Why Royal Mail went to court

[Glenno]

So the Question that should be asked is " who is playing who " , both parties knew about the AFG legally binding stuff, but who gains the most from this saga, the longer it goes on it can be argued from both sides, but the Mandate counts, end of, watch this space

[clashcityrocker]

How much did it cost us in legal fees to be told we had broken our own agreement?

[postslippete]

You're over-thinking it all Fish


Why on earth would the Royal Mail do the CWU a favour, it doesn't make sense. So, assuming in your argument that the Royal Mail did let the CWU hold its strikes and then suddenly decide that it was 'unlawful' after a few week's worth of strikes - surely the first thing any Court would say is - "the Union gave you a few weeks notice of impending strike action, why didn't you do anything about it then??".

And Royal Mail did - thats why they went to court - did they not?? Personally, I think Royal Mail were always going to take the CWU to court, like someone mentioned it was their trump card.

[fishtank]

The mandate does count Glenno but not as a strike ballot, It counts far more especially in the negotiations as a reminder that without the union the business cannot hope to implement change. Royal Mail has proven during this dispute that it is utterly useless at employee engagement. For that they need the union and for the union to be able to pull that off both sides need a deal.

[fishtank]

surely the first thing any Court would say is - "the Union gave you a few weeks notice of impending strike action, why didn't you do anything about it then?

I think a lot of people have a strange idea of what happens in court, maybe it's too much Judge Judy or something. Courts deal with legal fact.If the judge is bored he/she might prattle on about the case a little, they me even ask the question you asked although I doubt it but it wouldn't affect the ruling at all. Is it lawful Yes/No . End of.

[General Mannerheim]

How much did it cost us in legal fees to be told we had broken our own agreement?

£100,000 and a packet of hobnobs.

[postslippete]

surely the first thing any Court would say is - "the Union gave you a few weeks notice of impending strike action, why didn't you do anything about it then?

I think a lot of people have a strange idea of what happens in court, maybe it's too much Judge Judy or something. Courts deal with legal fact.If the judge is bored he/she might prattle on about the case a little, they me even ask the question you asked although I doubt it but it wouldn't affect the ruling at all. Is it lawful Yes/No . End of.

I must admit I've never been to court! I don't know about watching Judge Judy but the fact of the matter is that Royal Mail did go to Court, the strikes haven't happened (yet) and old Terry isn't sat on his rear selling the Big Issue just yet either. I'm not contradicting you Fish, I just think that there is a lot of pessimism and we need to try and stay optimistic about reaching some sort of agreement. Lets not forget that all of this is down to our employers. They have already shown us what our future could be like - and we have spoken back to them what we think via our support for strike action. That will have shocked the Royal Mail board. So, regardless if the strikes were unlawful or not, do you really think the company would still continue given that sort of support against what it intended doing?? Like rehabron quite rightly says, its not the Royal Mail that we know, and it wouldn't be long before they would eventually back down. Just like they always do, I might add. Yes/No??

[Lincox]

I honestly do not think that the ballot for strike action or the result has been a surprise to Royal Mail. You only have to look at the number of non balloted strikes, the employee surveys and the fact that their changes to employee terms are the most draconian, that they new exactly where this would go. They have an agenda, they know exactly where any agreement will be eventually set at and they continue their long term aim of managing out the full time contracts of long term employees, which in timewill reduce the power of the CWU and end up eventually with a non unionised business.

[aiden01]

I honestly do not think that the ballot for strike action or the result has been a surprise to Royal Mail. You only have to look at the number of non balloted strikes, the employee surveys and the fact that their changes to employee terms are the most draconian, that they new exactly where this would go. They have an agenda, they know exactly where any agreement will be eventually set at and they continue their long term aim of managing out the full time contracts of long term employees, which in timewill reduce the power of the CWU and end up eventually with a non unionised business.

Well according to dingo the size of the yes vote was a massive shock for rm.

[Danelectro]

So the leadership would have carried on and taken the strike action knowing it was inevitable that this would lead to bankruptcy because it would be preferable to stating something like 'after taking legal advice' we will now enter a mediation process with Royal Mail but they were saved from that conundrum and an army of angry members as known or unknown to them Royal Mail for various reasons passed up the opportunity to wipe them out finacially and took it to court so they could wipe the union out from the inside in a shrimp like fashion.Well at least we all know where we stand now..

[Danelectro]

it's not us and them, it's a symbiotic business arrangement.
.

Same difference.

[Flashman_]

I honestly do not think that the ballot for strike action or the result has been a surprise to Royal Mail. You only have to look at the number of non balloted strikes, the employee surveys and the fact that their changes to employee terms are the most draconian, that they new exactly where this would go. They have an agenda, they know exactly where any agreement will be eventually set at and they continue their long term aim of managing out the full time contracts of long term employees, which in timewill reduce the power of the CWU and end up eventually with a non unionised business.

I think you are right here Lincox. RMG`s plan, all along,I believe was to aim high, in the knowledge that they would get some (if not most )of their wishes in any dispute resolution agreement eventually. All they have done is look at past performance on disputes and calculated what they will get. Just look at how far we have been taken already. They must have thought all their Christmases had come at once when we agreed not to strike in the last agreement.

[rehabron]

Many like yourself like to indulge in the rhetoric of class war when talking about industrial disputes, that can be useful when you're trying to build a level of engagement but it's nothing like class war, it's not us and them, it's a symbiotic business arrangement.

" Fishtank" as you have quoted an exert from my posting in relation to you raising the question of " WHY ROYAL MAIL WENT TO COURT" and looking for a response to your question I gave an account of why I felt that in your summation taking the CWU once again to a high court injunction was to keep the union active for negotiating purposes rather than destroy it with litigation had the union decided to proceed with the strike call.
These negotiations have been on going for 18 months between executives of both parties and both parties would have had a team of legal advisors to assist in their deliberations and in these deliberations would have taken into account the legal bindings that was incorporated into section 2 of the Agenda for Growth and Stability Agreement 2013 which was announced as with this inclusion was to be the forerunner of all agreements and irrevocable and had built in 3 month reviews had any party failed to honour their part of this agreement.
In 18 months I believe there was sufficient time for any breach of the " legal bindings" for this to be discussed and reviewed by negotiators and their team of lawyers and advisors before it came to a high court injunction as had previously gone before in the previous strike call when we had a 63% working majority.
I would have expected that the union would have not allowed this to happen for a second time and make them look foolish in the eyes of their membership who were well prepared to back them to the hilt and gave them an outstanding 89.1% vote support.
I am a fully fledged member of this union and will continue to be until I leave the business I certainly do not indulge in the rhetoric of class war when talking about industrial disputes but it is a war of words I think Moya and Terry would vouch for this.
For your third way that you have mentioned I believe that this dispute and the 4 pillars which is the most we have ever fought on in years T&C, pensions etc could have been better handled and left both parties with some dignity that you have emphasised
that RM needs the union and the union needs RM well RM have won the first round by the judge refusing strike action for further mediation which I again believe the Union offered this arrangement some time ago and was refus3ed by RM. If we want to play cat and mouse politics then next time make sure that we are the cat.