Royal Mail injunction plans

[POSTMAN]

ltb

Dear Colleague

ROYAL MAIL GROUP LEGAL CHALLENGES

At 6pm on Friday the 6th October, the Union received two separate letters from Royal Mail’s solicitors stating they would be seeking an interim injunction to stop the Industrial Action notified to the employer for strike action to take place next week.

The first letter was in regard to potential legal proceedings and external mediation, which forms part of the process set out in the Agenda for Growth Agreement. In their letter the company acknowledges that the Agenda for Growth Agreement does not stop our members being able to take strike action. However, they claim that the external mediation process has not been fully exhausted, prior to us calling for industrial action.

The second letter was in relation to the company alleging the Union failed to take reasonable steps to notify our members of the ballot result.

Both letters required the Union to respond by noon today and to withdraw the notice for next week’s strike action. In response, we can confirm the Union will not be withdrawing the notice for strike action and following legal advice we will defend our position in court, if necessary.

Since the company’s initial letters were sent on Friday 6th October, we have now received two subsequent communications.

Firstly, to notify us that Royal Mail will now apply to the court for an interim injunction in relation to their claim on mediation.

Secondly, the company has withdrawn the legal challenge regarding our alleged failure to notify our members of the ballot result. In light of these developments we do therefore expect to be in court later this week.

It is very important that our Branches and Representatives convey the contents of this LTB to our members as soon as possible. Further information will be provided in due course.
Dave Ward
Tony Kearns
Terry Pullinger

[daveyeff]

There are basically two approaches the union should take here.

If the injunction is rejected, then strikes to go ahead as scheduled. I'm presuming their lawyers will argue that RM has broken any agreement, by bringing in executive action to bring an end to the pension scheme, and wasn't interested in mediation then. Not sure how any judge can argue that they should be able to demand it now, but if indeed an injunction is brought in, then really members need to be encouraged strongly, to work to rule through Christmas pressure. This could easily have as much of an impact as a few days striking here and there, with enough support.

work to rule is still classed as industrial action. don't ask me how, cos I agree with you. but as its I/A it is therefore part of their argument that its illegal. it is what it is.

[Dorset Plodder]

work to rule is still classed as industrial action. don't ask me how, cos I agree with you. but as its I/A it is therefore part of their argument that its illegal. it is what it is.

I don't believe we'd even have to Work To Rule. All we'd have to do is Work Properly with all that entails. BUT you know that not likely to happen because there's too many selfish buggers that insist on doing everything their way. The CWU has been asking us to Work Properly for years, but a lot of colleagues are more interested in cutting corners, breaking rules, working through Meal Breaks.... anything to go home early! We're just pissing in the wind trying to convince some people.

[hans solo]

if they take mediation as a reason
the pension scheme should be returned to its former state and be open for discussion
they cannot just dictate by executive action when breaking agreements
then spit the dummy out when it doesnt go their own way
cwu should be all over this and insist on reinstatement of pension

[worktotime]

lets just that the cwu have a really good case to overturn this scraping of the barrel move from royal mail to try and drag this out , but this wont change what a 3rd of the work force think of the Moya and her cronies running the company , and lets hope that the cwu can prove that royal mail have broken this agreement over using agency staff , making part time up to fulltime , executive action of the pension scheme etc which is all part of the same agreement ,

[LaggyBand]

There are basically two approaches the union should take here.

If the injunction is rejected, then strikes to go ahead as scheduled. I'm presuming their lawyers will argue that RM has broken any agreement, by bringing in executive action to bring an end to the pension scheme, and wasn't interested in mediation then. Not sure how any judge can argue that they should be able to demand it now, but if indeed an injunction is brought in, then really members need to be encouraged strongly, to work to rule through Christmas pressure. This could easily have as much of an impact as a few days striking here and there, with enough support.

work to rule is still classed as industrial action. don't ask me how, cos I agree with you. but as its I/A it is therefore part of their argument that its illegal. it is what it is.

I agree, it would be so incredibly effective, if every postie made it their mission for a week to stick to the book and finish on time, no doubt, but the crux of the matter is that of communication.

The union need to communicate this plan to the members, else it wouldn't happen. And in doing so they'll be accused of orchestrating a de facto strike.

[k979aaa]

There are basically two approaches the union should take here.

If the injunction is rejected, then strikes to go ahead as scheduled. I'm presuming their lawyers will argue that RM has broken any agreement, by bringing in executive action to bring an end to the pension scheme, and wasn't interested in mediation then. Not sure how any judge can argue that they should be able to demand it now, but if indeed an injunction is brought in, then really members need to be encouraged strongly, to work to rule through Christmas pressure. This could easily have as much of an impact as a few days striking here and there, with enough support.

work to rule is still classed as industrial action. don't ask me how, cos I agree with you. but as its I/A it is therefore part of their argument that its illegal. it is what it is.

Doing the job properly is not industrial action it is what it says it is don't run or carve your job for those in the city.

[Danelectro]

if they take mediation as a reason
the pension scheme should be returned to its former state and be open for discussion
they cannot just dictate by executive action when breaking agreements
then spit the dummy out when it doesnt go their own way
cwu should be all over this and insist on reinstatement of pension

Unfortunately as pointed out on another thread the Legally Binding Agreement seems to say they were in their right to do just that.

Depending how the chips fall in this dispute it may well turn out that it should have been 3 and not 4pillars of security we campaigned on.

[hans solo]

it is not legally binding
the pension plan was legally binding didnt stop rm changing it
and in fact i dont give 2 f***s about legally binding
rules are there to be broken on rm side its high time we did the same

[tinkerdil]

The pension has not changed. RM cannot reinstate the pension as it has not changed, yet. Clearly not till the end of March '18. And yes it appears that RM can serve notice of a change due to the pension being deemed financially unsustainable. This has been pointed out in a previous thread, as indicated by Danelectro.

[wacko74]

It's not even as though RM actually want to genuinely continue with negotiations via mediation... they're just using this as a stalling tactic to try and delay any strike action until after the Christmas period.

[Dorset Plodder]

I agree, it would be so incredibly effective, if every postie made it their mission for a week to stick to the book and finish on time, no doubt, but the crux of the matter is that of communication.

The union need to communicate this plan to the members, else it wouldn't happen. And in doing so they'll be accused of orchestrating a de facto strike.

The CWU have been asking Posties to "Work Properly" for years LG, at least in my region. I'm sure they could prove this (possibly by showing previous communications to Delivery Offices). It's never been very effective, simply because a lot of Posties are selfish and just please themselves. Most cannot see further than their own noses.

You are correct in that it needs to be communicated better, if perhaps 75% worked properly it'd have a significant impact, unlike in the past when a few individuals have tried it in dribs & drabs, and been basically pissing in the wind as the Runners & selfish bastards carried on regardless.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

There are basically two approaches the union should take here.

If the injunction is rejected, then strikes to go ahead as scheduled. I'm presuming their lawyers will argue that RM has broken any agreement, by bringing in executive action to bring an end to the pension scheme, and wasn't interested in mediation then. Not sure how any judge can argue that they should be able to demand it now, but if indeed an injunction is brought in, then really members need to be encouraged strongly, to work to rule through Christmas pressure. This could easily have as much of an impact as a few days striking here and there, with enough support.

work to rule is still classed as industrial action. don't ask me how, cos I agree with you. but as its I/A it is therefore part of their argument that its illegal. it is what it is.

Work to rule is classed as Industrial if either its organised by a group of people or, if a group of individuals decide to change the way they have been working at the same time.

Its all about perception. At least in my opinion.

In this case I think the CWU can call a work to rule because the ballot was for Action up to and including strikes. But they won't

[LaggyBand]

I agree, it would be so incredibly effective, if every postie made it their mission for a week to stick to the book and finish on time, no doubt, but the crux of the matter is that of communication.

The union need to communicate this plan to the members, else it wouldn't happen. And in doing so they'll be accused of orchestrating a de facto strike.

The CWU have been asking Posties to "Work Properly" for years LG, at least in my region. I'm sure they could prove this (possibly by showing previous communications to Delivery Offices). It's never been very effective, simply because a lot of Posties are selfish and just please themselves. Most cannot see further than their own noses.

You are correct in that it needs to be communicated better, if perhaps 75% worked properly it'd have a significant impact, unlike in the past when a few individuals have tried it in dribs & drabs, and been basically pissing in the wind as the Runners & selfish bastards carried on regardless.

Ha yes it's true the nature of the work cultivates an "every man for himself" attitude for sure. Get done - get home. I just meant that a national call to work to rule / work to time will undoubtedly be called a strike, so not really an option if the injunction is granted.

If however strikes are permitted it might be a good method towards the end of any prolonged period (36 days of striking in Canada?!) when wallets are looking thin.

[Dorset Plodder]

Ha yes it's true the nature of the work cultivates an "every man for himself" attitude for sure. Get done - get home. I just meant that a national call to work to rule / work to time will undoubtedly be called a strike, so not really an option if the injunction is granted.

If however strikes are permitted it might be a good method towards the end of any prolonged period (36 days of striking in Canada?!) when wallets are looking thin.

We've had a few "Characters" saying they voted No and they're going to be coming in if there's a strike. One told the Rep he doesn't agree with striking so he'll be working. I must admit to being a bit pissed off at their attitude, but that's what Democracy is about!

To get to your point, one of them is the most selfish bloke in the office, always pleases himself what he does. A true Runner that ALWAYS finishes early (in fact he takes it as a personal insult if someone gets back to the office before him) When I pointed out to him that one idea RM wants is for "Walk Ownership", working in TEAMS, and having to cover for Team Members on Leave (or Sick) with no additional Overtime...... well his face was a picture. Of course he hadn't been in the Union Briefing talking about these points because......... he had to get out on delivery and couldn't afford to waste the time! We really are working with idiots.