So what have we acheived?

Post by **stephen500** » 22 Oct 2007, 14:17

Well we set off as a united union seeking to stand up to a management seeking to impose its will on us in the most dracoian fashion.

Many members lost quite a few days pay. Not all were happy to lose that pay, but had one thing and that was integrity.

We believed in what we were opposing.

1) flexibilty including loss of overtime.

2) free d2ds

3) dilution of pensions and a latter retirement age

4) loss of mtsc, pay protection and evr terms

So what have we acheived by negotiation and strikes?

I for one will be fumming if after a loss of pay we have given substanial ground in any of these areas!

The Pec will do well to remember that we will not forget!

Post by **weetrogg** » 22 Oct 2007, 14:27

No matter what comes of this deal,WE the membeship can be proud of the way we have defended our livlyhoods and if as i suspect this deal is shite the national leadership should hang there heads in shame

if this is the case we the membership need to change quickly and drastically to have people who lead OUR union that are more representative of the workforce

Thank you everybody, you ve made proud to be a postal worker

NEVER forget or forgive the strike breakers!!!!

WE are the union

meweavy · Post by **meweavy** » 22 Oct 2007, 14:32

weetrogg wrote:No matter what comes of this deal,WE the membeship can be proud of the way we have defended our livlyhoods and if as i suspect this deal is shite the national leadership should hang there heads in shame if this is the case we the membership need to change quickly and drastically to have people who lead OUR union that are more representative of the workforce

Thank you everybody, you ve made proud to be a postal worker

NEVER forget or forgive the strike breakers!!!!

WE are the union

i agree completely,but after all the striking and the solidarity between all those who did go out the door,we deserve to get a bit more respect from both the union and r/m..

i just hope we havnt striked for nothing...we have to get something out of this deal otherwise whats the point.

catch · Post by **catch** » 22 Oct 2007, 14:42

if this is the case we the membership need to change quickly and drastically to have people who lead OUR union that are more representative of the workforce

Didn't this happen with Johnson/Keggie? Presumably Hayes/Ward got in to their present positions as a result of similar efforts no? I think far more fundamental issues are raised by the past three months (both within the post and what's been happening in other sectors) than a crisis of leadership.

Post by **weetrogg** » 22 Oct 2007, 14:53

catch wrote:
if this is the case we the membership need to change quickly and drastically to have people who lead OUR union that are more representative of the workforce
Didn't this happen with Johnson/Keggie? Presumably Hayes/Ward got in to their present positions as a result of similar efforts no? I think far more fundamental issues are raised by the past three months (both within the post and what's been happening in other sectors) than a crisis of leadership.

You are quite right, like maybe look at the make up the p.e.c. Could reserve say 5 places on th pec for area/divisional reps, i welcome any suggestions that make us more democratic and representative

WE are the union

:lfo :cfo :lfo :cfo

catch · Post by **catch** » 22 Oct 2007, 15:20

Whoever you get into either of those positions is going to end up in the same situation (of selling the membership or not behind fairly closed doors) no matter how 'radical' or representative they are - it's a structural issue with trade unions in general, and can't be fixed by tweaking. I don't think there's much option other than to take the stand that Liverpool did - to stay out until the written agreements are in your own hands (and then until the disputes are won) - controlling things directly at a shop floor level independently from the union apparatus. It's a shame things have taken (are taking?) so long, they would've been out nearly three weeks by now, and that only Leeds joined them last week, so that tendency has been both isolated and stretched beyond breaking point when there's not even anything to reject yet.

If you have this stuff going on, then yes it forces the leadership to take firmer stances (or actually come out openly against you which isn't all that rare an occurrence when things get to a certain point), but that's a side effect of self-organisation and militancy and shouldn't be its end goal. The way this site has functioned over the past 3-4 months shows some of the possibilities there are - direct communication between offices, open discussion of tactics etc. I think the barriers have been 1. the lack of anything notable happening in the rest of the public sector, even by now. 2. the expectation that the leadership would at least try to do their job properly (even if that means some concessions and flip flopping) - rather than the incompetence we've seen since August which borders on active hampering or criminal negligence.

It'd be a shame to see the experience of the past 3-6 months and the momentum built up diverted into getting rid of Hayes/Ward, cutting Labour party funding or the rank and filist 'reclaim the union' stuff being promoted by some of the left groups. People in trade unions across the world have been trying stuff like that for decades, and it ends up with the same perennial problems of bureaucratisation and leadership in the end (not that I think you should keep Hayes/Ward or Labour part funding but they're not the fundamental issues at stake). I don't have any great programme as an alternative to this, I'm mainly on here to keep up with events and try to circulate information both ways on how things are going, but the most promising stuff for me is the mass meetings - offices could be holding these to decide on whether to accept the deal or not as Liverpool was (and might still be) planning, rather than rely on carefully worded ballot literature - and this forum can be used to pick the deal apart (as has happened with the previous versions and leaks) to give people ammunition at those meetings. Also there really needs to be a structure set up parallel to the union which can take action on its own initiative including unofficial i/a if it's a stitch up (as looks likely).

With pensions and flexibility, there might not be a next time to prepare for - as soon as there's a two tier workforce (or anything similar), it'll be easy for RM to can it with 5-10 years when enough people are on the new system to swing a vote.

Post by **weetrogg** » 22 Oct 2007, 15:26

Your spot on catch

Post by **dvbuk55** » 22 Oct 2007, 18:33

A thoughtful and well written piece.

It puts things in perspective. You have to play the hand you're dealt.

catch · Post by **catch** » 22 Oct 2007, 19:20

So all out this week then?

johnnybignose · Post by **johnnybignose** » 22 Oct 2007, 19:56

And I remember when were to get 4 possible pay rises in the last crap deal [shaping our future]. 1.5% in april for total flexibility....im sorry its crap.

k979aaa · Post by **k979aaa** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:30

johnnybignose wrote:And I remember when were to get 4 possible pay rises in the last crap deal [shaping our future]. 1.5% in april for total flexibility....im sorry its crap.

Make's the way foward agreement seam like the deal of the century!.