Please no more 'why are we not informed '

stufalco · Post by **stufalco** » 21 Oct 2007, 13:36

mrlovepantsuk wrote:
stufalco wrote:lets remember, that the union forced an embargo on rm, that the talks wer private. it would be wrong for the pec to go and relese info when rm are sticking to it, remember, we dont want to stoop to leighton and croziers level! KEEP THE FAITH!! the pec will do the correct thing!!
that period of calm has finished though hasnt it, besides we`re not asking for a full blown account, just a little show of appreciation and support would help.

I do agree with you, a statment should be relesed, but the embargo still stands and has been agreed by boath sides, this is not the period of calm thing, its a separate agreement, witch was recomended by the tuc, and enforced by the cwu!

Turpin · Post by **Turpin** » 21 Oct 2007, 14:10

WELL WHY DONT THEY EVEN SAY THAT NO SORRY POOR VERY POOR DEAL ON THE TABLE A WEEK PLUS AGO AND STILL THEY CANNOT AGREE ON THINGS MUST BE AN OF ITS TITS DEAL...

Backlog clearing
Support Being Lost
Alarm bells ringing

andy2007 · Post by **andy2007** » 21 Oct 2007, 14:40

stufalco wrote:lets remember, that the union forced an embargo on rm, that the talks wer private. it would be wrong for the pec to go and relese info when rm are sticking to it, remember, we dont want to stoop to leighton and croziers level! KEEP THE FAITH!! the pec will do the correct thing!!

Actually, it was RM who wanted the secrecy.

Remember that, that was a joint statement that both sides agreed to. Though why the CWU agreed to that clause is a mystery to me.

RM originally insisted on secrecy, till the CWU told us about the conditions, prior to the ballot. They wanted that condition reinstated, so that we wouldn't know what was happening 'till it was too late.

True, it would mean breaking one of the terms of the agreement for resuming the talks. But what choice do we have. We certainly can't carry on like this.

not me · Post by **not me** » 21 Oct 2007, 18:18

if it takes over a week to sort out this 'agreement' then surely an agreement was never made?

stufalco · Post by **stufalco** » 21 Oct 2007, 18:22

custard wrote:if it takes over a week to sort out this 'agreement' then surely an agreement was never made?

what happens is that rm and cwu negotiators agree terms, then it is passed onto the pec, who have to review it. its worth remembering that no agreement will be reached / accepted untill u and i have our say through a ballott!

mrlovepantsuk · Post by **mrlovepantsuk** » 21 Oct 2007, 18:24

stufalco wrote:
custard wrote:if it takes over a week to sort out this 'agreement' then surely an agreement was never made?
what happens is that rm and cwu negotiators agree terms, then it is passed onto the pec, who have to review it. its worth remembering that no agreement will be reached / accepted untill u and i have our say through a ballott!

what is the point of having negotiators if it then has to go to the pec, why dont the pec do the negotiating?

andy2007 · Post by **andy2007** » 21 Oct 2007, 18:35

mrlovepantsuk wrote:
stufalco wrote:
custard wrote:if it takes over a week to sort out this 'agreement' then surely an agreement was never made?
what happens is that rm and cwu negotiators agree terms, then it is passed onto the pec, who have to review it. its worth remembering that no agreement will be reached / accepted untill u and i have our say through a ballott!
what is the point of having negotiators if it then has to go to the pec, why dont the pec do the negotiating?

Because it would be a sensible idea to have them at the negotiations, and would save time and effort. That's far too easy, they have to do things the hard way, don't they.

DirtyHarry · Post by **DirtyHarry** » 21 Oct 2007, 21:06

felang13 wrote:Theres a reason the PEC don't keep you informed ..1.the parameteres are always changing ,so whats right one min is wrong the next and 2.the union could not risk unofficial industrial action due to information or disinformation leaked to the membership ,so please bear with the Executive they are on your side

Well said, Patience is a virtue few people seem to have these days.

pinstripe · Post by **pinstripe** » 21 Oct 2007, 21:21

DirtyHarry wrote:
felang13 wrote:Theres a reason the PEC don't keep you informed ..1.the parameteres are always changing ,so whats right one min is wrong the next and 2.the union could not risk unofficial industrial action due to information or disinformation leaked to the membership ,so please bear with the Executive they are on your side
Well said, Patience is a virtue few people seem to have these days.

Patience is a virtue, but having to wait 10 days at least, since they reached an agreement which will affect everyone of our working lives without even being told just what exactly they had agreed on our behalf, is a joke. How can they expect us to continue with the 'official' support when they don't tell us anything. Their continued silence is leaving us with 2 choices, either to cave in to RM or take matters into our own hands. Both alternatives are acceptable to RM. I thought we were the Union, but it seems that we only matter when the leadership needs the numbers for a strike or when they up the subs. Sorry but I've just about had enough, I can't believe they've made us wait this long without any info.

strangler · Post by **strangler** » 21 Oct 2007, 21:51

What secrecy clause? First I`ve heard of one.
Patience is a virtue? Do me a favour...

andy2007 · Post by **andy2007** » 22 Oct 2007, 08:59

strangler wrote:What secrecy clause? First I`ve heard of one.
Patience is a virtue? Do me a favour...

In the agreement to go back to the negotiating table. One of the clauses, was that only information agreed by both sides would be given to us. The rest would be kept secret.

I'm afraid I can't remember the exact wording

(perhaps someone else has a copy of it?

), but that is basically what it said.

dunposting · Post by **dunposting** » 22 Oct 2007, 11:51

Back to normal..

Is this now ever going to happen?
The only way to clear the back log is going to be by overtime.
If we all refuse overtime its classed as industrial action

So can we do overtime and still do the job correctly.

mrlovepantsuk · Post by **mrlovepantsuk** » 22 Oct 2007, 12:33

dunposting wrote:Back to normal..

The only way to clear the back log is going to be by overtime.
If we all refuse overtime its classed as industrial action

how can it be classed as ia, overtime is not compulsory, they cannot make you do it?

andy2007 · Post by **andy2007** » 22 Oct 2007, 12:56

mrlovepantsuk wrote:
dunposting wrote:Back to normal..

The only way to clear the back log is going to be by overtime.
If we all refuse overtime its classed as industrial action

how can it be classed as ia, overtime is not compulsory, they cannot make you do it?

The only exception, is if it's Scheduled Attendance (SA). Because you are contracted to do it. However, the only punnishment they can give for that, is to ban you from overtime......

Post by **POSTMAN** » 22 Oct 2007, 22:52

andy2007 wrote:
strangler wrote:What secrecy clause? First I`ve heard of one.
Patience is a virtue? Do me a favour...
In the agreement to go back to the negotiating table. One of the clauses, was that only information agreed by both sides would be given to us. The rest would be kept secret.

I'm afraid I can't remember the exact wording (perhaps someone else has a copy of it? ), but that is basically what it said.

Was just a Media Blackout while the talks were going on.
And interestingly word was at the 1st meeting,for 2 hrs they rowed about who leaked to the press where the talks were taking place.

ROYALMAILCHAT

Please no more 'why are we not informed '

Why the secrecy clause?!?!

It would require common sense!

Re: Please no more 'why are we not informed '

Re: Please no more 'why are we not informed '

Secrecy clause.

Back to normal..

Re: Back to normal..

Re: Back to normal..

Re: Secrecy clause.