Royal Mail injunction plans

LouBarlow · Post by **LouBarlow** » 07 Oct 2017, 07:26

I've not been the biggest fan of union tactics these last few years, but they played a blinder with the recent Four Pillars campaign, in terms of their approach, visiting offices, using social media etc, so I will be giving them the benefit of the doubt that they saw this coming too and have contingencies in place.

....however, I *still* have that niggling feeling that they might have been played, as they were during the last national disagreement. If they have left it too late to strike before Christmas, after sitting on the strike vote for so long, then that is a monumental blunder that they won't recover from, as I guarantee, there will not be this appetite for action, if it is delayed until the new year.

wandle · Post by **wandle** » 07 Oct 2017, 08:54

LouBarlow wrote: ....however, I *still* have that niggling feeling that they might have been played, as they were during the last national disagreement. If they have left it too late to strike before Christmas, after sitting on the strike vote for so long, then that is a monumental blunder that they won't recover from, as I guarantee, there will not be this appetite for action, if it is delayed until the new year.

I think it's quite telling that, with news of the intended strike dates coming after the stock market closed on Thursday, the share price went UP by 1.5% yesterday

One could read into that seemingly perverse reaction that punters are presuming one of two things:

a) Royal Mail's attempt to get an injunction will succeed (and thus no strikes before Black Friday or Christmas) or
b) Royal Mail will have to make an offer that's good enough for the CWU to 'suspend' strike action while we vote on the new offer(and thus no strikes before Black Friday or Christmas)

Post by **rogersh** » 07 Oct 2017, 08:58

In the video Terry Pullinger stated it was ironic that Royal Mail were using a legal challenge, Especially in regards to resourcing, Making up part timers that have been working beyond their hours for over six months ,Temporary contracts, The abuse & use of agency workers & a whole host of other issues....

If these instances of breaches can be used to invalidate an an injunction then the CWU have played a blinder. Notwithstanding the result it should be paramount all the alleged breaches of the growth & stability agreement should be investigated & rectified immediately. Surely you cannot "cherry pick" some clauses of an agreement while ignoring others.

banner · Post by **banner** » 07 Oct 2017, 16:33

I cannot believe that a court would even waste its time on this non issue.
If there are two parties that have made an agreement and one of the parties has violated the agreement, then the agreement is null and void.
RM have consistently violated that agreement in the past and the CWU only need to have some proof to win this argument.
Am I missing something?

fishtank · Post by **fishtank** » 07 Oct 2017, 16:51

banner wrote:Am I missing something?

Probably the 23 pages of legal jargon that make up the "legal protections".
If the business had broken the agreement in any obvious way the court is likely to ask why the union did not seek a legal remedy at that point rather than wait until they were dragged into court to bring it up. It's unfortunately a legitimate question.

clashcityrocker · Post by **clashcityrocker** » 07 Oct 2017, 17:12

banner wrote: RM have consistently violated that agreement in the past

When?

Post by **tractorboy2** » 07 Oct 2017, 17:19

What about clause 10

LaggyBand · Post by **LaggyBand** » 07 Oct 2017, 17:20

banner wrote:I cannot believe that a court would even waste its time on this non issue.
If there are two parties that have made an agreement and one of the parties has violated the agreement, then the agreement is null and void.
RM have consistently violated that agreement in the past and the CWU only need to have some proof to win this argument.
Am I missing something?

Also, it's a great day of business. Two sets of lawyers being paid handsomely. Wonder what firm they're using - Magic Circle?

jetblack · Post by **jetblack** » 07 Oct 2017, 18:15

The Judge will give careful consideration to both sides of the case ..... and then come out in favour of the employer.

a) what do we do then and b) why would RMG go down this route ?

wannabeek · Post by **wannabeek** » 07 Oct 2017, 18:18

I don't understand how they can believe that a court injunction will help their cause.

If their High Court attempt succeeds then there will, I am certain, still be many wildcat strikes around the country. Because they are outside the remit of the union, they will be unable to get the union to help get them resolved. I believe it will then spread to a large national 'illegal' strike if that happens.

Suppressing people's vote is never a good thing and it won't get you where you want in a democracy - look at the situation in Spain...

parforthewalk · Post by **parforthewalk** » 07 Oct 2017, 18:33

I think that the union is in a no win situation.

It had to call a strike given the strategy of the company & after 18months of talks it has ended with both sides being poles apart.

The people at the top on both sides are high risk gamblers (that's why they hold/have these positions).

The outcome of the injunction, has the probability of 'Winner-takes-all', & the probability is that the company will win & the union & the workers will have to except the crumbs on the table.
With an injunction in place the appetite for strike will lesson considerably as we near xmas, as staff will not want to loose even more money (xmas bonus etc).
It will be no good after xmas in the new year either, as 99% of the workers will be spent up & awaiting credit card bills to drop on the mat early Feb!

Moya & her team have also ready stated that there is no better deal/offer on the table.
Also don't forget she took on the unions in the Canada & won/broke them. Is it only a matter of time before the inevitable happens?

stoneybroke · Post by **stoneybroke** » 07 Oct 2017, 18:45

parforthewalk wrote:I think that the union is in a no win situation.

It had to call a strike given the strategy of the company & after 18months of talks it has ended with both sides being poles apart.

The people at the top on both sides are high risk gamblers (that's why they hold/have these positions).

The outcome of the injunction, has the probability of 'Winner-takes-all', & the probability is that the company will win & the union & the workers will have to except the crumbs on the table.
With an injunction in place the appetite for strike will lesson considerably as we near xmas, as staff will not want to loose even more money (xmas bonus etc).
It will be no good after xmas in the new year either, as 99% of the workers will be spent up & awaiting credit card bills to drop on the mat early Feb!

Moya & her team have also ready stated that there is no better deal/offer on the table.

Also don't forget she took on the unions in the Canada & won/broke them. Is it only a matter of time before the inevitable happens?

That's the spirit!

morgaith80 · Post by **morgaith80** » 07 Oct 2017, 19:00

If I'm reading the agreement correctly and following everything that's happened so far I think the injunction will stick.

RM announced new pension plans and then discussed the plans with CWU, agreement couldn't be met at the table..... Next stage should be mediation. As much as it pains me to say it.

glfp · Post by **glfp** » 07 Oct 2017, 19:13

parforthewalk wrote:I think that the union is in a no win situation.

It had to call a strike given the strategy of the company & after 18months of talks it has ended with both sides being poles apart.

The people at the top on both sides are high risk gamblers (that's why they hold/have these positions).

The outcome of the injunction, has the probability of 'Winner-takes-all', & the probability is that the company will win & the union & the workers will have to except the crumbs on the table.
With an injunction in place the appetite for strike will lesson considerably as we near xmas, as staff will not want to loose even more money (xmas bonus etc).
It will be no good after xmas in the new year either, as 99% of the workers will be spent up & awaiting credit card bills to drop on the mat early Feb!

Moya & her team have also ready stated that there is no better deal/offer on the table.
Also don't forget she took on the unions in the Canada & won/broke them. Is it only a matter of time before the inevitable happens?

That's what she been brought into do - take on the union and force through a modernisation programme, slash jobs.
With Canada Post strikes went from 3 days of action to 36 under her tenure.
She will not bow down to the Unions and strikes if anything of her past is to go by.
ATB
Graham

wannabeek · Post by **wannabeek** » 07 Oct 2017, 19:44

Oh great spirit. Not.

So just give up when faced with an obstacle is what you do. Just give up, roll over and let some suit dictate your fate.

It's not what I do.