I agree with all of RM's proposals bar 1

[banner]

I take it that anyone who doesn't like seniority would not be then bothered if some one were to barge in front of them if they were queuing in a shop.

Utter nonsense.

It's funny how all these new entrants act like seniority is evil and that anyone who has some never got treated the way they do now....

Well I've been with Royal Mail 23ish years and spent the 1st part of my career as a reserve we got chucked on single rounds sometimes more than 1 a day...

Whole weeks spare getting pulled off rounds just as you had bagged up to be put on a round a female colleague had cried about then you found the other walk hadn't been touched!

No shared vans so no one to hold your hand on the way round

I am only in the middle of the pack and can tell you I have always thought seniority is the fairest way! am I envious or jealous of the top 10 senior posties in my office no not one bit they deserve it

How very sad.

Doesn't make it right.
Maybe if things changed some offices wouldn't be down to the bare bones because new starters are treated like sh*te and forever jack it in.

"But hey its always been like that".
That's a post persons motto isn't it ?

Christ I give up !

I welcome a big shake up and I think its on its way !
ATB
Graham

So who altered the fact that seniority is meant to be a fluid process to allow it to take effect? Any spare rounds should always be available to pick. Are the postal workers responsible for changing that policy? It is Royal Mail management who have changed this and they know it will cause division and in turn cause resentment towards seniority.
You want to compare delivering mail to other companies that don't have seniority? There is no comparison with people on production lines, warehouse workers or supermarket workers who can interchange without many consequences.
There is local knowledge of the layout of areas, familiarity with customers habits, dangers and obstacles etc...
The vacant duties and absorb duties always have the highest complaints against them and always receive the poorest service out of the rounds in an office.

You keep going on about how bad seniority is but can you explain the replacement system? If there isn't a process to decide who does what then it must be down to management to decide. How will that not lead to favouritism? How will that not lead to the biggest moaners and dead wood getting the easiest duties whilst the grafters get shafted? How will that improve the life of new starters?

[jetblack]

.... if you truly want solidarity, and you think the Union is there for all, not just yourself, then in my honest opinion you accept the outcome of the vote or leave the Union.

Its one thing for a union member to believe a no vote is the best option (deluded as that might be) but its an entirely different thing for a union member to ignore the democratic mandate.
Compulsory expulsion from the union.

I would like to see also some kind of a setup whereby those constantly backing the employer be on the terms and conditions put forward by the employer - and union members be on terms and conditions brought about by collective bargaining and workers solidarity (and sacrifice). That would be the only type of two tier workforce I would like to see.
Watch union membership swell and surge then.

[Driver74]

I don't really understand all the complaints about seniority it's the only system that treats everyone fairly and doesn't discriminate against anyone all the senior people in the office have done their time at the bottom same as everyone else and years ago ago there were duties that were far easier than the rest of the office these were the senior duties but I don't remember anyone complaining it wasn't fair, just remember everybody has started from the same position

[Spedley]

I go with you Driver74. It has it's problems but as a general rule seniority is a good starting place.

[fishtank]

But why is it everyone in my office would be quite happy to start as early as possible and head out in the dark if they could?

It's probably because they have experience that you don't.
There are major differences between delivering in the dark in the morning and at night, in the morning there's less traffic, it's getting lighter, it's getting warmer, there are no drunks falling out of pubs, people haven't just got home from work and let the dog out for a piss, walking conditions improve as the sun comes up. All of these things are reversed at night but the biggest difference and the one that will lead to a dramatic increase in slips, trips and falls is fatigue. If you start your delivery in the dark you're alert and your energy levels are high, by the time fatigue starts to play a part in your decision making it's light and the extra danger posed by working in the dark has passed. If you are working in the dark at night after a 5 hr delivery you are far more likely to make mistakes, dangerous mistakes.

It's not rocket science and most posties with any kind of delivery experience know these things.

[mark.cup]

Glfp

How am I sad for respecting people who have served the company longer than I have?

I guess you don't have any seniority hence the bitterness?

[chrisj]

Two things to pick up:

The Union is a closed shop and whether the member likes the Union or not, it is Union that RM recognises as the representative of the workers.
Collective bargaining means in or out of the Union, the postie is still bound by its decisions and agreement.

The way to operate in a one-party state is to join that party and try to influence things. It is not just about solidarity for everyone. Some no votes will also concentrate the minds of the Union officials.

Second, why continue to give a mandate to people that comes up with agreement that you will end up voting against? That is not right! It is like saying we should trust the likes of Tony Blair when he says we should get involved with the war in Syria...

Just because our boys are fighting a war does not mean we have to support the tenants of the war. And when the times comes to put the boys in harm's way again, we should not blindly give consent as before.

So stop saying people should leave the Union - we are not the army, it is a democracy and we cannot all agree and perhaps it is unhealthy to all agree. People need to chill - you get your YES vote and the fun starts. Buckle up!

[kookoo32]

But why is it everyone in my office would be quite happy to start as early as possible and head out in the dark if they could?

It's probably because they have experience that you don't.
There are major differences between delivering in the dark in the morning and at night, in the morning there's less traffic, it's getting lighter, it's getting warmer, there are no drunks falling out of pubs, people haven't just got home from work and let the dog out for a piss, walking conditions improve as the sun comes up. All of these things are reversed at night but the biggest difference and the one that will lead to a dramatic increase in slips, trips and falls is fatigue. If you start your delivery in the dark you're alert and your energy levels are high, by the time fatigue starts to play a part in your decision making it's light and the extra danger posed by working in the dark has passed. If you are working in the dark at night after a 5 hr delivery you are far more likely to make mistakes, dangerous mistakes.

It's not rocket science and most posties with any kind of delivery experience know these things.

I yearn for the good old days delivering in the dark mornings where I have been smashed into by the paperboy on his bike, fallen up/down flights of stairs, slipped on icy paths, stood on countless piles of dog crap, been almost hit by vehicles who didn't expect to see anyone on the go that early in the morning. I have 20+ years delivery experience and would rather take my chances delivering late in the dark and I say this as someone who lives in the North of Scotland where it can be dark at 3pm in winter.

[jetblack]

So stop saying people should leave the Union.

Don't know if its my post you are referring to - but I didn't say they should leave the union. I said that anyone that is in the union and breaks a strike should be expelled from the union. That is pragmatics as much as anything else - can't have rogue elements subverting the democratic mandate. God knows, the Trade Union Act has set the bar high enough as it is with the new regs on IA - christ, if we do get a yes vote it will have more legitimacy than a lot of political parties/politicians mandates. And if, in spite of this, individual union members choose to break that strike they should, in my view, be immediately expelled from the CWU. They, as individuals, are anti-democratic, surely ? Self interested rogue states, sort of. I personally will be pushing for compulsory expulsions at branch should this unfortunate situation occur with reference to strike breaking on my watch.
Lets remember here that we aren't having a dispute over wether boys should be allowed to wear skirts at school - we are fighting for the terms and conditions of ordinary working people ie. ourselves. Its pretty straight forward. A lot of us stand to be between £20k and £50k worse off in our retirement - yet Wall Street and the City are pulling £400,000,000 per year from our feet on the street. Yet some here have spat their dummies out cos someone else is getting a Mars bar and they are only getting a Snickers.

[Acca Dacca]

So stop saying people should leave the Union.

Don't know if its my post you are referring to - but I didn't say they should leave the union. I said that anyone that is in the union and breaks a strike should be expelled from the union. That is pragmatics as much as anything else - can't have rogue elements subverting the democratic mandate. God knows, the Trade Union Act has set the bar high enough as it is with the new regs on IA - christ, if we do get a yes vote it will have more legitimacy than a lot of political parties/politicians mandates. And if, in spite of this, individual union members choose to break that strike they should, in my view, be immediately expelled from the CWU. They, as individuals, are anti-democratic, surely ? Self interested rogue states, sort of. I personally will be pushing for compulsory expulsions at branch should this unfortunate situation occur with reference to strike breaking on my watch.
Lets remember here that we aren't having a dispute over wether boys should be allowed to wear skirts at school - we are fighting for the terms and conditions of ordinary working people ie. ourselves. Its pretty straight forward. A lot of us stand to be between £20k and £50k worse off in our retirement - yet Wall Street and the City are pulling £400,000,000 per year from our feet on the street. Yet some here have spat their dummies out cos someone else is getting a Mars bar and they are only getting a Snickers.

You and others keep saying we are losing tens of thousands in retirement.
DC members are losing nothing
Would you be happy if some your colleagues got £20-50k more than you in retirement despite doing same job?
Its hardly Mars n Snickers
If DB are losing as much as you say they are then DC are quite right to feel shafted given we weren't getting the 20-50k to even lose!

[cloherty1976]

So stop saying people should leave the Union.

Don't know if its my post you are referring to - but I didn't say they should leave the union. I said that anyone that is in the union and breaks a strike should be expelled from the union. That is pragmatics as much as anything else - can't have rogue elements subverting the democratic mandate. God knows, the Trade Union Act has set the bar high enough as it is with the new regs on IA - christ, if we do get a yes vote it will have more legitimacy than a lot of political parties/politicians mandates. And if, in spite of this, individual union members choose to break that strike they should, in my view, be immediately expelled from the CWU. They, as individuals, are anti-democratic, surely ? Self interested rogue states, sort of. I personally will be pushing for compulsory expulsions at branch should this unfortunate situation occur with reference to strike breaking on my watch.
Lets remember here that we aren't having a dispute over wether boys should be allowed to wear skirts at school - we are fighting for the terms and conditions of ordinary working people ie. ourselves. Its pretty straight forward. A lot of us stand to be between £20k and £50k worse off in our retirement - yet Wall Street and the City are pulling £400,000,000 per year from our feet on the street. Yet some here have spat their dummies out cos someone else is getting a Mars bar and they are only getting a Snickers.

If the city is pulling in £400,000,000 then the posties could be pulling in £40,000,000 and if the CWU expelled members surely that would hurt them in the pocket too. Just a thought

[clashcityrocker]

- can't have rogue elements subverting the democratic mandate.

So nobody is allowed a conscience?
Nobody is allowed to think for themselves?
How many times would Corbyn have been expelled from the Labour Party then?

I always thought my union was a broad church.
I like it that way. I don't really like this "my way or the highway " view of things.

If one of my colleagues walks across my picket line I don't think they should be expelled from my union.
Rather I think that I have failed in my role as a trade unionist to convince them that my arguments should prevail.

[banner]

- can't have rogue elements subverting the democratic mandate.

So nobody is allowed a conscience?
Nobody is allowed to think for themselves?
How many times would Corbyn have been expelled from the Labour Party then?

I always thought my union was a broad church.
I like it that way. I don't really like this "my way or the highway " view of things.

If one of my colleagues walks across my picket line I don't think they should be expelled from my union.
Rather I think that I have failed in my role as a trade unionist to convince them that my arguments should prevail.

I don't understand your argument here. If the converse were true and after a democratic vote it was found that members had decided not to strike, should the members who voted to strike still be allowed to strike? No, they would have to abide by the majority decision so why should it be different the other way around?
No-one is physically going to stop any individual from doing whatever they please but if you have decided to be a part of an organisation based on the founding principle that we shall support one another after all due democratic processes then it just doesn't make sense why you would undermine it's existence in such a way.
I've voted yes and no to strikes in the past but would always follow the democratic will for the good of the overall collective bargaining process and continued existence of a union.

[ScousePostie]

Working 9-5 is not the end of the world. Most of the UK workforce works this way and they haven't collapsed from exhaustion, turned to dust or into gremlins any second past 3pm

Office workers work 9-5 but probably aren’t walking 12 miles a day near continuously for 4 hours. Remember, it’s someone that is sat in a nice air conditioned office, earning a fat wedge for coming up with ideas on how we should be working. Posting letters in the winter, in the dark up to 5pm (walk ownership, who knows when you’ll finish) is not something that is safe.

Ugh, people who work office jobs have different pressures. Im not saying our job isnt hard. It is. But if you are trying to compare peoples office jobs compared to ours? Il argue you couldn't do there jobs. Different skill sets. Our job is unskilled. It is. Any person you and I know within 3 days could do our jobs. We are very easily replaced. YOU ARE DELUDING YOURSELF!

Also i keep hearing this 9-5 is unsafe. Oh really? So for the hour that it might be dark. Depending on UK location. Is it really that unsafe? Do you lock yourself in your home the second the sun goes down? I bet you can find yourself to the pub perfectly safe in an evening? Clutching at straws with this argument. Just say you dont want to work until then. Dont pull the unsafe bullshit. Everyone was perfectly happy leaving the office in the morning in the dark! urgh. Pathetic.

I don't really see the argument as pathetic. Last Christmas I did a packet duty, 2-8pm. After 4:45, unless you knew exactly where you where going, it was incredible difficult. Those 16-18 packets an hour I was doing when it was light - down to 8-9 once it was dark. Try looking for door numbers, house names in the dark. Then get out the van, grab the parcel then make your way up some (in this area I work in anyway) atrocious paths. There is no doubting that people trip whilst making their way from door to door even when its daylight, it happens! So imagine it when it's dark trying to do the same job! And as for you're pathetic point about finding a pub in the dark - where are pubs usually located? In places that are well lit, even at night!

We're not talking about going out in the dark and it getting lighter has the morning goes on, in case you haven't noticed after sunset it goes darker!

Totally agree with glgp when they said that senior staff couldnt hack joining now. Biggest moaners in the office are the senior staff. Like a broken record. day after day.

On a separate point... I have to completely agree with this.

[mark.cup]

So stop saying people should leave the Union.

Don't know if its my post you are referring to - but I didn't say they should leave the union. I said that anyone that is in the union and breaks a strike should be expelled from the union. That is pragmatics as much as anything else - can't have rogue elements subverting the democratic mandate. God knows, the Trade Union Act has set the bar high enough as it is with the new regs on IA - christ, if we do get a yes vote it will have more legitimacy than a lot of political parties/politicians mandates. And if, in spite of this, individual union members choose to break that strike they should, in my view, be immediately expelled from the CWU. They, as individuals, are anti-democratic, surely ? Self interested rogue states, sort of. I personally will be pushing for compulsory expulsions at branch should this unfortunate situation occur with reference to strike breaking on my watch.
Lets remember here that we aren't having a dispute over wether boys should be allowed to wear skirts at school - we are fighting for the terms and conditions of ordinary working people ie. ourselves. Its pretty straight forward. A lot of us stand to be between £20k and £50k worse off in our retirement - yet Wall Street and the City are pulling £400,000,000 per year from our feet on the street. Yet some here have spat their dummies out cos someone else is getting a Mars bar and they are only getting a Snickers.

You and others keep saying we are losing tens of thousands in retirement.
DC members are losing nothing
Would you be happy if some your colleagues got £20-50k more than you in retirement despite doing same job?
Its hardly Mars n Snickers
If DB are losing as much as you say they are then DC are quite right to feel shafted given we weren't getting the 20-50k to even lose!

There is a difference not that I agree with the DC scheme but you signed up not knowing anything else!

Us on the DB scheme have honoured our side of the bargain re contributions and have had the promises we signed up to thrown in the bin with regard to a final salary pension at 60...

If I remember correctly in 2008 my personal illustration was work 5 years longer and receive less than I was promised at 60 on the previous scheme

If this was anything other than a pension it would be a world class miss selling scandle