Policies or Personality?

[motherhubbard]

I would have done a poll if I knew where that forum had gone .....

In the forthcoming election between Hayes and Ward are you going to vote because of the candidate's policies or personality?
If it is his policies that have swayed you please let me know which ones.

In the absence of any clear documented differences between the candidates I will have to go on personality and if I bother to vote (which is looking increasingly unlikely) I won't be voting for a Chelsea/Rangers fan.

[Martin Walsh]

I would detail policies but clearly you have no idea once you mentioned Dave being a Rangers fan ! He went to St Thomas Moore School !!! At the end of the day them members will decide !!!

[dvbuk55]

No doubt it will be an overwhelming vote by the members.

[motherhubbard]

I would detail policies but clearly you have no idea once you mentioned Dave being a Rangers fan ! He went to St Thomas Moore School !!! At the end of the day them members will decide !!!

So any debate is to be immediately stifled due to my (possible) error in stating Dave is a Rangers fan?
How grown up.
So is Dave a practicing Catholic? Does that prevent him being a Rangers fan?
Which football team does he prefer to go and watch while in Scotland?

And this Thomas Moore school? Was it named after Thomas More?

[POSTMAN]

Look up at the top of the forum!
http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/poll.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[dvbuk55]

I'm going for Clyde as long as he has Clint with him

[TrueBlueTerrier]

This is my own personal view.

Ward is marginally to the left of Hayes, but only because he is not as wedded to the Labour Party. Both want us to stay in the Party as they see this as the best way of promoting their constituents views and interests. Ward though claims he will work for the CWU and its members as a priority whereas Hayes comes across as protecting and promoting the Labour party as a way of improving workers rights and protecting their interests. So the only difference is wafer thin and is based on emphasis of approach rather than any major difference in policy.

As to recent agreements, Ward and Hayes both can take equal blame and credit as Ward was the main negotiator with RM, but Hayes as leader, along with the PEC and others, was responsible for deciding on the direction and strategies of the Union.

Personalities - Both appear to hold Union values at their heart, and both are good at engaging the members in face to face communication, both are equally good at the tub thumping needed at demos and marches, and both talk to members directly when given chance, or invited to do so.

The main difference, and it really pains me to say this, is that Dave Ward comes across much better on TV and Radio when defending the Union or Royal Mail. The sad fact is that when there isn't much to chose between the 2, not stumbling over your words sways it for me.

[dvbuk55]

This is my own personal view.

The sad fact is that when there isn't much to chose between the 2, not stumbling over your words sways it for me.

Erm, Erm, Erm anyone in mind in particular teebs?

[fishtank]

I can't see how two people who have both been firmly entrenched in the CWU policy machine for the best part of 30 years could possibly have different policies, as for different personalities I'm not convinced that the personality put forward by either candidate is 100% genuine.

If the DGS(P) is such a hard line ball-breaker why are we where we are? If the current GS is as useless as is now being promoted by some why has he been propped up by the rest of HQ for 15 years?
Where were these voices of concern 5, 10 or 15 years ago?

[dvbuk55]

I can't see how two people who have both been firmly entrenched in the CWU policy machine for the best part of 30 years could possibly have different policies, as for different personalities I'm not convinced that the personality put forward by either candidate is 100% genuine.

If the DGS(P) is such a hard line ball-breaker why are we where we are? If the current GS is as useless as is now being promoted by some why has he been propped up by the rest of HQ for 15 years?
Where were these voices of concern 5, 10 or 15 years ago?

Well we were here but nobody took any notice and in fact the criticism levelled at these two, the CWU in general and the union organisation in particular was always decried by the mouthpiece until now, but it's really just changing horses in mid stride, there will be no change for the membership. These people are nothing but politicos talking a good talk but falling far short of the walk. The old adage doesn't seem to be holding water these days when it's said you can fool some of the people etc, it should be if you can fool enough people to keep voting for you, however few that may be, you'll never come a cropper.

[Martin Walsh]

Let's be clear the role of the GS is different now then it was when the CWU was first formed 20 years ago.

Billy has chosen to detach himself from the industrial committees of postal and telecoms after all the GS is the main negotiator of the CWU. Remember Alan Johnson , Tony Young and Derek Hodgson the other General Secretaries in those 20 years remained involved in industrial matters.

Billy in the last couple of years has combined the role of GS with a uni ambassador role which means he travels a lot outside of the UK.

Let's look at the clear differences between the two GS candidates which some may not know !

Under Billy's watch the then Labour Government bought in unfair competition ahead of the rest of Europe which has led to the closure of mail centres . RDCs and has allowed Whistl to capture 29% of the DSA market which they are now delivering end to end threatening the USO.

How did Billy respond to this he gave Labour more money at the next General Secretary Election than ever before. How did they repay us they twice tried to privatise us !!!

What did Billy then do he recommended the labour Government Minster Who was in charge of the proposal to privatised Royal Mail to be the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party Alan Johnson. Conference defeated him.

If Dave had been leader we would have been arguing from a position that if Labour stitched us up then we would not be supporting them financially and given the financial state of the Labour Party that may have made them listen and not have tried to privatise us. With Billy the Labour Party know he will not drive an hard bargain.

The second difference is that Dave wants to reorganise CWU HQs to give more support to local reps and to fund more on the organisation agenda.

CWU HQs has hardly been touched and we now have more appointed officers which the members will never have a vote on than when we merged. Look at the pension fund we have now 3 pension funds in operation at CWU HQs and these have never been merged as conference instructed in 20 years. The members money has to pay for 3 different pensions for its staff and ex officers. The CWU owes money on two of these pensions and over 5 million is against the cost of CWU HQ. Alan Johnson rejected an MPs pension to stay in the ex UCW pension scheme as it is so good.

Little has changed under Billy's leadership but if Dave wins then CWU HQ will be reorganise to support local reps and the organising agenda in the field.

The other area where we are weak is campaigning in regions on issues which effect the membership in communities as the GS controls the campaigns. Dave will allow regions to campaign on issues which effect communities providing its is in the interests of the membership.

Dave is the man to front up to the Government of the day , to Ofcom and the Labour Party and the TUC ! It is time for change !

[dvbuk55]

Funny how you haven't been so vociferous in the past dingo. The sun shone out of HQs backside according to you, any mistakes were put down to how difficult the situation was, nobody had experience in "high level" negotiations, lets be honest here dingo, sod all will change in the next 20 years because everybody at HQ has a vested interest in things remaining the same and the same goes for full time officials, who I might add, have done also nothing in the last 20 years to support the grass roots reps or make any changes in the organisation. The main problem is that CWU HQ officials have lost sight of exactly who it is that employs them because they seem to have a misconceived idea that is they who control the members and not the other way round. The old saying "as ye sow" will definitely come home to roost eventually.

[fishtank]

Under Billy's watch....

It wasn't just his watch though, it was also his deputy's watch, and yours and mine and everyone at HQ who went along with all the decisions that were accepted at the time but somehow with the benefit of a little hindsight were all wrong but remarkably all Billy's fault.
Are we to believe that the big tough table thumping Dave Ward was bullied into accepting these decisions by Billy Hayes....Lol.

[POSTMAN]

Total and utter pathetic bollox!

The way it's coming out is Dave Ward is the lap dog that has suddenly got his bite along with all the 'sudden' Billy haters.

Billy for prime minister,as he knows how to f**k people over for a number off years and get away with it!

[motherhubbard]

Let's look at the clear differences between the two GS candidates which some may not know !

Why don't we know?
Whose job was/is it to keep us informed?

You then go on to tell us how different it would be if Dave had been GS years ago but very little about what he is going to do now.
Reform HQ .......Hmmmm
And the pension issue? That's all Billy's fault is it? And how is Dave going to resolve it?
And how will that protect and terms and conditions and give us any job security?

I think it quite scary that nobody has answered the question posed at the start with:
I will be voting for Dave because of .....
I will be voting for Billy because of .....

An election totally devoid of ideas.