FORMAL NOTICE FOR NATIONAL REPRESENTATIVE ELECTIONS 2015

[dvbuk55]

Your suggestion is we stop dealing with facts and pressures we face would be a total disaster to all members. Nothing is easy in today's climate and not everything the union does is right but ingnoring the threat from the shareholder , off com and competition may sound good to post on here but it will not serve the members well.

You are wrong dingo, I'm not suggesting the union ignore the facts and the pressure, it's how they deal with it that I am critical of. The handling of members affairs is abysmal and as one poster pointed out it is shown on a document as RM, the Union and employees as though there are three separate entities - he asks are we not the union - and of course the answer is no. When you suggest that the CWU is different in order to survive, well they are barely surviving - how many members have been lost since 2010? As I recall the Miners union who did not support Scargill and broke away to side with the management didn't survive either and so there is a salutary lesson for all you appeasers.

[Martin Walsh]

On one hand you criticise me for London driving a hard bargin with Royal Mail and on the other you accuse me of being an appeaser !

For the record the percentage of membership density has not changed much since 2007 it's still higher in urban offices and lower in more rural areas. The highest membership density is in London. Now there is a link there the more members who are well led and stick together normally get either a better deal or fight against what Royal Mail wants to do. It has nothing to do with ratios of full time or part time staff but everything about being organised.

In London , Liverpool and Manchester we are at the front of unfair competition and whilst the job will change again for a range of things including mail optimisation we are not going to roll over for Royal Mail and we are going to ensure that the staff we represent still have a well paid job with less Saturday's and reasonable average earnings otherwise there will be no deal.

Every office or area could do the same and some do , the key is to stop moaning and criticising others for being strong and get organised!!!! Happy christmas not an humbug in sight !!!

[dvbuk55]

On one hand you criticise me for London driving a hard bargin with Royal Mail and on the other you accuse me of being an appeaser !

For the record the percentage of membership density has not changed much since 2007 it's still higher in urban offices and lower in more rural areas. The highest membership density is in London. Now there is a link there the more members who are well led and stick together normally get either a better deal or fight against what Royal Mail wants to do. It has nothing to do with ratios of full time or part time staff but everything about being organised.

In London , Liverpool and Manchester we are at the front of unfair competition and whilst the job will change again for a range of things including mail optimisation we are not going to roll over for Royal Mail and we are going to ensure that the staff we represent still have a well paid job with less Saturday's and reasonable average earnings otherwise there will be no deal.

Every office or area could do the same and some do , the key is to stop moaning and criticising others for being strong and get organised!!!! Happy christmas not an humbug in sight !!!

There's the rub dingo, office A and office B both have union members but one has better deals than the other and yet it is a National Union or supposed to be so where is the organisation? The CWU is a disjointed organisation that professes unity but is in fact a very long way away from that. It is shows how little you understand of office structures if you think that a full time/part time ratio doesn't make a difference. Anyone who serves in an environment where 50% of the staff and sometimes more are part time and of those only a small proportion are members realises how difficult it is organise any sort of union action. People on part time contracts would not take any action that would jeopardise their employment and their ability to feed, clothe and put a roof over their families head. It's always been easy for you to say we stick together when you have a 90+ %age of full timers with the same amount of union membership. Still those are things that no longer concern me, I handed my uniform in today and retired. By my side is a glass jar full of humbugs and each time I take one out I'll think of you

[fishtank]

It has nothing to do with ratios of full time or part time staff but everything about being organised.

If you believe that then you go against every trade union theory being taught right now, you might be right but that would mean everyone else is wrong.

Of course contracted hours make a difference, all the data and common sense backs that up, If you have to rely on management/business discretion for overtime and the ability to take home a living wage of course you're going to be less militant, more flexible and less likely to join a union.

As for this theory about organisation...take a look at the geographical and logistical differences between organising 10,000 members across London and 10,000 members across the whole of Scotland, You champion local agreements because they suit an easy to co-ordinate, organise and supervise area, Give it a try in an area of over 30,000 square miles.