bad deal for us

wakkono · Post by **wakkono** » 22 Oct 2007, 15:51

the deal cant be that bad cause the cwu would know if its a bad one the members would just vote no
where is the logic of agreeing a bad deal knowing it would be rejected?

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 22 Oct 2007, 15:59

wakkono wrote:the deal cant be that bad cause the cwu would know if its a bad one the members would just vote no
where is the logic of agreeing a bad deal knowing it would be rejected?

Politics - If they have been leaned on by Labour Party bigwigs (and no I don't know if they have its just a suggestion) to get a deal accepted for a commensurate deal applicable to themselves at a future juncture. (A Bung or a sly promise of things to come).

tiptreejam · Post by **tiptreejam** » 22 Oct 2007, 16:07

Politics - If they have been leaned on by Labour Party bigwigs (and no I don't know if they have its just a suggestion) to get a deal accepted for a commensurate deal applicable to themselves at a future juncture. (A Bung or a sly promise of things to come).

What about the judge who granted the injunction which stalled our momentum....was he leaned on by Gordon?(well, of course it happens, as we all know from the David Kelly/Hutton enquiry farce) Incidentally, shouldn't that judgement send shock waves through the whole trade union movement??

wakkono · Post by **wakkono** » 22 Oct 2007, 16:11

if thats the case then lets start off a no vote campaign

Midge · Post by **Midge** » 22 Oct 2007, 16:18

As usual, it seems, the union leadership would rather settle for a half-way house 'compromise' which compromises our terms and conditions, than lead an all-out fight to uncompromising victory.

If we need to tackle the new labour 'logic' on pensions, flexibility and liberalisation of postal services to fight Leighton and Croziers agenda properly.

Where is the leadership that is prepared to do this?

Some on the PEC wanted to fight, we need to kick the deal out to make the rest fight.

robd · Post by **robd** » 22 Oct 2007, 16:49

it'll be interesting to see,after very little in the way of media coverage,
will the CWU go into overdrive,promoting the fact they've secured a massive
5% pay rise for us.
the scenario,the public happy it's business as usual,Royal mail happy,and the
CWU claiming a result.
However,with xmas round the corner,it'll be left to the postman to decide if
any of santas parcels get through.
whatever this dispute has been about,it's clear everyones had a seperate
agenda,and ultimately everything comes down to money.
Greedy Postman....you decide?

tenpole tudorsack · Post by **tenpole tudorsack** » 22 Oct 2007, 16:58

I'LL VOTE "NO" SIMPLY ON TWO ISSUES... A SELLOUT ON FLEXIBILITY AND INCREASED DOOR TO DOORS FOR BUGGER ALL

wakkono · Post by **wakkono** » 22 Oct 2007, 17:02

ill second that tenpole

chayoliver · Post by **chayoliver** » 22 Oct 2007, 17:10

just let your customers know they dont have to except Door 2 Door leaflets ? so that'll solve that problem

wakkono · Post by **wakkono** » 22 Oct 2007, 17:21

dont agree with that dude i happen to like the Â£23 quid a week i get for em i look at it as money for fu ck all im going to every call at least once a week and it only takes 30 mins to slot em together
i picked a different duty 12 months ago so i lost my shift allowance so the cash from d2d more than covers the money i lost

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 22 Oct 2007, 17:48

Full text of agreement at http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/forum/vi ... php?t=6975

Post by **POSTMAN** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:44

New forum as well to discuss it in as well.
http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/forum/viewforum.php?f=25

ROYALMAILCHAT

bad deal for us

bad deal for us

Re: bad deal for us

Re: bad deal for us

Crappy compromise