FULL AGREEMENT

Fluke · Post by **Fluke** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:04

I agree its the same shite put differently, I honestly cant see what I gave up 8 days pay for so I will be voting NO!

Can we now get a petition going calling for the resignation of Hayes and Ward? I am sure some one on here could put a few words together, we can print the forms off then get our colleagues to sign them along with their union numbers. All we need then is central point to send them to.

goinpostal · Post by **goinpostal** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:04

DirtyHarry wrote:
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.

too right we will be working till were so old we will be delivering our own funeral notice mate

leader · Post by **leader** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:06

it is now abundantly clear the negotiators had no faith in the rank and file membership of this union. They have accepted rubbish on the basis it does not affect them and can get back to their mundane lives and let the members deal with the aftermath. I urge everyone to put out the message tomorrow vote NO!

We now have a situation that is a ticking time bomb in each office should HQ get their way.

WE ARE MANY THEY ARE FEW! VOTE NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!

harvey · Post by **harvey** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:06

just read the whole thing. billy and dave should do the honourable thing and resign after negotiating this pile of sh.te but then they're not honourable men are they? just parasites

madelin4 · Post by **madelin4** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:06

Not much on the job losses

Navy Bob · Post by **Navy Bob** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:06

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.

Well said

ROCKS · Post by **ROCKS** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:09

Word has it richard+judy,ant+dec,fiona phillips,blue peter cast,cowell,walsh,minogue+osborne r counting the votes guess wot will happen!!!!

Post by **Wessex** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:11

daor myselfing up fzzer79 wrote:Â£100s lost ...nothing gained !!!!!!!! union from me !!!! they wonder why postman walk through picket lines !!!

I'm proud of standing up for myself,it may have cost me money but I would do it again...."you can shop at Principals but you cant buy 'em."

mufc · Post by **mufc** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:11

at this point ,after reading the pitifull excuse of an agreement, i would like to thank those who went that extra bit further and stayed on the picket line those extra few days . I was on the picket line on every single day of the official industrial action and i cant begin to imagine how much money you guys lost. We all should have gone unofficial for those extra days and showed hayes and ward exactly what we are about. Liverpool,London and any other offices who walked i salute you

billypants · Post by **billypants** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:11

catch wrote:Late starts - no change except saturdays .

why . . . . can the lorries go faster on weekends then . . . coz that's supposedly why we've got these later starts

POSTMAN . . . . can you please change these icons to be Billy and Dave :lfo :cfo

billypants · Post by **billypants** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:13

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!!

We've only got a reasonable offer on paper . . . . don't forget that a good chunk of this money is from ESOS, money that they already owe us . . . . . so that's giving us a rise with our own money . . . . . nice trick

Sandyman · Post by **Sandyman** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:13

Flexibility:

"It is all about managers, reps and employees working together sensibly with a bit of give and take, applying equally to all. This is not about employees not knowing what job they are on, or when they start and finish from one day to the next. Nor is it about anyone refusing reasonable requests. Account should of course always be taken of individual circumstances."

Managers engaged in "give and take" & working "sensibly" ?

Managers "give"???????? That never has and never will happen. And as for "refusing reasonable requests", what If I go over 30 minutes one day and want it back the next day because of my "individual circumstances" - and that day is heavy too? They won't give it back at all. This wording is loaded one way - win/win for management, lose/lose for us.

Also, the original deal propagandered by RM said/lied "generous VR terms". This deal now offers even less for those who want to leave on EVR as it's not even mentioned!!!!! How the hell can the CWU have let them off the hook on that when they were the ones who were telling all and sundry about "40,000 job losses". Are those 40,000 jobs now safe or are they just waiting for us to to get absolutely peed off and leave, any EVR payment savings made to go to the Laurel and Hardy bonus fund.

And we all know what the "agreed locally" clauses mean - the powers on high decide, the puppet DUM's meekly obey, and common sense goes out of the window. I / we didn't strike for such a vaccuous deal.

X in the No box from me.

dongash · Post by **dongash** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:14

hayes and ward, no different than leighton and crozier!

DirtyHarry · Post by **DirtyHarry** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:14

mdlmrk wrote:glad im leaving royal mail in december,but i will use my vote and go with the majority who reject this deal..i did not stay out for all the strikes just to shaft my m8s when i leave...

You sir, are a DIAMOND GEEZER.

Unlike the w****r from MARGATE.

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 22 Oct 2007, 20:15

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.

You think the deal is bad and your leaving soon but you are going to vote Yes - now that is low. You could at least not vote rather than vote for something you disagree with.

ROYALMAILCHAT

FULL AGREEMENT

thankyou

Re: eh??