The current state of play

[fishtank]

The bulk of what the union put forward to Royal Mail(and Royal Mail rejected) is called the New Integrated Delivery Programme Agreement and appears to mostly be a reiteration of previous existing agreements but firmed up in stronger language.
The main difference (and I suspect that this is the really sticky sticking point) seems to be around a section called Resourcing to Workload on a fair and manageable basis which details when and how lapsing/absorption should take place.

It is not a militant document,in fact I would say it doesn't go far enough so the fact that Royal Mail have rejected it out of hand makes me very nervous about any future plans Royal Mail does have for delivery.

[whatamess!!]

Fish, clearly you have seen this document, can you share/leak. The way i'm seeing it, is that an agreement is looking unlikely by Wednesday of next week. The way Bob Gibson was speaking at the briefing is that both parties are miles apart. Why would we think an agreement on fair and manageable workloads(B&H) would be agreed in 10 days(BY THE 13TH) when they have been at logger heads since BT2010. So the question has to be asked why did the strike last Monday be postponed, I understand the concessions RM made but this issues in deliveries has been around far to long!

[Danelectro]

One would think that is what should happen... However, the Union might think they have achieved a lot as it is and then put the onus on the members to actually put their heads above the parapet.

If the Union negotiators pull out then it is definitely going to be a Strike and then it will be a long hard slog until we get something close to what members want.

As it stands most members do not know the nitty-gritty of what is going on with the talks... However, if the negotiators pull out, they will have to come out with the real reasons then people (mostly in delivery) will become even more belligerent.

if memory serves me right chrisj - you didn't even want to go on strike because its so 20th century-now you have got what you want ( locked in a room negotiating) but your still nae happy.

If they are miles apart the talks should end now and strikes announced for before the 20th as a eureka moment passing round the after eights doesn't seem forthcoming - its either that or sell deliveries down the river and put the bullying/lapsing issues on the back burner.

[chrisj]

You are probably right me not wanting to go on strike... However, now that I know for sure that some efforts is being put into the things that really matter to me then my view has changed. The problem with the Union is that they are not communicating well enough to their members.

If the strike was just going to be amount money and pensions, then I would not have bothered. yes, more money is better than less but we all know that employers do not give for nothing. If more money means more work and less healthier work-life balance then I would have taken the £300 and 8.6%

I have actually resisted having a right go at the Union as regards the negotiation... I am always sort of sceptical about some aspects of their politiks* and their need to be power-brokers but that aside I know it is better with the Union than not.

I am not unhappy but cautiously pessimistic (lol) about the players in the negotiations - do they know enough about Delivery and at what stage will they compromise to save the whole group - just like they did the last time. And that still hurts!

I should say that I am most Unhappy about our colleagues in Delivery because we are our own worst enemy. The Union can urge (they have not done enough) members to start on their time and do the job properly but if the members are too stubborn, too selfish or unwise then the bullying and harassment will carry on and more and more work will be piled on.

If we are all doing the job properly, the bullying and harassment will reduce in a short period of time. And the isolated cases can then be vigorously tackled by Reps and Union at large.

Lastly, to follow up on doing the job properly - a work-to-rule ballot should ensue as soon as possible because it will be far more effective than a Strike** and will help some think about doing the job properly...

* Last week was so busy because RM were heading off the strike by pumping out ridiculous amount of work - and which group copped it negatively again?

[dvbuk55]

Now why on earth after almost four years of BT2010 where the CWU and Royal Mail have had a shared venture with Joint this and Joint that, lapsing, absorption, bullying, harassment and RM running rough shod wherever and whenever it wanted, with impunity, would they sign away the bully's' charter they have enjoyed for so long?

Despite the singing of the praises of the Deal of the Century it's come back to bite the CWU in the arse.

[chrisj]

More on my views on Strikes. Yes, I am in agreement that the employee should always have the right to withdraw his/her labour. However, Strikes are becoming less and less effective and the government and employers are often looking at using legislation to blunt the effects and/or make it more difficult to achieve.

I went on the 2009 strikes even though I was relatively new in the job, and not with full knowledge of the issues. I have said previously, I will be ready to walk at a local level if needs be... Moreover, the loss of wages is not an issue but when people start getting too militant: wanting to destroy the fabric of a business and/or intimidate other employees, then I can be against Strikes for those sort of reasons.

I still prefer Work-To-Rule as a first step before a Strike not the other way round...

We wait and see but will there be agreement in the next few days?

[RTP]

Work to rule would have about as much effect as going at an elephant with a fly swat would.

[chrisj]

I suppose you are saying that posties will not respect work-to-rule rather than W_T_R being ineffective as a method of putting pressure on an employer?

[fishtank]

A work to rule can either bring the staff in an office together or cause the kind of division and bitterness that can cost members their jobs and poison the whole working environment.
It's not for the faint-hearted.

[chrisj]

So a work-to-rule is the ultimate in labour Unionism. A very tall order! Pity!!

[FinishOnTime]

The thought of getting some of the clowns in my office to adhere to a work to rule is laughable.

[bandit1157]

It's a shame that some people don't realise that a work to rule would probably get more hours put back in more offices
help reduce the pressure from management and relieve unrealistic workloads. But the "i'm alright Jack" attitude seems to prevail everywhere.

[Godric]

The thought of getting some of the clowns in my office to adhere to a work to rule is laughable.

agreed for my office as well

[arsenalbob]

We had a bit of a chuckle this morning RM have been re iterating that their top end offer is the same as the original offer albeit with a non binding extension on terms and conditions and they have agreed to a separate further review on pensions They are gearing workload in preparation to one day of IA later this month We have certainly had an abnormally heavy week as evidence of this so surely when IA is announced it must be for two days to have any effect or at least reverting back to rolling days as of 2009

[Glenno]

Strategy to the top table "BOB"