FULL AGREEMENT

Dan Gleebitz · Post by **Dan Gleebitz** » 23 Oct 2007, 15:25

Well This morning I couldn't believe what I was hearing, our Union Rep saying the agreement was worth a yes vote.

His words were, " I've read the agreement and it's about 80% good 20% bad.

Like I said in an earlier post, looks like it's time to jump ship brothers.

Post by **disheartened** » 23 Oct 2007, 15:25

Crackerjackpencil wrote:Oh so much for the much vaunted section of the agreement "we shall have a 60 day consultation on it..." Perhaps they did and they didn't notice whilst they negotiated our lives away.

PENSIONS

Any pension reform has been formally de-coupled from the pay agreement.

However, the Union has secured many key principles to take into a formal 90 day pensionsâ€™ consultation process. These principles include

Full protection of final salary to accrued service benefits
The final salary scheme to be replaced for the future by a similar defined benefits scheme.
The right to retire at 60 for existing scheme members.
The option to take pension at 60 with un-reduced past service benefits and to continue working.
The ability to negotiate a new scheme for new entrants.
The existing accrued rates to be maintained. (1/80th and 1/60th)

On the subject of pensions Dave Ward, Deputy General Secretary said: â€œThe companyâ€™s intention was to strip out Â£1.6billion from the pensions deficit by taking it directly from workersâ€™ benefits. This has now been put back in and any proposals will be subject to further discussion with the Union and a separate ballot of the workforce at a later dateâ€

meweavy · Post by **meweavy** » 23 Oct 2007, 15:27

heedbloke wrote:dunno if this has been said, but wot about the idiots who will only see a Â£175 lump sum dangling before their eyes and vote yes......... hope they see sense..

:lfo :cfo ....is there not one for ward and hayes............!!

anyone who only see,s this Â£175 is blind..the robbing f***ers have taking our back pay,and to offer half of it back is insulting..

tenpole tudorsack · Post by **tenpole tudorsack** » 23 Oct 2007, 15:28

CHINESE PUZZLE COMES TO MIND, OR... LET'S MIX UP THE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS, MOVE THEM AROUND A BIT AND HOPE NO-ONE REALISES THAT RM HAS GOT MOST OF WHAT IT WANTS!!!

meweavy · Post by **meweavy** » 23 Oct 2007, 15:31

tenpole tudorsack wrote:CHINESE PUZZLE COMES TO MIND, OR... LET'S MIX UP THE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS, MOVE THEM AROUND A BIT AND HOPE NO-ONE REALISES THAT RM HAS GOT MOST OF WHAT IT WANTS!!!

why is it the only people that seem to see through this s**t deal is those it will effect the most...
is there not one working brain cell in that room when they have these talks or what...how gullible can our union leaders be?

goinpostal · Post by **goinpostal** » 23 Oct 2007, 15:32

Yeah like in a sentence "i think your a bastard" only 20% of it is negative!

catch · Post by **catch** » 23 Oct 2007, 15:35

meweavy wrote:
heedbloke wrote:dunno if this has been said, but wot about the idiots who will only see a Â£175 lump sum dangling before their eyes and vote yes......... hope they see sense..

:lfo :cfo ....is there not one for ward and hayes............!!
anyone who only see,s this Â£175 is blind..the robbing f***ers have taking our back pay,and to offer half of it back is insulting..

Worse than that.

Taken your back pay then they've pickpocketed your ESOS money and handed it back to you in the hope everyone's forgotten about it pretending it's back pay.

Woody6 · Post by **Woody6** » 23 Oct 2007, 15:38

Its a NO from me but have got a horrible feeling they will get a yes vote.I have read the deal on hear and also had the managers brief last night they both say different things.I don't suppose we will get to see the deal in full (another Way forward/PBS con).

meweavy · Post by **meweavy** » 23 Oct 2007, 15:49

so if we vote against this deal and it doesnt go through...will we get the unions backing on more strikes..or will they bottle that aswell..and it will be wildcat strikes because this union has basically taken it up the arse by r.m and expects us to do the same...

we wil get the unions backing if we vote no on this deal..

meweavy · Post by **meweavy** » 23 Oct 2007, 15:50

meweavy wrote:so if we vote against this deal and it doesnt go through...will we get the unions backing on more strikes..or will they bottle that aswell..and it will be wildcat strikes because this union has basically taken it up the arse by r.m and expects us to do the same...

we wil get the unions backing if we vote no on this deal..

will we get the unions backing rather...

tenpole tudorsack · Post by **tenpole tudorsack** » 23 Oct 2007, 15:51

THEY WILL HAVE TO BACK US IF WE GET A MAJORITY "NO" VOTE

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 23 Oct 2007, 15:52

meweavy wrote:
meweavy wrote:so if we vote against this deal and it doesnt go through...will we get the unions backing on more strikes..or will they bottle that aswell..and it will be wildcat strikes because this union has basically taken it up the arse by r.m and expects us to do the same...

we wil get the unions backing if we vote no on this deal..
will we get the unions backing rather...

Yes ----- they work for us not the other way round - if we vote it out with even a majority of 1 they have to try to negotiate a better deal as its what the members want. So in essence yes they have to back us.

meweavy · Post by **meweavy** » 23 Oct 2007, 15:59

TrueBlueTerrier wrote:
meweavy wrote:
meweavy wrote:so if we vote against this deal and it doesnt go through...will we get the unions backing on more strikes..or will they bottle that aswell..and it will be wildcat strikes because this union has basically taken it up the arse by r.m and expects us to do the same...

we wil get the unions backing if we vote no on this deal..
will we get the unions backing rather...
Yes ----- they work for us not the other way round - if we vote it out with even a majority of 1 they have to try to negotiate a better deal as its what the members want. So in essence yes they have to back us.

ok cheers for the info..

ive just read through the deal,properly and not skipped any parts(well apart from the bonus scheme part,lets be honest thats not really worth reading as we aint going to see any of that anyway)...
and it is absolute shite..so definatel a big NO from me..

meweavy · Post by **meweavy** » 23 Oct 2007, 16:02

as for the flexibilty and covering other peoples work..thats not going to work whatever way they look at it..how can you do any more work,when you work up to youre time on youre duty...how can they make you do any extra work...i dont get it..or is this where the extra hour comes into play when theyve taking it off youre "light

"tuesday.

Dan Gleebitz · Post by **Dan Gleebitz** » 23 Oct 2007, 16:10

linkinpark wrote:
Dan Gleebitz wrote:Well This morning I couldn't believe what I was hearing, our Union Rep saying the agreement was worth a yes vote.

His words were, " I've read the agreement and it's about 80% good 20% bad.

Like I said in an earlier post, looks like it's time to jump ship brothers.

No it aint its time to FIGHT for your job!

Not if you are going to find another job it ain't.