Whose side are you on CWU?

[Martin Walsh]

Dvbuk not that your worth a reply but for clarity purposes there are 20 less jobs on the night shift that means there is 20 people on the night shift who have to move to the late shift ! MTSF says it should be the last 20 unless there have legitimate reasons and if it is not the last 20 then it is the next more senior 20 , they are all members and lets be clear all probably do not want to go onto the late shift so they will put up some valid and not valid reasons why they can't. The CWU is there to support all the individuals and establish if the reasons are valid or not. Any one can say they cannot do a late shift but is it a legitimate reason cause if it is then the next more senior night person has to then go on to the late shift. Remember 20 jobs less.

It must great in your world of no responsibility to slag of the cwu but reps at the sharp end have to deal with issues in a fair way and subject to our agreements.

[dvbuk55]

Dvbuk not that your worth a reply but for clarity purposes there are 20 less jobs on the night shift that means there is 20 people on the night shift who have to move to the late shift ! MTSF says it should be the last 20 unless there have legitimate reasons and if it is not the last 20 then it is the next more senior 20 , they are all members and lets be clear all probably do not want to go onto the late shift so they will put up some valid and not valid reasons why they can't. The CWU is there to support all the individuals and establish if the reasons are valid or not. Any one can say they cannot do a late shift but is it a legitimate reason cause if it is then the next more senior night person has to then go on to the late shift. Remember 20 jobs less.

It must great in your world of no responsibility to slag of the cwu but reps at the sharp end have to deal with issues in a fair way and subject to our agreements.

Not as great as your world, sitting on your backside with full release and quite a considerable salary, I mean who can blame you for not wanting to rock the boat! As for agreements you seem to trot them out to suit but what about all those agreements not upheld. Family Friendly ring a bell? Seniority? You certainly trot that out but again only when it suits. You see dingo union support fits where it touches, it used to be excellent and trusted - now? well it leaves more than a lot to be desired, more politician than representative at all levels.

[denhamhoop]

Whilst some of us understand that the CWU sometimes are in tricky no win situations.In this case it should be Royal Mail asking for proof not the Union Rep.I can remember my former Union Rep once telling me tell me the truth and that way there are no surprises that Royal Mail can throw at us when in a meeting.The trouble is complacency sets in and unfortunately as Reps spend more time with Management than they do Union members they do form closer relationships than should really happen.The Rep also in this case probably wants this issue sorted as quickly as possible and human issues throw in complications.Maybe if there was less release then maybe Reps might be a little more sympathetic.
I used to drink with a Union Rep and he once told me of a situation during a resign where a member was signing for a duty involving Saturdays and he specifically asked "Can you work Saturdays" and the member said "Yes No Problem".Low and behold they sign for said duty then walk past him into the Branch Secretary and say " I Can't work Saturdays Get me out of them" My drinking friend just shook his head.So members do sometimes lie to suit their own purposes

[General Mannerheim]

Reading this thread and the replies I find it more than a little ironic the LTB sent out today of Still the Enemy Within.

[Martin Walsh]

The CWU are committed to keeping seniority and we all know that Royal Mail would like to remove it? This is a straight seniority issue in line with MTSF . There are 20 jobs less on nights and 20 most junior people have to move to lates if all them come with an excuse and we just accept that excuse then it will be down to the more senior people to go on lates.

Make your minds up ever you want seniority or your want a free for all system where anyone can say they cannot do something without any evidence. Believe me it happens I have seen it when someone says they cannot do a night duty and then you see they regularly perform nights on overtime.

[Lincox]

Don,t have a problem with providing reasonable evidence of personal situations but I have serious doubts that such evidence will have any impact on the eventual decisions that are made. A bit like providing witness statements for grievance hearings. Totally ignored.

[dvbuk55]

The CWU are committed to keeping seniority and we all know that Royal Mail would like to remove it? This is a straight seniority issue in line with MTSF . There are 20 jobs less on nights and 20 most junior people have to move to lates if all them come with an excuse and we just accept that excuse then it will be down to the more senior people to go on lates.

Make your minds up ever you want seniority or your want a free for all system where anyone can say they cannot do something without any evidence. Believe me it happens I have seen it when someone says they cannot do a night duty and then you see they regularly perform nights on overtime.

Is seniority always the overarching solution or are there occasions when it is allowed to be ignored.

[simpletruth]

Management decide they need to move a few people from one shift to another.
It is to be done on a seniority basis, ie: those at the bottom of the seniority list will be told they have to change to the new shift unless they have a genuine reason to refuse.

Sounds fair enough, right?

One by one the chosen few are taken into a meeting room where sits a manager and a union rep.
Now, at this point you might be thinking the manager will stress the importance of the change to your working hours, and the union rep will be there to support you should you have any objection to the change?
Wrong.
What actually happened was the union rep supported the manager. In fact, the union rep was worse than the manager who, certainly in my case, was able to almost sit back and see his work being done most efficiently by the rep who angrily demanded the employees furnish proof of their stories.

Now I could state examples here, but I will refrain for now because i do not want to jeapordise any further steps that may have to be taken regarding this matter.

Never have I seen anything like this in my working life. And remember, any union member in a situation such as this would naturally look to their union for advice and support. But when the union rep has already quite clearly nailed their colours to the management mast, who do the employees turn to?

Oh one more twist in the tale. The employees who said they would have difficulty changing shifts were told a few days later that the management and another union rep (of higher rank in the union than the first rep) had looked at their cases and refused to change the decisions. They did this without speaking to the employees or asking for details of their objections.

Now I have no issue with the management here. Rightly or wrongly they want to make changes and are taking steps to bring the changes in to force. It is the total lack of support given to the employees by the CWU. In fact it's not just a lack of support, it is the blatant and shocking SHOW OF SUPPORT for the management to the detriment of the union member.

Imagine going into court having paid for a defence lawyer, only to have them join in with the prosecution lawyer in trying to get you sent down for a good stretch.
Beyond belief.

Any advice or comment would be most welcome before other avenues are persued.

Let everyone read the MTSF in and out. Word for word as that is their protection and if the CWU Rep or any other CWU individual makes a comment against it; you start quoting from the MTSF. Simple! because you have to have your own back; there is no trust left in the CWU.

[fishtank]

in my experience some will put up agreements which are not factual to stay on a night shift and this is where it is important to have factual evidence to prove an individuals case be that he or she is a carer etc.

Remember 20 will have to move and if 10 of the least senior individuals have put up agreements why they cannot do a late shift then it will mean 10 more senior indivdual have to move and they will then question why those who are less senior have been able to give reasons why they should stay on nights. This is why factual evidence needs to be provided.

That might be your experience but neither the CWU nor Royal Mail has any legal right to demand evidence factual or otherwise to support a claim for flexible working. Only eligibility can be questioned, not individual merits.

I would suggest in this case the affected members seek legal advice outside the union because their statutory rights are being abused to protect the perceived contractual rights of more senior members of staff, something an Employment Tribunal will take a very dim view of. You of all people should be aware that Statutory Employment Law trumps the MTSF agreement every time.

[fishtank]

Absolutely laughable that a CWU rep believes he should have access to members personal information so that he can decide who's telling the truth or not.
What professional qualifications does he hold?

Talk about setting the union up for a legal ass-kicking...lol.
Time this union was dragged into the 21st Century...or maybe aim low and go for the 20th century....seniority, nice to have but I wouldn't go anywhere near a court of law with it, it's a ticking time bomb is what it is, the union would do well to try to keep its distance.

[dvbuk55]

Welcome to CWU World. It's like Disney World where you are embraced in a fantasy that purports to entertain but is really there just to fleece you of your hard earned cash. I mean there are individuals on here who would be well suited to a Mickey Mouse outfit.

[silly suffolk]

Welcome to CWU World. It's like Disney World where you are embraced in a fantasy that purports to entertain but is really there just to fleece you of your hard earned cash. I mean there are individuals on here who would be well suited to a Mickey Mouse outfit.

probably kept you in employment above the market pay rate for quite a while.

[dvbuk55]

Welcome to CWU World. It's like Disney World where you are embraced in a fantasy that purports to entertain but is really there just to fleece you of your hard earned cash. I mean there are individuals on here who would be well suited to a Mickey Mouse outfit.

probably kept you in employment above the market pay rate for quite a while.

Nothing I hadn't fought for over 25 years before the union became a deflated version of its former self.

[Lincox]

It has been many years since I was a Union Rep in another business, but the whole point of having representation is that before any meeting you sit with your representative and discuss your situation and agree a modus operandi.
It appears to me that members are going into a meeting where the union rep is already sat there with management and the modus operandi has been agreed between the rep and the manager.
This is outrageous and I would say to Dingo that if he is aware that this is happening, then he should report this back to the PEC immediately and get them to impose training sessions with all reps to remind them of their responsibilities to the membership that they are supposedly representing.

[Shedend]

It never ceases to amaze me how people can make comments like these about a cwu rep who is not on here to defend himself.
Remember there are two sides to every story. Some should bear that in mind when commenting……..