ANNOUNCEMENT : ALL OF ROYAL MAIL'S EMPLOYMENT POLICIES (AGREEMENTS) AT A GLANCE (Updated 2021)... HERE

ANNOUNCEMENT : PLEASE BE AWARE WE ARE NOT ON FACEBOOK AT ALL!

FULL AGREEMENT

Got a question for a CWU Rep? And all CWU related matters.
TrueBlueTerrier
FORUM ADMINISTRATOR
Posts: 72596
Joined: 30 Dec 2006, 10:29
Gender: Male
Location: On my couch

Post by TrueBlueTerrier »

South East Postie wrote:
TrueBlueTerrier wrote:
South East Postie wrote:SCAB
Sorry South East Postie he has a different opinion to you but as it has not yet gone to vote IMO you should not call him a scab. On this site, yes you can use the word, a scab is

a. A worker who refuses membership in the union.
b. An employee who works while others are on strike; a strikebreaker.
c. A person hired to replace a striking worker.

So although I disagree with the agreement - I cant accept the term Scab on this agreement until the vote is in.

However, this is just my opinion and I dont want people on different sides of an argument calling each other names as it just denigrates yours and my position. Try arguing against his point rather than calling him a scab.
im very sorry TBT, i will not withdraw my comments, as i stand by them, you may delete me from the site if you wish.
No wont delete you,- I fully support your position just flagged up what I think a scab is. I think DVB is wrong and I will vote no - but as we have not yet voted I wont call him a scab just a misguided postman who is perhaps guilty of a bit of short-sightedness.

Also will never delete anyone as 1. I cant. 2. Your are a good member of the forum. Perhaps we should leave it at that and say we have the same opinion on the offer just not those who want to accept it.

Solidarity.
Last edited by TrueBlueTerrier on 22 Oct 2007, 19:44, edited 1 time in total.
All post by me in Green are Admin Posts.
Any post in any other colour is my own responsibility.
If you like a news story I posted please click the link to show support Any news stories you can't post - PM me with a link
My sharing of news articles should not be interpreted as an endorsement or condemnation of any particular viewpoint or the issues presented. I share them solely for informational purposes.
South East Postie
Posts: 154
Joined: 14 May 2007, 13:25
Gender: Male

Post by South East Postie »

where is tommo !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
South East Postie
Posts: 154
Joined: 14 May 2007, 13:25
Gender: Male

Post by South East Postie »

TrueBlueTerrier wrote:
South East Postie wrote:
TrueBlueTerrier wrote:
South East Postie wrote:SCAB
Sorry South East Postie he has a different opinion to you but as it has not yet gone to vote IMO you should not call him a scab. On this site, yes you can use the word, a scab is

a. A worker who refuses membership in the union.
b. An employee who works while others are on strike; a strikebreaker.
c. A person hired to replace a striking worker.

So although I disagree with the agreement - I cant accept the term Scab on this agreement until the vote is in.

However, this is just my opinion and I dont want people on different sides of an argument calling each other names as it just denigrates yours and my position. Try arguing against his point rather than calling him a scab.
im very sorry TBT, i will not withdraw my comments, as i stand by them, you may delete me from the site if you wish.
No wont delete you,- I fully support your position just flagged up what I think a scab is. I think DVB is wrong and I will vote no - but as we have not yet voted I wont call him a scab just a misguided postman who is perhaps guilty of a bit of short-sightedness.

Also will never delete anyone as 1. I cant. 2. Your are a good member of the forum. Perhaps we should leave it at that and say we have the same opinion on the offer just not those who want to accept it.

Solidarity.
fair play mate. i admit i may have overstepped the mark but im just fuming as what we have got here. good luck to us all.
Last edited by South East Postie on 22 Oct 2007, 19:45, edited 1 time in total.
blackadder
Posts: 584
Joined: 04 Jul 2007, 20:49
Location: deep south

Post by blackadder »

any1 wana remind me why we went on strike in th 1st place ?? oh yeah it was to refuse the deal that the union has just accepted. now can any1 tell me why i should pay £3 a week in future for them back stabbing ba**ards ??

vote no
the path of my life is strewn with cowpats from the devils own satanic herd
arsenalbob
EX ROYAL MAIL
Posts: 338
Joined: 17 Jun 2007, 15:34

Post by arsenalbob »

the last time a recommended yes vote was overturned was in 1849. be warned the ballot will be rigged
TrueBlueTerrier
FORUM ADMINISTRATOR
Posts: 72596
Joined: 30 Dec 2006, 10:29
Gender: Male
Location: On my couch

Post by TrueBlueTerrier »

blackadder wrote:any1 wana remind me why we went on strike in th 1st place ?? oh yeah it was to refuse the deal that the union has just accepted. now can any1 tell me why i should pay £3 a week in future for them back stabbing ba**ards ??

vote no
Perhaps those of us voting No will give you a reason. I hope so. :Very Happy
All post by me in Green are Admin Posts.
Any post in any other colour is my own responsibility.
If you like a news story I posted please click the link to show support Any news stories you can't post - PM me with a link
My sharing of news articles should not be interpreted as an endorsement or condemnation of any particular viewpoint or the issues presented. I share them solely for informational purposes.
tomangoe
Posts: 117
Joined: 10 Apr 2007, 18:47

Post by tomangoe »

IT APPEARS TO ME THAT THIS PILE OF SHITE AGREEMENT IS ALL ABOUT THE TOP BODS OF THE UNION TRYING TO HANG ONTO POWER AND NOT BEING TOTALLY SIDELINED BY ROYAL MAIL.iT'S NOT ABOUT POSTMEN AND WOMEN AS ANYONE WITH ANY NOUS ABOUT DELIVERY WOULD KNOW THERE AREN'T ANY EASY SUMMERS OR EASY TUESDAYS AND i FOR ONE AIN'T DOING ANYMORE WORK-I'M TOTALLY EXHAUSTED NOW WHEN i FINISHE MY WALK WITHOUT DOING A NINE HOUR FRIDAY.BILLY AND DAVE SHOULD TRY DOING A DELIVERY FOR A MONTH AND THEY'D SEE THAT WHAT THEY'VE AGREED IS EXACTLY WHAT ROYAL MAIL WANTED ALL ALONG.WE HAVE WON NOTHING WITH THIS AGREEMENT,WE'VE LOST EVERYTHING WE WERE FIGHTING FOR.fORGET A BALLOT WE NEED AN EMERGENCY UNION CONFERENCE TO GET THE LEADERSHIP CHUCKED OUT AND PEOPLE IN WITH A BIT OF BOTTLE AND UNDERSTANDING AS TO JUST HOW PISSED OFF WE ALL ARE :so there
larsson1971
Posts: 78
Joined: 01 Jun 2007, 20:03
Location: Renfrewshire, SCOTLAND

Post by larsson1971 »

THERE COULD BE TROUBLE AHEAD . :cfo :lfo
Delivery Driver , a good 1
dodger71
Posts: 39
Joined: 05 Sep 2007, 17:36
Gender: Female
Location: right here right now

WHAT A JOKE

Post by dodger71 »

THEY EXPECT US TO ACCEPT THAT PILE OF SH*T MOR F*UCKIN STRINGS THAN A PUPPET SHOW (D2D PENSIONS) IF BILLY AND DAVE ARE READING THIS POST THEN "FU*KIN WAKE UP"

ALL YOU HAVE DONE IS HELPED RM DESTROY THE UNION TO EVEN CONSIDER THIS IS A CRIME


IF THIS GETS PASSED THROUGH THERE WILL BE THOUSANDS LEAVING THE CWU AND I CANT BLAME THEM...FU*k IT WE MIGHT AS WELL WORK AT TESCOS THAN ACCEPT THE SAME DEAL WE WENT ON STRIKE FOR

*********VOTE NO UNTIL :cfo AND :lfo GO***************
I FEEL LIKE A BITCH FOR AC AND AL
k979aaa
Posts: 12578
Joined: 03 Sep 2007, 19:14
Gender: Male
Location: THE NORTH

Re: Scab Definition

Post by k979aaa »

mailjock wrote:Personally I can't agree that a person who doesn't join a union in a workplace should be termed a scab. Every has the legal right not to join a union and closed-shops will never return. I actually happen to believe that it is a human right to be able to make the choice of whether to join a union or not.

And Btw I have known many non-union members respect picket lines and not cross them so how can they possibly be described as strike breakers.

strike breakers to me are union members who cross official picket lines where a democratic strike decision has been reached or non-union members who are hired to strike break.
Yes you are right some non member's don't even know how useful or how to become member's of the union this is why the union has membership campaign's.
DirtyHarry
Posts: 5051
Joined: 13 May 2007, 23:16
Gender: Male
Location: London

Re: eh??

Post by DirtyHarry »

jungle boogie wrote:SORRY IF THIS PISSES PEOPLE OFF! ive just read the entire statement and wasnt exactly overwhelmed to say the least but i think its a reasonable offer and should be accepted,i understand all the 'to be agreed locally' is bollocks but the pay offer is better than the firemen and the nurses got and they save lives,im not undermining our jobs because i know first hand how much the job has changed just in the last few months so i think we should pull together and understand the need for change or we are going to get shafted with everything.the strikes have achieved alot of things,i think the pros outweigh the cons so lets all stop ranting and just get on with our easyish jobs earn a decent pay and enjoy life!!
No thanks. :so there
goinpostal
Posts: 395
Joined: 05 Jun 2007, 00:09
Gender: Female

Post by goinpostal »

pistol wrote:Hm food for thought indeed, much of a muchness really aint it....a little give on one side..a lot of take from the other..it's down to personal preference really as to wether you got movement in your chosen area of importance.(pensions,flexibility,etc) my thoughts go out to offices that have No/weak Reps..the dums at those offices must be rubbing thier hands together and foaming at the mouth.Take everything on board and weigh up all your local pro's and cons before jumping in with the masses and start screaming yes or no..
Why weigh up the local pros and cons when we can vote a big massive f***ing no? They let local offices deal with job cuts with the efficiency agreement and look where that got us - Manvers, Stoke, Burslem, and we only know about them because they fought, how about all the offices that knuckled under without a fight? Letting them siphon off the major issues for "joint working groups" that will do a similar dodgy deal on them is divide and rule like somebody said. Leaving local offices to agree the flexibility stuff is deliberately allowing RM to get it through in 90% of the places, and then maybe tweak things a bit everywhere else. That approach - the Ward and Hayes approach - would be a disaster.

Its not just about this or that bit about the deal, it is about abandoning a strike right at the point when it was massively successful, to negotiate this piece of shite. Twice now. With members left for days (or in august september, weeks) without being told in order to "cool them down". That is treachery, they are all a bunch of bureaucrats who do not represent our interests because they dont share them, theyre well pade and have got a nice comfy office life where everything is about meeting royal mail and pushing little proposals over the table at each other. Out with them all.

What we need to do is win a massive no vote and start demanding the strikes resume. Talk to staff, one by one if necessary, to get a majority on board, and sign statements and send them in demanding the strikes are restarted.

We need a rank and file meeting asap, what are the times and place for this national one on sunday? Every single person on this website should get there and bring anyone they can with them, get your branch behind it too. 4000 people is a hell of a lot, everyone of those people is in an office. And if we had a rank and file movement we would be able to attract far more people, because then the people in your office know its not just you, the lad/lass who always comes up and chews on their ear about striking, standing up to the boss, but that it is a real movement.

We should demand the leftwingers who voted against it come out of the shadows and lead a fight against it. We didn't vote for them to just sit in meetings and raise your hand, if they are real lefts they will break their vow of silence and loyalty to their NEC mates and condemn them, and come out fighting and campaigning against the deal. So send them an email while your at it!

Dont leave the union, that is exactly what ward and hayes want, they want the militant wing to be downhearted and give up. No way, too much is at stake, and we can win it. Unite and fight!

:lfo :cfo
Join Labour, defend Corbyn from the Right, and fight for socialist policies
borderscot
Posts: 87
Joined: 05 Oct 2007, 12:35

Post by borderscot »

perhaps the PEC have read something in that agreement that no one else can see

Just say NO
DirtyHarry
Posts: 5051
Joined: 13 May 2007, 23:16
Gender: Male
Location: London

Post by DirtyHarry »

Margate Postman wrote:my pension isnt directly involved yet so ill be voting yes. its time to accept change, im just pleased im retiring soon. the job once was decent and now look at it.
So, because YOU'RE retiring soon, the rest of us looking at YEARS and YEARS working for this shower of b'stards, should "accept it's time to change."

Two words, FECK OFF.
chayoliver
Posts: 243
Joined: 16 Jul 2007, 11:24

Re: eh??

Post by chayoliver »

DirtyHarry wrote:
jungle boogie wrote:SORRY IF THIS PISSES PEOPLE OFF! ive just read the entire statement and wasnt exactly overwhelmed to say the least but i think its a reasonable offer and should be accepted,i understand all the 'to be agreed locally' is bollocks but the pay offer is better than the firemen and the nurses got and they save lives,im not undermining our jobs because i know first hand how much the job has changed just in the last few months so i think we should pull together and understand the need for change or we are going to get shafted with everything.the strikes have achieved alot of things,i think the pros outweigh the cons so lets all stop ranting and just get on with our easyish jobs earn a decent pay and enjoy life!!
No thanks. :so there
You couldn't make this up could you, where do these people come from, people like this obviously gladly pull out a white flag for fun :arrrghhh
No Surrender