COMPARING 9/9/07 DOC TO NOW!!

[andy2007]

As I have said several times: There are some important safeguards in this deal, but only for US! There is too much reliance on "Grandfather Rights", leaving bits out for now, so there will be less support if it comes to a ballot over them, and relying on vague references to taking our circumstances into account.

On the other hand: Lovejoy and everyone else who wants to vote yes, are just as entitled to their opinion as those of us who will vote no.

Please remember, that the Union is a Democracy. So everyone has the opportunity to speak out about their beliefs, and vote in any way that they feel is right. HOWEVER, it also means that once a decision is made, WE MUST ABIDE BY THAT, AND STICK TOGETHER!

We can only hope that the right decision is made. Not just for us, but for future generations. The decision we have to make, won't just effect the conditions of service for RM employees. But the General Public as well.

Everyone, PLEASE read the agreement thoroughly. Just as I, Lovejoy, and many others have. It is very useful to read, or hear other people's opinions. But the final decision on how you vote, is down to you, and no-one else.

NEVER LET ANYONE PRESSURE YOU INTO MAKING A DECISION THAT YOU DON'T BELIEVE IS RIGHT!

Lovejoy has the courage of his convictions, and continues to discuss the deal in a mature and responsible way. I have yet to see a poorly thought out post by him. I completely disagree with his take on the deal. But I also respect his decision, and the way that he is discussing the situation.

We could all learn a great deal from his example.

[johnnyp]

As I have said several times: There are some important safeguards in this deal, but only for US! There is too much reliance on "Grandfather Rights", leaving bits out for now, so there will be less support if it comes to a ballot over them, and relying on vague references to taking our circumstances into account.

On the other hand: Lovejoy and everyone else who wants to vote yes, are just as entitled to their opinion as those of us who will vote no.

Please remember, that the Union is a Democracy. So everyone has the opportunity to speak out about their beliefs, and vote in any way that they feel is right. HOWEVER, it also means that once a decision is made, WE MUST ABIDE BY THAT, AND STICK TOGETHER!

We can only hope that the right decision is made. Not just for us, but for future generations. The decision we have to make, won't just effect the conditions of service for RM employees. But the General Public as well.

Everyone, PLEASE read the agreement thoroughly. Just as I, Lovejoy, and many others have. It is very useful to read, or hear other people's opinions. But the final decision on how you vote, is down to you, and no-one else.

NEVER LET ANYONE PRESSURE YOU INTO MAKING A DECISION THAT YOU DON'T BELIEVE IS RIGHT!

Lovejoy has the courage of his convictions, and continues to discuss the deal in a mature and responsible way. I have yet to see a poorly thought out post by him. I completely disagree with his take on the deal. But I also respect his decision, and the way that he is discussing the situation.

We could all learn a great deal from his example.

Exactly the way it should be.

[BEMUSED]

What amazes me is how in this Great Deal, the leadership has shifted all the negotiations down to Unit level, and you all will accept this .,

Watch out for the cry form the leadership " Hey don't blame me, blame the Unit representative.

You all know that the managers have been told not to negotiate anything away from the default duties(and to stay with the executive action).

The leadership should have the ability to make agreements not pass the buck.!!!

[lovejoy]

Interesting debate.

Lovejoy - (hypothetically) if your Branch are recommending the agreement, would you expect your officials and committee to recommend the deal individually, or would you be happy to see them come out of the woodwork and tell people to vote no?

The EC are elected to represent all members, and regardless of the vote taken, are then expected to carry out the views of the executive, not their own.

Sorry I didn't get back I had to cook tea for Mrs Lovejoy!!!

The difference between the Branch committee and the PEC in this situation is massive. As a branch you will merely voting on whether or not to recommend the agreement. The PEC actually took the decision to say yes to the agreement.

In normal circumstances i would say yes everyone should abide by normal views but this situation is not normall. These people want the status of being a 'hero' and voting no but they will not back it up!!

Who do you think leaked out the names of the No voters?? It certaintly wasn't those who voted YES. My issue is not with the fact that they voted no its with the fact that they hide away behind the rules after.

If they really cared about us and had such belief in what they had done then surely they would say f*** the rules and come out in our defence???? I know most of us would - wouldn't we??

[Glenno]

LOVEJOY me old mucker Iknow what YOU say has a lot of credibility but i would like to point out out a few things PENSIONS defered to a later d2d defered to a later date early starts brought in by exec/action flexibility covering another p/man whether sick or on leave and leaving the rest down to LOCAL NEGOTIONATIONS is a bit of a bitter pill to swallow AFTER ALL THE SUPPOSED negotionations took place and a DEAL WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN STRUCK

[BELIAL]

Interesting debate.

Lovejoy - (hypothetically) if your Branch are recommending the agreement, would you expect your officials and committee to recommend the deal individually, or would you be happy to see them come out of the woodwork and tell people to vote no?

The EC are elected to represent all members, and regardless of the vote taken, are then expected to carry out the views of the executive, not their own.

Sorry I didn't get back I had to cook tea for Mrs Lovejoy!!!

The difference between the Branch committee and the PEC in this situation is massive. As a branch you will merely voting on whether or not to recommend the agreement. The PEC actually took the decision to say yes to the agreement.

In normal circumstances i would say yes everyone should abide by normal views but this situation is not normall. These people want the status of being a 'hero' and voting no but they will not back it up!!

Who do you think leaked out the names of the No voters?? It certaintly wasn't those who voted YES. My issue is not with the fact that they voted no its with the fact that they hide away behind the rules after.

If they really cared about us and had such belief in what they had done then surely they would say f*** the rules and come out in our defence???? I know most of us would - wouldn't we??

Sorry LOve joy now youve got me really confused, the Ec will represent members regardless of the vote?Pec abnormally recommends yes , we should vote no and be hero's , but cannot provide rational justification.
The no voters leaked the names of the yes voters and are some how hiding behind a smokescreen of rules. Surely if the yes voters are revealed then so are the no's and if they voted no they cared enough to support our fight?
Been busy can anyone point me to thread on Yes appeasers on PEc

[lovejoy]

LOVEJOY me old mucker Iknow what YOU say has a lot of credibility but i would like to point out out a few things PENSIONS defered to a later d2d defered to a later date early starts brought in by exec/action flexibility covering another p/man whether sick or on leave and leaving the rest down to LOCAL NEGOTIONATIONS is a bit of a bitter pill to swallow AFTER ALL THE SUPPOSED negotionations took place and a DEAL WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN STRUCK

agreed mate and i have never said that the agreement is perfect. My decision to back a yes vote is against the background of a number of things

Another point that makes me laugh is people seemed to have forgotten how they were struggling to get people on strike for the 48hr action.

There are branches going for a NO vote who had masses of members walking in on the last strike. If they can't get members out in Oct how the hell will they get them out at Christmas!!

Whilst the agreement stalls a lot of things this can be viewed in two ways. Ok so we haven't moved them completely but they are in are they!

Keeping the faith (just)

[dvbuk55]

[quote="lovejoy]If they really cared about us and had such belief in what they had done then surely they would say f*** the rules and come out in our defence???? I know most of us would - wouldn't we??[/quote]

If this is such a good deal then why would we need to be defended? Rumour has it that some senior officers are also against the deal. I wouldn't defend the low lifes who have recommended this deal for their own ends and I personally think it is a bit disingenuous to decry those who advocate a no vote for, according to you, the same reasons.

[lovejoy]

[

I'm not saying its a bad deal! Thats what the people who voted no are doing therefore they obviously think they need to defend us - ........... by staying silent???

[lovejoy]

Interesting debate.

Lovejoy - (hypothetically) if your Branch are recommending the agreement, would you expect your officials and committee to recommend the deal individually, or would you be happy to see them come out of the woodwork and tell people to vote no?

The EC are elected to represent all members, and regardless of the vote taken, are then expected to carry out the views of the executive, not their own.

Sorry I didn't get back I had to cook tea for Mrs Lovejoy!!!

The difference between the Branch committee and the PEC in this situation is massive. As a branch you will merely voting on whether or not to recommend the agreement. The PEC actually took the decision to say yes to the agreement.

In normal circumstances i would say yes everyone should abide by normal views but this situation is not normall. These people want the status of being a 'hero' and voting no but they will not back it up!!

Who do you think leaked out the names of the No voters?? It certaintly wasn't those who voted YES. My issue is not with the fact that they voted no its with the fact that they hide away behind the rules after.

If they really cared about us and had such belief in what they had done then surely they would say f*** the rules and come out in our defence???? I know most of us would - wouldn't we??

Sorry LOve joy now youve got me really confused, the Ec will represent members regardless of the vote?Pec abnormally recommends yes , we should vote no and be hero's , but cannot provide rational justification.
The no voters leaked the names of the yes voters and are some how hiding behind a smokescreen of rules. Surely if the yes voters are revealed then so are the no's and if they voted no they cared enough to support our fight?
Been busy can anyone point me to thread on Yes appeasers on PEc

Sorry mate i can't make head nor tail of what you have just posted??

[dvbuk55]

[

Well then you must think it is a good deal. Those who voted No must have made their opinion known at some point otherwise we wouldn't know there was dissent. Perhaps you know if the senior members of the union have refused to advocate a yes vote? I've never made a secret I will vote yes but my motives are to clear out the dead wood from Wimbledon not pander to their political ambition.

[BELIAL]

Not surprised you are confused LJ just paraphrasing your post, had the same effect on me.

[lovejoy]

Not surprised you are confused LJ just paraphrasing your post, had the same effect on me.

doesn't surprise me - after all it doesn't contain any swear words

[andy2007]

LOVEJOY me old mucker Iknow what YOU say has a lot of credibility but i would like to point out out a few things PENSIONS defered to a later d2d defered to a later date early starts brought in by exec/action flexibility covering another p/man whether sick or on leave and leaving the rest down to LOCAL NEGOTIONATIONS is a bit of a bitter pill to swallow AFTER ALL THE SUPPOSED negotionations took place and a DEAL WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN STRUCK

agreed mate and i have never said that the agreement is perfect. My decision to back a yes vote is against the background of a number of things

Another point that makes me laugh is people seemed to have forgotten how they were struggling to get people on strike for the 48hr action.

There are branches going for a NO vote who had masses of members walking in on the last strike. If they can't get members out in Oct how the hell will they get them out at Christmas!!

Whilst the agreement stalls a lot of things this can be viewed in two ways. Ok so we haven't moved them completely but they are in are they!

Keeping the faith (just)

It makes no difference wether we think we can get a good turn out or not Lovejoy. The only consideration that matters, is wether we think that the deal is acceptable, and can be voted for with a clear concience.

Now I know from your other Posts, that you have carefully considered the deal, and thought things through before making your decision. It is what everyone should do.

However, I do object to you suggesting that people should vote for it, simply because the odds of winning are diminishing with time. Win or loose. It doesn't matter. So long as the stakes are high enough, and we feel passionately enough about our beliefs. Then it is up to each and every one of us to support any action that may be required.

[lovejoy]

LOVEJOY me old mucker Iknow what YOU say has a lot of credibility but i would like to point out out a few things PENSIONS defered to a later d2d defered to a later date early starts brought in by exec/action flexibility covering another p/man whether sick or on leave and leaving the rest down to LOCAL NEGOTIONATIONS is a bit of a bitter pill to swallow AFTER ALL THE SUPPOSED negotionations took place and a DEAL WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN STRUCK

agreed mate and i have never said that the agreement is perfect. My decision to back a yes vote is against the background of a number of things

Another point that makes me laugh is people seemed to have forgotten how they were struggling to get people on strike for the 48hr action.

There are branches going for a NO vote who had masses of members walking in on the last strike. If they can't get members out in Oct how the hell will they get them out at Christmas!!

Whilst the agreement stalls a lot of things this can be viewed in two ways. Ok so we haven't moved them completely but they are in are they!

Keeping the faith (just)

It makes no difference wether we think we can get a good turn out or not Lovejoy. The only consideration that matters, is wether we think that the deal is acceptable, and can be voted for with a clear concience.

Now I know from your other Posts, that you have carefully considered the deal, and thought things through before making your decision. It is what everyone should do.

However, I do object to you suggesting that people should vote for it, simply because the odds of winning are diminishing with time. Win or loose. It doesn't matter. So long as the stakes are high enough, and we feel passionately enough about our beliefs. Then it is up to each and every one of us to support any action that may be required.

i salute your commitment Andy but what i am saying is there are people on here slagging off the deal that can't even deliver their colleagues/members for more action. The stakes are high and if you vote no you must do so knowing there is a strong chance of more action with no real strategy in place to make further gains.

I for one will deliver if there is a no vote!!!