Issues In Deliveries

[Martin Walsh]

The trade union movement has moved on along way from the days of the ford dispute which led to equal pay. Who remembers when the dockers and others marched for Enoch Powell ?

Unions have moved on a long way , we were only at the TUC on Tuesday discussing more proportionality in the union including rule changes. yes there are egos in any Political organisation there is even egos on this board.

let's not compare us with ford during the 60s and 70s. In deliveries there are less then 11% women and in Mail centres there are significantly more women.

I appreciate the reply Dingo, I take it you are a senior Trade Union Official? The reason i say that is that i have done the media courses and your response is typical in evading the question being asked by deflection. The point i was making was that the trade union hierarchy has changed little in 40 years, and you then deflect that question on women membership at ford of 40 years ago without addressing the real question being asked

I think your question is bizarre , you quote a film which took place in the 60s and compare it to a debate on reserve seats in 2014 and then sum it up with is it any wonder people are losing faith in trade unions !

The latest CWU leavers and joiners show more people joined then left last month.

but the simple reason why there are less members in unions is that our manufacturing industries have been crushed and most of our traditional industries including the public sector have had massive job reductions.

You can also add the retail industries which has never been a strong unionised area is growing it is hardly surprising.

Add this to the anti trade union laws off course less people are in trade unions. Sadly with zero hour contracts and an increasing hire and fire mentality by employers , the CBI and this government workers need a union.

[BernardBresslaw]

I find it rather ironic that the same person who said the issue of bullying was being blown out of all proportion (despite documented evidence that this isn't the case) has the gall to accuse others of being ignorant of issues outside their own offices.

[chrisj]

The title says 'issues in deliveries' and the two kindred spirits had the whole topic to themselves for a few days but was there really a debate on delivery issues - No. Was there any contribution from the Mail Centre usuals - No.

That says it all. Those that want to denigrate this site and lump all of us together and label people as not knowing what they are saying or not knowing what is happening in other offices can carry on the debate - on their own...

This site gives some of us the opportunity to know what is happening in other offices and provide useful information and many other useful threads and stickies - some funny and some instructive and provide some sort of emotional support... The list goes on.

This New Agreement will soon be put to bed and we can go back to our normal every day issues - and for me that is more important than a fake debate or not. drb's last post was actually more informative than the other ones - he provided good analysis rather than blaming the non-debater like his mate.

* I know TBT contributed but with respect he has not hard the Revision so he might be a little more forthright with his opinions - he is still sitting on the fence with this Agreement, I believe .

[gluteus maximus]

My last comment on the subject.

This is the problem as i see it, the union hierarchy, no matter what union is totally out of touch on its membership. Arguments are put forward for debate and are instantly shot down as not showing the good of the few. I call that an autocracy, not a collective

[drb]

rather than blaming the non-debater like his mate

You are all my mates Chris! Before we put this "post to bed"...I still believe the "freemasons" are behind it all!!

[chrisj]

drb - am sure there was a time when you were that kind of poster: when things were still fresh and you used this site to help yourselves and others; at least to try and resolves issues, provide info and support fellow posties.

I was disappointed when you sort of* (not as bad as dingo) slagged off the site and its posters... He cannot keep telling people they do not know what they are talking about and that just because it happens in one's office does not mean it happens elsewhere. The irony of that statement is that he appears to know what happens in most places (which he does not) and even when told he still does not want to believe things just because it does not happen in London and its suburbs (like yours).

Union structure and the many other things that dingo is boring us with are not the real issues in deliveries. The real issues can be found in the 'Blue Shirt', 'Union', the News sections and others of this site. That is what you folks that know much more about the working of the Union should be contributing to; not getting involved in a blame game. You should 'try' not to always be the mouthpiece for the Union or try to defend the indefensible or blatantly dismiss or become economical with the truth or as 'gluteus maximus' have put it - 'divert' with irrelevant facts and/or conjectures.

Dingo is more of your mate than I am - I guess you know him personally and have had dealings with him . We can now put this to bed..

[fishtank]

The debate on deliveries on here has become laughable. It's based on assumptions and beliefs rather than any facts.

What national facts do we have about deliveries, very little that haven't came via the employer which hardly makes them reliable but lay them down anyway and we'll debate them.
Keep them national though and stick to verifiable facts where possible.
You're right though the debate on deliveries has become a joke but not just on here, throughout the union.

Whilst listening to the members is important , some members may not always know to get what they want may mean that they have to change as well and this is where the union needs to explain more.

I think if we're talking about resistance to change and you ask Royal Mail where that is the greatest problem they'll point to your area. I think if we're honest most in the union would too so really that's a problem you should address yourself and stop using it as a reason the union shouldn't talk to members directly.

This is why the union is rolling out the FDAR joint. Statement.

The same one we rolled out in 2012?
Whoop-de-feckin-do...

[drb]

Chris - you where right about the site becoming a "slagging match" (or rather me in my previous posts),(and I have apologised...really!).

I think once one steps back and does check other posts,(and I have quoted one or two from other posts), and as I stated then,they where not hard to find.

I think you will find that whether I know Dingo or not,(and I regularly receive reports from other offices/reps), the reports themselves differ from divisional reports,and that is not any ONE persons fault,just maybe,(maybe) that "structure" is out of place.

For example,I know of a delivery office in which if the unit rep is off,(leave), local management tend to stray into unagreed agreements. Also the bullying rears it's head from management. Bear in mind the rep is only on leave for one week. Now you wonder what is is like when an office has no rep. No one reports it either so the actual divisional report will not truly reflect this. Hence people on this site tend to vent what is going on in their office in comparison to strong branches/offices.

I still believe that branches should be run from their offices and units in which they represent rather then their own premises,in that they are always in their environment. Right from political officers to legal/medical/branch secretary. A big worry for me is unit reps,(or IR) burning themselves out or becoming "gun shy".

[dvbuk55]

A big worry for me is unit reps,(or IR) burning themselves out or becoming "gun shy".

That drb is a very astute observation. A unit rep is right in the firing line day after day and often dealing with factors he is ill equipped to deal with. It can be a very lonely place particularly when an office is evenly split with part time staff and many of them not union members. The management are circumventing the agreements by going direct to part time non union members and they are easy targets. Our rep I believe has given up the ghost purely because there is no direct leadership from the Branch and he is probably not alone. I believe the structure of the union has failed and no one seems to be prepared to rectify it. It isn't just ordinary members who think they have been abandoned.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

* I know TBT contributed but with respect he has not hard the Revision so he might be a little more forthright with his opinions - he is still sitting on the fence with this Agreement, I believe .

You are right we have still had a complete CDV revision yet but some of our office have and I do get to see their issues, albeit 2nd hand, so I know about them, but can't claim to be fully conversant with them.

My fence sitting has also finished and I am a No voter. It the issues were separated I would have voted Yes on Pay and No on the agreement. On balance I feel that the issues in delivery were sidelined, and If this was the first time it had happened I would have given the Union the benefit of the doubt. However as some of the issues around BT2010 have been ignored, papered over, not addressed sufficiently or even made worse by some branches (based on posts on here), then I have no confidence in them being resolved under AFG2014.

Therefore my considered opinion is that the Union needs to readdress the concerns and issues in deliveries and the only chance we have of that happening is by voting "No".

Am I worried about the consequences of a No vote - Yes I am but at least it would force those in charge to focus the attention on where its needed.

I am also concerned by a Yes vote because as with BT2010 the reviews and promises of addressing the issues will lapse because the Union have legitimate and more pressing issues to concentrate on.

But on balance I think the risks of a Yes vote are more wide ranging and potentially more destructive than a No vote, even if RM have a fit of pique and remove all the legal guarantees and pay rises.

[dvbuk55]

Therefore my considered opinion is that the Union needs to readdress the concerns and issues in deliveries and the only chance we have of that happening is by voting "No". .

Good decision based on the whole agreement not on the pay.

[chrisj]

I have always maintained that my NO vote is a protest vote. I do not expect a 'NO' majority but a good NO showing will at least show the Union and RM that there are people out there that could not be bought easily and that the 'delivery issues' should continue to be taken seriously.

Even if it is only a Review for now - we should pressure them into making sure that it is done properly and that the subsequent Report is published and actions taken...

I recognise that the delivery members (all of us) are partly to blame for some of the problem 'issues in delivery' but the Union too has its head in sand (scared of ruffling feathers and also scared of unintentional consequences of taking a hard line on members) and then there is a RM that does not like to play by the rules (at least not for everyone - divide and conquer).

If a No vote, I am all too happy for the pay deal to be delayed - that will wind some people up no end. But I do not see RM not paying up eventually... The 5 years protection and money is nice but the NO strike deal plus a very satisfied MC is all too good for RM. If we are all (Delivery & MC) still struggling then people will still be happy to go a Strike and strife for a commitment to resolving 'delivery'

[Lounge Lizard]

The trade union movement has moved on along way from the days of the ford dispute which led to equal pay. Who remembers when the dockers and others marched for Enoch Powell ?

Unions have moved on a long way , we were only at the TUC on Tuesday discussing more proportionality in the union including rule changes. yes there are egos in any Political organisation there is even egos on this board.

let's not compare us with ford during the 60s and 70s. In deliveries there are less then 11% women and in Mail centres there are significantly more women.

Spoken like a true politician, answer the question you want to answer and not the question asked. You're a career union man dingo plain and simple not an employee of RM and speaking of egos.........................

Proportionality? What on earth has proportionality got to do with delivery issues? If you'd said the failure of the CWU to address the issues that would have been germane but how many women are in delivery posts is irrelevant unless you want to compare the low number in comparison to mail centres is an indication of the work load.

Indeed, and I still await the TUC's commitment to 'proportionality' in ALL industries, abattoirs, construction sites and deep sea trawlers still having a seriously small percentage of women workers, or is it just the cosy indoor jobs this is about ?