the "talks"

world class male · Post by **world class male** » 30 Oct 2017, 15:28

so now both parties agreed on a mediator, RM latest video says these talks give 7 weeks taking us near to xmas, and emphasise that the CWU by law must give 2 weeks notice to strike, they also preparing to extend these talks if needed thus taking it past the xmas rush so they can probably say up yours to us all.
lets say early dec and no where near a deal can the CWU advise all it's members to go on a overtime ban straight away?
not sure if it's 2 weeks notice to strike or 2 weeks notice for any sort of IA

geordieboy123 · Post by **geordieboy123** » 30 Oct 2017, 16:06

world class male wrote:so now both parties agreed on a mediator, RM latest video says these talks give 7 weeks taking us near to xmas, and emphasise that the CWU by law must give 2 weeks notice to strike, they also preparing to extend these talks if needed thus taking it past the xmas rush so they can probably say up yours to us all.
lets say early dec and no where near a deal can the CWU advise all it's members to go on a overtime ban straight away?
not sure if it's 2 weeks notice to strike or 2 weeks notice for any sort of IA

Sorry but no we haven't been ballotted for action short of a strike.

Post by **cloherty1976** » 30 Oct 2017, 16:14

world class male wrote:so now both parties agreed on a mediator, RM latest video says these talks give 7 weeks taking us near to xmas, and emphasise that the CWU by law must give 2 weeks notice to strike, they also preparing to extend these talks if needed thus taking it past the xmas rush so they can probably say up yours to us all.
lets say early dec and no where near a deal can the CWU advise all it's members to go on a overtime ban straight away?
not sure if it's 2 weeks notice to strike or 2 weeks notice for any sort of IA

Can’t do an overtime ban as it’s attached to our duties on network

Post by **wacko74** » 30 Oct 2017, 16:37

I wish people would stop getting so hung up on the fact that we probably won't strike before xmas now... Jan is just as bad as Dec in my experience, the pkt volumes hardly decline at all from xmas pressure levels, plus there's the usual deluge of holiday brochures, catalogues and other junk mail, personally I find Jan the heaviest and most unpleasant month of the year.

A strike in Jan will cause just as much disruption and put the Board under just as much pressure from shareholders, plus we'll have the advantage of not being labelled the big baddies trying to ruin everyone's xmas.

chickenwittle · Post by **chickenwittle** » 30 Oct 2017, 16:45

wacko74 wrote:I wish people would stop getting so hung up on the fact that we probably won't strike before xmas now... Jan is just as bad as Dec in my experience, the pkt volumes hardly decline at all from xmas pressure levels, plus there's the usual deluge of holiday brochures, catalogues and other junk mail, personally I find Jan the heaviest and most unpleasant month of the year.

A strike in Jan will cause just as much disruption and put the Board under just as much pressure from shareholders, plus we'll have the advantage of not being labelled the big baddies trying to ruin everyone's xmas.

Sorry , I disagree the threat of striking over Black Friday and the lead up to xmas would have put Royal Mail under severe pressure . I don't think that pressure is the same after xmas , thanks the cwu not reading the small print .

fishtank · Post by **fishtank** » 30 Oct 2017, 16:50

I wish people would stop getting so hung up on the fact that we probably won't strike before xmas now... Jan is just as bad as Dec

No it isn't.
You just think it is because you don't have any night shift, any parcel relief, management stop throwing overtime around and at least 15% of your office are on annual leave.

Traffic in January is nowhere near what it is in the build up to Christmas. Strikes in January would be a desperate last resort by the union and to be honest if we do end up down that route we're not in a good place at all. People are not " hung up" that we won't strike before Christmas, some people just know the difference between a position of strength and a last throw of some loaded dice.

Post by **cloherty1976** » 30 Oct 2017, 16:50

chickenwittle wrote:
wacko74 wrote:I wish people would stop getting so hung up on the fact that we probably won't strike before xmas now... Jan is just as bad as Dec in my experience, the pkt volumes hardly decline at all from xmas pressure levels, plus there's the usual deluge of holiday brochures, catalogues and other junk mail, personally I find Jan the heaviest and most unpleasant month of the year.

A strike in Jan will cause just as much disruption and put the Board under just as much pressure from shareholders, plus we'll have the advantage of not being labelled the big baddies trying to ruin everyone's xmas.
Sorry , I disagree the threat of striking over Black Friday and the lead up to xmas would have put Royal Mail under severe pressure . I don't think that pressure is the same after xmas , thanks the cwu not reading the small print .

Agree with you as Xmas would have got media attention,this is something they always struggle with.
Carrying a banner to Westminster with 50 people behind will not get a lot of attention in my view

borgpicard · Post by **borgpicard** » 01 Nov 2017, 19:17

and emphasise that the CWU by law must give 2 weeks notice to strike,

Easy, 2 weeks before the end of the talk, give notice, it is that simple.

clashcityrocker · Post by **clashcityrocker** » 01 Nov 2017, 19:26

borgpicard wrote: Easy, 2 weeks before the end of the talk, give notice, it is that simple.

It isn't that simple.
To give notice of strike action during the mediation may well be a breach of the mediation process, and as such would be illegal......again.

panch1989 · Post by **panch1989** » 01 Nov 2017, 20:25

Why is everyone so keen on striking? Im a yes voter before someone loses their heads.
RM wernt talking seriously before. Now they have to. Hopefully a deal can be struck and no strikes happen. Dont you agree?
Who cares when we can strike. It will damage share prices no matter what, that will lay pressure on missing moya. Funny how shes now at the talks aint it.

Danelectro · Post by **Danelectro** » 01 Nov 2017, 20:27

clashcityrocker wrote:
borgpicard wrote: Easy, 2 weeks before the end of the talk, give notice, it is that simple.
It isn't that simple.
To give notice of strike action during the mediation may well be a breach of the mediation process, and as such would be illegal......again.

Should cover off that scenario in the words of the Legally Binding Agreement and if it doesn't cover it off then what's illegal about it ?

wandle · Post by **wandle** » 02 Nov 2017, 16:10

Danelectro wrote:
clashcityrocker wrote:
borgpicard wrote: Easy, 2 weeks before the end of the talk, give notice, it is that simple.
It isn't that simple.
To give notice of strike action during the mediation may well be a breach of the mediation process, and as such would be illegal......again.
Should cover off that scenario in the words of the Legally Binding Agreement and if it doesn't cover it off then what's illegal about it ?

To give notice two weeks before the end-date of the talks would be at best inflammatory, and would give the mediator cause to doubt the CWU's resolve to reach an agreement.
It would be just the same as Royal Mail saying 'we are committed to this process... but we hereby give notice that in two weeks' time, if no agreement is forthcoming, we're just going to introduce all these changes by executive action'

k979aaa · Post by **k979aaa** » 02 Nov 2017, 18:35

wandle wrote:
Danelectro wrote:
clashcityrocker wrote:
borgpicard wrote: Easy, 2 weeks before the end of the talk, give notice, it is that simple.
It isn't that simple.
To give notice of strike action during the mediation may well be a breach of the mediation process, and as such would be illegal......again.
Should cover off that scenario in the words of the Legally Binding Agreement and if it doesn't cover it off then what's illegal about it ?
To give notice two weeks before the end-date of the talks would be at best inflammatory, and would give the mediator cause to doubt the CWU's resolve to reach an agreement.
It would be just the same as Royal Mail saying 'we are committed to this process... but we hereby give notice that in two weeks' time, if no agreement is forthcoming, we're just going to introduce all these changes by executive action'

Did they RM do this with our pensions though by saying your not having that and thus breaking a legally binding agreement?

clashcityrocker · Post by **clashcityrocker** » 02 Nov 2017, 18:41

k979aaa wrote: Did they RM do this with our pensions though by saying your not having that and thus breaking a legally binding agreement?

No because there is a clause in the legally binding agreement that says they can do what the f**k they like if they think it is economically necessary. (or words to that effect)

jetblack · Post by **jetblack** » 02 Nov 2017, 19:52

Long story short - the legal and judicial systems are weighted heavily in the favour of RMG. Nothing new there. It isn't that the union is incompetent - its that they are pissing into the wind/they are playing unwittingly against the banker and a loaded deck of cards.

RMG and their ilk have the media (opinion formers), they have the political elite, the legal framework, the police force/security services - they have just about everything.

Except - the ability to perform the work of 110,000 at the drop of a hat. That they don't have. Thats what we have on our side, be it before or after Christmas. That is our prerogative.

Of course Christmas IA (the threat of) gives us additional leverage - but I don't think the revenues on any one day are negligible for RMG/Blackrock et al.

Don't get despondent chaps - everything to play for here - wether that be before or after Christmas.