proposed deal loses delivery issues

[TrueBlueTerrier]

But what has been done to ensure it is done in your office. You see there is no point having any agreement if you don't force management to adhere to it.

If we want local units to enforce it then you either need a pro-active branch system (which we don't have) to police the Units where the Union is considered weak or under-represented, or you need to go for the Nuclear option and reduce the amount of reps between HQ and local units.

Both options are unpalatable for some, but both will have a very large impact on membership as individuals and as a Union. But one thing is for sure the current state of the branches will not survive this agreement even if it is endorsed by a large majority. It will either be forced to change by circumstances or it will wither on the vine. I personally would like to see more proactive branch system rather than a reduction of reps, but some will disagree.

[fishtank]

It's inevitable if the union pursues a policy where everything is left to individual units that members will start to question the need for a very expensive and lets be honest varyingly effective branch and divisional structure.

As you point out teebs the union can't have it both ways, It's either a more effective structure that supports and takes some of the pressure off local units or we need to start looking at why 25%+ of members subs is going to some branches without the members seeing anything of substance in return.

Another thing that has to be addressed is the increasing number of "joint working groups" and "reviews" that are or will be ongoing in deliveries. The union has to understand that our participation in these groups is solely on the basis that members see real benefits coming out of them, The members are directly and indirectly paying for that involvement and our reps should not be involved in them if the idea is simply to facilitate the implementation of Royal Mail's agenda for growth.
If that's what Royal Mail wants they can pay for that privilege themselves.

[Martin Walsh]

we are in agreement on branch reform . However do you really think that taking away area reps and Divisional reps and relying on 5 officers and 17 PEC members most who have never worked in deliveries and have no idea of the geographical area is he right way forward.

The key to reorganise the Branch's is to enforce it from headquarters? take the biggest branch in the Uk it is weak in a number of areas cause it's too big. But you know the reason why it is never pulled into order cause it offers any national officer or PEC member 1000 votes.

I remain convinced that the way to more unity is to make Branch's smaller but not on the basis of single offices where no unity exists across the area? Branch's must be pulled into line and actions taken if they don't. Equally the same for all reps including area and Divisional reps.

When your a senior rep your an easy target for others who want to deflect the blames from themselves. in the same way local reps are often blamed by members in tough times.

Why are some Branch's and Divisions better organised then others , cause normally they are closest to the members communicating with them and meeting them.

[britwrit]

In theory, doesn't a local rep have a lot more power under this agreement? Before, they could call out the office on strike but they'd first have to get the vote - no small step - and the effect of a strike in only one office would be limited.

Now, with no more executive action, can't they simply string out any negotiation forever, asking for informal mediators, special mediators, external mediators, etc. etc.? Sort of like how I once heard a mystery writer describe lawyers? They don't have much have sway directly but they have the power to make everybody else's life miserable.

[fishtank]

Now, with no more executive action, can't they simply string out any negotiation forever, asking for informal mediators, special mediators, external mediators, etc. etc.?

The use of voluntary mediation must be jointly agreed.
The use of special mediation only applies when unballoted industrial action occurs and it's purpose is in the words of the agreement "to ensure an immediate return to work while issues and grievances are investigated".

The use of external mediation is limited to the following circumstances:

• If a local disagreement remains unresolved after Stage 3 of the IR Framework there will be 7 days for national intervention, after which it will automatically be referred immediately for external mediation.

• Where the national parties fail to reach agreement on a point of principle relating to existing agreements that has been referred to them, it will be referred for external mediation after a period not exceeding one month from it being initially tabled by either party.

• Where there is a national disagreement relating to a matter that is not covered by existing collective agreements, it will be similarly referred if an agreed way forward is not found within one month.

• Where unballoted industrial action continues beyond 48 hours.

[britwrit]

Oh, cool. Sorry, but thanks. I'd misrembered what I read.

Just from random (and quite possibly not representative) posts I've read on here in the past, how realistic is that month deadline? It always seems like people refer things to area and they get forever lost.

[dvbuk55]

Yes the union needs reorganising, branch representation needs to be beefed up, the National Union needs to step up to the plate and enforce a standard throughout. Will it happen? Of course it won't, get this agreement through and it will be the same old crap because it will be another three years of sitting back for the union hierarchy whilst RM run riot with an agreement as loose as a hoes knickers.

[aiden01]

Yes the union needs reorganising, branch representation needs to be beefed up, the National Union needs to step up to the plate and enforce a standard throughout. Will it happen? Of course it won't, get this agreement through and it will be the same old crap because it will be another three years of sitting back for the union hierarchy whilst RM run riot with an agreement as loose as a hoes knickers.

nothing better than a whores knickers up and down

[Martin Walsh]

In theory, doesn't a local rep have a lot more power under this agreement? Before, they could call out the office on strike but they'd first have to get the vote - no small step - and the effect of a strike in only one office would be limited.

Now, with no more executive action, can't they simply string out any negotiation forever, asking for informal mediators, special mediators, external mediators, etc. etc.? Sort of like how I once heard a mystery writer describe lawyers? They don't have much have sway directly but they have the power to make everybody else's life miserable.

Brit your right there is no executive action within the agreement. All stage 3s unresolved will be referred to external mediation.

Equally it has a new flashpoint process and that local managers have to abide by the status quo on all issues which are negotiable which is anything within a national agreement or joint statement. Reps have a legal right to disagree .

[gluteus maximus]

Dingo

Might i ask is there a time limit on stage three disagreements once they have been passed to outside mediators

Who decides who these outside mediators are, Royal Mail or the CWU

WHY USE MEDIATORS WHEN THE DECISION OF AN ARBITRATOR WILL BE FINAL ON BOTH PARTIES

[Martin Walsh]

The IR framework has set timescales but are rarely met.

For instance if the local parties cannot agree they are meant to meet again in 7 days and if they cannot resolve it raise the issue to the area parties , the area parties can decide to meet just once or have more than one meeting along with the area parties, they can decide to put it back to the local parties , reach an understanding or agreement or raise it to the are parties.

The Divisional parties will meet with both the area and local parties present to attempt to reach an agreement or resolution. if it is an issue concerning the interpretation of a national agreement then it can be raised as a point of principle to our respective HQs to resolve. otherwise the disagreement can either be resolved , passed back to local parties with an agreed understanding or not be resolved.

Currently if it is not resolved Royal Mail can write to the CWUS informing them that they attend to take executive action and the Members can then be balloted for industrial action.

under the new process I believe the timescales will be reinforced and if there is no agreement at stage 3 it will go to an external mediator. But the mediators recommendations may be ignored by either party so we could still end up with no agreement. Until the procedure is exhausted there can be no executive action or balloted industrial action.

Royal Mail and the CWU will be assisted by Peter Harwood of ACAS in appointing the external mediators.

[gluteus maximus]

if i am blunt, it seems the whole process past a stage three is nothing more than trying to time out any disagreement process. Say You have 28 days for a stage three resolution, then it goes to an outside mediator for who knows how long.

With all due respect, ACAS has lost most of its credability now as it always favours the employer once it has to start putting things into writing

With all this resolution being taken out of the CWU at national level, What now is the point of even having a Trade Union, why not just have an independent trade council or work place committee.

I believe in my own opinion that this is the start of the end for trade unions in this country. I looked up to the CWU as one of the last true powerful Trade Unions, that belief is now somewhat tarnished. Forget changing economic factors etc, This is no more than a commercially orientated agreement. I have cast my eyes over this National agreement through the eyes of an independent looking in. It seems like it has been written by the employer rather than a trade union. The ambiguity and ways in which terms can be interpreted by both sides show only subjective innuendos and lacks even basic clarity. The agreement seems rushed as though subject to a time constraint to be signed off.

I am being critical of no individual, especially you Dingo as it is obvious you are a senior representative with your knowledge. My thoughts are my own observations

[Martin Walsh]

I think your wrong , most of the issues which go into the framework are things management want and we disagree with them, So your point about delaying the process does not benefit Royal Mail at all.

Things do not often go to national level from the IR framework so your point is not valid with that regards.

it is not binding mediation so negotiations is still needed. I have had experience as ACAS and other parties as mediators and I disagree with you that they support the employee , in my experience Royal Mail are more opposed to ACAS cause they recommend that they do things differently.

Over the last 10 years The CWU have had more industrial action ballots locally then all the TUC unions combined and that is by using the current framework. However lets face it we now have a very competitive parcels market and now we have an end to end rival in TNT. Years ago we would go out on strike and come back and clear the backlog on overtime,. Now a days there are consequences from strike action like loss of income from contracts going elsewhere which may effect jobs.

it is worthwhile seeing wether external mediation may help.

Far from giving away our right to negotiate we are relaunching the IR framework which includes more training for local reps .

[cloherty1976]

Over the last 10 years The CWU have had more industrial action ballots locally then all the TUC unions combined and that is by using the current framework. However lets face it we now have a very competitive parcels market and now we have an end to end rival in TNT. Years ago we would go out on strike and come back and clear the backlog on overtime,. Now a days there are consequences from strike action like loss of income from contracts going elsewhere which may effect

This is so true and the more strikes we have the more work we will lose. Unfortunately those old days of striking have gone but I suppose this will disappoint a certain few who can't change with the times...

[gluteus maximus]

We are in agreement Dingo that industrial action that involves a walk out belongs very much in the past, and only used as a very last resort. But the right to withdraw ones labour is a right that is to be held sacrasant. Thank you for your dignified response, even in disagreement we can be civil about it