I shall be voting "yes"

[fishtank]

I think we need to stop going around in circles.
We need to decide what kind of union we want.

In my opinion you either lead from the front or get out of the f***ing way and I'm not prepared to pay that kind of money for a top tier to negotiate a deal then disappear into the long grass for three years leaving us to clean up the mess until the next deal is due.

If it's to be down to local offices to fight their own battles then so be it,that doesn't frighten me but lets get rid of the pointless and expensive talking shop at the top as well as the "policy advisors" because if they're not prepared to put the hours in making sure the deals they negotiate are abided by I can't see much use for them.

[gluteus maximus]

Can someone please answer my question??

The full agreement has been put out to the members but the legal contract has not as yet I believe.

I am sorry to keep pushing this Dingo, believe me it is nothing personal so please do not take it that way.

Why has this legal contract not been put out for the members to agree on, The agreement has, but the substantive provisions on the legal protections are being withheld. Why?

It gives the impression of Cloak and Dagger, something to hide, and clandestine in nature

[Martin Walsh]

Chris it is laughable that you suggest that I would spend time on here campaigning for a yes vote? I have been on the site for a number of years and even I know I would not be able to convince the likes of Dvbuk , fish , going postal , Dirty Harry , Lincox or the dozen of others who would oppose any agreement unless it meant that Royal Mail put up the white flag and return the ways of working back to some distant past. As someone who has done 28 years I remember the senior bods when I joined saying the games up and finished it's too hard even then.

To convince them I would need to be more than the special one I would need to Be Paul McKenna and be able to erase their minds.

I said this before if all the posters want to keep this board for everyone with a negative view of the agreement then I suggest it will be a very boring board.

I have been a members , a local rep , a branch secretary , an area rep and a senior rep so I do have experience of all roles. I visit and meet members in a number of different units and listen as well as talk.

I respond to many emails on here but I get quite a few which are impossible to respond to as Royal Mail know who I am and keep mentioned my leaks during the agreement. I was even in trouble with the CWU due to people on here posting on Facebook what I had said on here.

Now you ask how does a weak office get Royal Mail to abide by agreements or joint statements? Well you might not like the answer but if this agreement is agreed by the membership then the IR framework is then legally enforceable. Your rep will have a legal right to disagree and raise an issue free from executive action. You can ask your divisional rep to request voluntary mediation. If the framework cannot be resolved then there will be external mediation. remember if Royal Mail are breaking a national agreement or joint statement then this can be challenged .

there will be new roles and responsibilities for Divisional reps who must keep a record of all issues within their divison and this will be reviewed nationally.

I would suggest a weaker office has more chance under the terms of this agreement then they have currently.

[Martin Walsh]

Can someone please answer my question??

The full agreement has been put out to the members but the legal contract has not as yet I believe.

I am sorry to keep pushing this Dingo, believe me it is nothing personal so please do not take it that way.

Why has this legal contract not been put out for the members to agree on, The agreement has, but the substantive provisions on the legal protections are being withheld. Why?

It gives the impression of Cloak and Dagger, something to hide, and clandestine in nature

Your acting like a dog with a bone.

it is not a cloak and dagger agreement. I don't know what union your in but the CWU are in the process of a full consultation of their reps and members. The Postal Executive have agreed that the agreement should be subject to a members ballot. All the senior reps including Divisional Reps and Area reps have been fully briefed and had the ability to listen the lawyer who wrote the contract along with our other national officers.

The next step is that every local rep 1500 reps will also have the opportunity to hear the agreement explained and have their questions and views answered.

Branch's will then have to opportunity to recommend acceptance or rejection to the agreement to their branch members.

then every member will then have the chance to vote on the agreement.

In terms of the legal contract it is hardly a secret as within the agreement , it states in the introduction under contents appendix a legally binding contract between the employer and CWU . it will be given out to Branch's and reps and members.

[gluteus maximus]

Can someone please answer my question??

The full agreement has been put out to the members but the legal contract has not as yet I believe.

I am sorry to keep pushing this Dingo, believe me it is nothing personal so please do not take it that way.

Why has this legal contract not been put out for the members to agree on, The agreement has, but the substantive provisions on the legal protections are being withheld. Why?

It gives the impression of Cloak and Dagger, something to hide, and clandestine in nature

Your acting like a dog with a bone.

it is not a cloak and dagger agreement. I don't know what union your in but the CWU are in the process of a full consultation of their reps and members. The Postal Executive have agreed that the agreement should be subject to a members ballot. All the senior reps including Divisional Reps and Area reps have been fully briefed and had the ability to listen the lawyer who wrote the contract along with our other national officers.

The next step is that every local rep 1500 reps will also have the opportunity to hear the agreement explained and have their questions and views answered.

Branch's will then have to opportunity to recommend acceptance or rejection to the agreement to their branch members.

then every member will then have the chance to vote on the agreement.

In terms of the legal contract it is hardly a secret as within the agreement , it states in the introduction under contents appendix a legally binding contract between the employer and CWU . it will be given out to Branch's and reps and members.

Thanks for the response Dingo, it is appreciated, i hate the term Lawyer and American English. It is Solicitor or Barrister.

Having now had a chance to look at the agreement that has been released. The annex A that holds the legal protections has been withdrawn prior to publication. So i ask the question as to why. Does the CWU not think that its members are able to give a balanced judgement and offer a debate on those provisions?.

If i am expected to cast my vote on that agreement, an agreement which will decide contractual provisions for a period of five years. Then i would expect the full terms of that agreement to be made avaliable to the members for scrutiny.

it is not expected that most people will be able to understand some of the termanology used, but some members will. In any democratic organisation in which the membership is the union, i expect transparency,

Something smells rather bad with this whole agreement, it has the air of being rushed and drawn up in haste as though a deadline had been attached.

Respect to you dingo so as stated, it is not an attack on you personally, it is just that people are being kept in the dark in my opinion for some sort of ulterior motive

[chrisj]

I give up!

I was not talking legal issues... simple things like posties wanting to work to their time and being able to prove that their performance is pretty good to justify cutting off or refusing to lapse or do what the manager might think is reasonable in an office here you have people coming in early and others simply not wanting to make waves. local reps are just not as powerful or even as empowered as you might think - but that will not change your view. So?

Never mind! You might have been on the site for longer than I have but I am not quite certain what to make of you as a RM employee or postie.

If you have read my posts, I am not voting a Yes or No. It will not make a difference as long as members keep coming in early and working for nothing - at least in my office and many other offices over the country. I am spoiling my ballot as a protest vote against the Union and those members that continue to ruin things for some of us. Enough said! Well, for now.

[dvbuk55]

I would suggest a weaker office has more chance under the terms of this agreement then they have currently.

The Deal of the Century didn't pay off then dingo, whereas the new deal, despite the fact that it doesn't deal with the delivery issues, is going to be our saviour
I'm sure you'll pardon me for being sceptical but I'm sure we'll end up with the same debacle as last time.

What is a worrying thought though dingo, not for me personally because I won't be around to see it, but should you end up in the corridors of power absolutely nothing would change. The members would be represented in much the same way they are now by apologists and appeasers when what they need is an organisation with leaders able to galvanise the members into a cohesive strong unit. What they don't need is isolated units arranging deals, that is a sure fire way of dismantling the CWU in total.

[Martin Walsh]

I give up!

I was not talking legal issues... simple things like posties wanting to work to their time and being able to prove that their performance is pretty good to justify cutting off or refusing to lapse or do what the manager might think is reasonable in an office here you have people coming in early and others simply not wanting to make waves. local reps are just not as powerful or even as empowered as you might think - but that will not change your view. So?

Never mind! You might have been on the site for longer than I have but I am not quite certain what to make of you as a RM employee or postie.

If you have read my posts, I am not voting a Yes or No. It will not make a difference as long as members keep coming in early and working for nothing - at least in my office and many other offices over the country. I am spoiling my ballot as a protest vote against the Union and those members that continue to ruin things for some of us. Enough said! Well, for now.

Don't sulk and take your ball home.

This agreement gives the local rep the right to disagree on absorption or if management are not adhering to the resourcing meetings which are mandatory .

The agreement reviews efficiency and there are no individual performance standards. The agreement does not change your right to cut off which is covered within the safeguarding Mail process within the conduct code. it is also covered in the dignity and respect agreement. Now in terms of those who come in early etc what do you want the union to do ? I remember an office when we had two deliveries who used lock up the Mail sort to ensure streaming to the second delivery, a member came in with bolt cutters to get at the work.

[Martin Walsh]

My prediction from many reps I have spoken to and members is that this is going to go through in a massive majority of those who vote.

I think we both know that the real thing that has HQ nervous is turnout.
Just how low does it go before you have to question the validity of any mandate?
Above 70% would be great but unlikely.
60-70% would not be great but acceptable.
Anything below that and we have real problems.

Fish The turnouts you put their are higher then the national ballot results. You know that is never going to happen.

traditionally reps do more work getting members to vote yes in a national agreement then they do to get members to vote yes in an agreement.

What about measuring the yes vote on what each branch did on the national yes vote ? For example in your branch 78% of the members voted yes and 22% voted no.

Some Branch's were as low as 54% , the majority of Branch's including a whole division was lower? Some were in the 80s ans some 90s.

my prediction will be lower than the industrial action ballot which was in the 50s but higher then the average yes vote of 78%.

[hampshireman]

I give up!

I was not talking legal issues... simple things like posties wanting to work to their time and being able to prove that their performance is pretty good to justify cutting off or refusing to lapse or do what the manager might think is reasonable in an office here you have people coming in early and others simply not wanting to make waves. local reps are just not as powerful or even as empowered as you might think - but that will not change your view. So?

Never mind! You might have been on the site for longer than I have but I am not quite certain what to make of you as a RM employee or postie.

If you have read my posts, I am not voting a Yes or No. It will not make a difference as long as members keep coming in early and working for nothing - at least in my office and many other offices over the country. I am spoiling my ballot as a protest vote against the Union and those members that continue to ruin things for some of us. Enough said! Well, for now.

Don't sulk and take your ball home.

This agreement gives the local rep the right to disagree on absorption or if management are not adhering to the resourcing meetings which are mandatory .The agreement reviews efficiency and there are no individual performance standards. The agreement does not change your right to cut off which is covered within the safeguarding Mail process within the conduct code. it is also covered in the dignity and respect agreement. Now in terms of those who come in early etc what do you want the union to do ? I remember an office when we had two deliveries who used lock up the Mail sort to ensure streaming to the second delivery, a member came in with bolt cutters to get at the work.

Must admit that I thought the local Rep has always had the right to disagree.So; should not be championed as something new?

[dvbuk55]

Must admit that I thought the local Rep has always had the right to disagree.So; should not be championed as something new?

Yes yes just more of the flannel to make it appear as though the new deal has produced something of benefit, I'm surprised he hasn't trotted that they've managed to secure hourly paid work once a week. As for the legalese, is any average OPG going to understand it? By the time the ballot is done and dusted there will be a considerable amount of back pay and THAT is what the leadership will be banking on to get a YES vote and I wouldn't be surprised if it went through. Its a backward step but hey the members voted it in...........the fact is that its the only game in town.

[chrisj]

I am not sulking but I just do not want to keep going on and on the conversation going round and around in circle... I gave up with you dingo not with others that might want to contribute even if they wanted to vote yes or disagree with me.

Local Reps can always raise a disagreement - fine in theory - but not exactly that easy depending on Local Rep knowledge, ability and confidence , the disagreement issue, the advice sought before raising a disagreement and working in a smaller divided office.

Imagine in a smaller office, a local rep decides to raise a disagreement, will that involve the posties refusing to follow the manager's instruction straightaway or they have to wait for the resolution of the disagreement whilst carrying on as instructed.... What if some members (and non members) decides to side with the manager and what if the disagreement itself is knocked back? That will definitely knock confidence, embolden the manager and in a small rural office e.g, it might even get personal.

At the end of the day, in a small delivery office, the local rep has to perform his primary duty as postie as well as all the other things. A whole load of them will not have the time to think about legal issues when they raise a small disagreement or when they try to pull up the manager for harassment (its often more constant harassment rather than outright bullying that is often the problem). *BTW, asking posties if they have been bullied is a bit too loaded - most will probably say No, but give examples of harassment then the survey will show a different result.

I guess raising a disagreement is probably second nature and so constant in some large offices that the managers and posties know the game and the rules... But in a small office of just over 50 with non Union members, loads of part-timers, manager;'s lap dogs and runners and those that come in early, it can be a big big challenge for any Rep. And that is why we do not even have a REP - ours resign blaming lack of support from posties, CWU and managers...

[Straight4ward]

Now you ask how does a weak office get Royal Mail to abide by agreements or joint statements? Well you might not like the answer but if this agreement is agreed by the membership then the IR framework is then legally enforceable. Your rep will have a legal right to disagree and raise an issue free from executive action. You can ask your divisional rep to request voluntary mediation. If the framework cannot be resolved then there will be external mediation. remember if Royal Mail are breaking a national agreement or joint statement then this can be challenged .

there will be new roles and responsibilities for Divisional reps who must keep a record of all issues within their divison and this will be reviewed nationally.

I would suggest a weaker office has more chance under the terms of this agreement then they have currently.

I work in a “weak office”. Our rep is very low key. I have absolutely no idea who our divisional rep is or even how to contact him if I needed to. In truth, I don’t actually know what division I’m in (no wisecracks, please), though if I saw a listing of the various divisions I could, no doubt, work it out.

In 10 years employment I’ve never ever had any contact with the union other than our office rep, apart from the guy who comes in every year or so to sign up new recruits. Now I appreciate that it’s a two-way street and that I haven’t done anything myself to find out who’s who and what’s what, so I really can’t complain too much that I’m left to fight my own battles.

I tend to regard my union fees as firstly, an insurance policy should things go tits-up big time at some stage and secondly, as I benefit from the deals struck on my behalf, I feel I should make a contribution towards the costs of running the union.

I like the sound of “new roles and responsibilities for divisional reps” and hope that would see them visiting each office in their area perhaps a few times each year and talking to all the members they represent.

Ever the optimist, I have high hopes, if not necessarily expectations, of the new agreement to afford us some additional protection. I’ll be voting Yes.

[chrisj]

If these divisional reps, area reps, branch secs or whatever have made some sort of efforts to communicate with their members then at least they can respond and get more involved... Trying to find out who these people are and what they do will not help you much unless, of course, you need them if you are in deep trouble.

These folks are the ones with full-time release, so they should be up and about and send the odd newsletter from time to time. Even throughout the recent balloting and 'dispute' only the usual suspects (London and some other strong areas or branches) communicate regularly with their members... Good on them!

The last time, I saw anyone from outside our District rep (?) is when they had the road show for the last Agreement re: D2D payment etc. We have a district rep come from time to time as we do not have a Rep and he is on the phone but day-to-day involvement with management as some highlighted here rarely happened if when we had the old old retired Rep.

Do these people even hold workshops for local reps or send out useful information and tips on how to get the best out of the Agreements or any situation? They (throughout the CWU) should all be sharing information and best practices. We are not talking World Class Unionism here but some local reps will really benefit from more useful info and assistance.

This site is the best avenue for knowing more about the UNion and sharing information and experiences. Contrary to what some senior Reps might think, it is fairly representative. Just go to the Introduction section and those that have contributed to which offices have had Revisions - this site covers the entire Nation... Excellent work!

So we shall have a Review that we know will not provide accurate information for so many reasons to mention, again, but then our CWU/IR experts could not be bothered as long as their Areas are enjoying a lot of benefits and privileges from the discord and shady deals.

[dvbuk55]

IMHO Chris yours is a fairly representative view of how the union has failed the membership. When we speak of the CWU we really are referring to the Ivory Tower which has done nothing to engender a unified membership and has allowed branch organisation to be a law unto themselves. Oddly enough dingo now comes out with the review which will rein in and quantify the work of each branch...............rather timely under the circumstances: far too late of course if this agreement goes through which then relies on each unit to see to its own. Personally I think that's a backward step and actually creates a wider gulf between the full time representatives and those who actually work for a living as well as represent the members.