Hohn will still fail. The managers' union is already jumping in with the CWU. Strikes will force the share price down and the Government will be forced to re-nationalise like they did with Railtrack.

[dvbuk55]

The CWU are not looking for a 10 year deal , the fact is the CWU do not want an end date be that 3 years , 5 years or 7 years. The fact is we want no end date and a review which is a renegotiation which also has legal notice period in place so any change has to result in Royal Mail giving advance notice and a renegotiation taking place.

Moya Greene is wrong Royal Mail have a lot longer business plan then 3 years , they have been closing Mail centres a lot longer , they have been running out world class mails for over 6 years and using delivery best practise and paragon for well over 5 years.

What the CWU are asking for is fair. It speaks volumes that all they are currently offering is 3 years and then your terms and conditions fall off a cliff , sacrificed for the profiters to make more money at our expense.

Can we rewind here a bit.



If we aren't looking for a legally binding long/short term agreement then what exactly in simple terms are we asking for? Most members are banging on about a long term agreement to protect terms and conditions but surely they are forever under negotiation. Unless RM tried to implement change without agreement and run the risk of a never ending bout of industrial action in local areas, which we have seen in the recent past. If RM has agreed to look at pensions again and the %age pay rise can be agreed as is, surely the terms of the agreement can be continued to be discussed.