a sell-out brewing

[goinpostal]

"An agenda for growth underpinned by a culture of consensual change, timely decision making and industrial stability supported by alternative dispute resolution processes."

It is up for the CWU leadership to come out of their two week hibernation with RM bosses and state clearly and immediately how this is not a no strike deal.

It sounds like a rotten deal "more than three years protections" in other words clearly nowhere near ten years - and a no strike deal would clinch it. Once again Ward and Hayes prepare to sign away our interests for short term small gains as they have for years of downsizing whoops meant to say "modernisation".

After they delayed, wasting a year and letting privatisation go through unopposed, they are falling for RM"s delaying tactics again. This deal on the table is not worth it.

The debate needs to start on how activists reps and members who disagree with all this to make our voice heard for once and stop this happening. Any ideas?

[Pat Ostman]

Once again Ward and Hayes prepare to sign away our interests

If you are right and this deal that, we don't even have fine details on yet, is a stinker then WE will have to sign it off. Surely the members vote on the agreement. That's how BT2010 got through. People agreed with the CWU, I didn't on that occasion but that's democracy.

So vote NO but for gads sake wait for the details before you make up your mind.

[mandelsons_toenail]

"An agenda for growth underpinned by a culture of consensual change, timely decision making and industrial stability supported by alternative dispute resolution processes."

Be honest, how straightforward are those terms used, it's waffle, you know it, I know it, your Dom knows it.

Waffle waffle

Vote no

[arnold cheshire]

Once again Ward and Hayes prepare to sign away our interests

If you are right and this deal that, we don't even have fine details on yet, is a stinker then WE will have to sign it off. Surely the members vote on the agreement. That's how BT2010 got through. People agreed with the CWU, I didn't on that occasion but that's democracy.

So vote NO but for gads sake wait for the details before you make up your mind.

everybody voted NO for the 2010 agreement

[Pat Ostman]

Once again Ward and Hayes prepare to sign away our interests

If you are right and this deal that, we don't even have fine details on yet, is a stinker then WE will have to sign it off. Surely the members vote on the agreement. That's how BT2010 got through. People agreed with the CWU, I didn't on that occasion but that's democracy.

So vote NO but for gads sake wait for the details before you make up your mind.

everybody voted NO for the 2010 agreement

everybody with any common sense voted NO for the 2010 agreement

FTFY

Alas, it's not the same thing and I can give you 42,023 reasons why.

[dvbuk55]

"An agenda for growth underpinned by a culture of consensual change, timely decision making and industrial stability supported by alternative dispute resolution processes."

It is up for the CWU leadership to come out of their two week hibernation with RM bosses and state clearly and immediately how this is not a no strike deal.

It sounds like a rotten deal "more than three years protections" in other words clearly nowhere near ten years - and a no strike deal would clinch it. Once again Ward and Hayes prepare to sign away our interests for short term small gains as they have for years of downsizing whoops meant to say "modernisation".

After they delayed, wasting a year and letting privatisation go through unopposed, they are falling for RM"s delaying tactics again. This deal on the table is not worth it.

The debate needs to start on how activists reps and members who disagree with all this to make our voice heard for once and stop this happening. Any ideas?

Well Reps are being invited down on Monday 4th November for a National Briefing - and that is a worrying sign because it looks to me like the stage is being set for a NO PLAN B and this is the best we can get so tell the troops to vote YES......................again...............I hope I'm wrong. What happened to clearing the diary?

[banner18]

What's so bad about a no strike deal? A deal is what it says, if either party breaks the agreement then the deal is off, we are not talking law here. As long as the strings attached to the no strike deal are acceptable then what's the issue? To be honest I don't see what the fuss is about, most of us won't notice any difference, all the changes railroaded through over the past few years have been met with at best indifference and worst annoyance without any talk of industrial action from the rank and file.

[dvbuk55]

What's so bad about a no strike deal?

Well if you are dealing with an honest, fair and generous employer, who recognises a fair days work for a fair days pay, abides by agreements and treats employees equally............nothing BUT if that employer is Royal Mail we'd be on a hiding to nothing.

[Stella102]

the union lost a lot of members today in light of this news.

[clashcityrocker]

Once again Ward and Hayes prepare to sign away our interests for short term small gains as they have for years of downsizing whoops meant to say "modernisation".

After they delayed, wasting a year and letting privatisation go through unopposed,

1. Ward and Hayes don't sign anything away. We vote. If you don't like democracy........tough.
2. How did they let privatisation go through unopposed? We couldn't be balloted on strike action over the issue of privatisation.

[arnold cheshire]

the union lost a lot of members today in light of this news.

why ? in the bt 2010 agreement it said something like consensual change with agreement with the cwu

[fishtank]

What's so bad about a no strike deal?

Usually because RMs side of the bargain is often full of holes and get out clauses and our side of the bargain,the agreement not to strike is pretty unequivocal.

If you take the 1 in 4 saturdays as an example,RM have pretty much gone back on their word in a lot of areas and screwed us over but since the words of the agreement state Royal Mail and CWU commit to achieving at least 1 in 4 Saturdays off for the majorityof employees (including reserves) during the roll out of the operational transformation programme...they haven't actually broken the agreement.

There are many examples as you know of Royal Mail breaking the spirit of an agreement but not the words and with a no strike agreement in place we would need a thousand lawyers spending a thousand days proof reading every single Joint Statement and Agreement trying to find every single way the business could screw us over without actually breaking an agreement.

[dvbuk55]

You spell it out so succinctly ft. As a union, despite past experience, we never seem to learn the lesson that Royal Mail is not our friend and ally but our adversary. Joint statements? More the bidding of the master to an unwitting servant.

[Stella102]

i do not like the sound of joint statement. Would you go to bed with Mr. Moya Greene?

[banner18]

The truth is that a strike would be a disaster for both Royal Mail and the union. This was always the most likely outcome.