Local CWU branch to recommend NO vote

[lovejoy]

I would like to reply to the comment made by lovejoy-''Firstly I will say it is very very rare you enter into a dispute to BETTER terms and conditions. Disputes (this one included) are about protecting terms and conditions.''

I don't seem to quite have the hang of the quote thing!

I do not know where you are coming from here - Every April we go to the employer to negotiate a pay rise to at least keep up with inflation ie to improve our pay!

It might be rare for the National Union to achieve this,for various reasons, but we certainly enter into the dispute with the aim of improving terms and conditions.

Agreed on pay but you know as well as I do Paul that events such as Conference have turned into a talking shop - 35hr weeks, national average wage, extra annual leave, payments for cars on delivery!!! Need I go on!

I know we look to improve pay each year but this dispute was never about pay to 99.9% of members

[EJL]

lovejoy, you said that you would vote yes on the basis of a list of names of people who were opposing the deal and that if they told you it was xmas you would check your diary.

Maybe you should not personally insult people who are exercising their democratic right to campaign for a no vote as they believe postal workers deserve better!

That is fine as long as the "people" exercising their democratic rights to campaign are the paid up members of the CWU that are affected by this dispute.

The problems start when "people" get involved with their own agenda for the wrong reasons from outside of the CWU.

[strangler]

I think a YES vote will bring about the resignation of a good many CWU reps within a very short space of time. This 'local felixibility' business is a deriliction of duty on the part of those on the PEC and the local reps will be on the receiving end of plenty of grief from the members. It's bad enough being a local CWU rep as you never feel you have the backing of the CWU at national level. A YES vote will mean local reps really will be adrift from the union. I wouldn't not be in a union, but if this abomination gets voted in I can see us losing very many members. The best thing would be a massive NO vote then we get rid of Hayes and Ward rather than lose possibly hundreds of good union men and women.

I agree, surely a no vote would see the departure of Hayes and Ward due to being out of touch with their membership. Or would they cling on by their fingernails?

[tenpole tudorsack]

I think a YES vote will bring about the resignation of a good many CWU reps within a very short space of time. This 'local felixibility' business is a deriliction of duty on the part of those on the PEC and the local reps will be on the receiving end of plenty of grief from the members. It's bad enough being a local CWU rep as you never feel you have the backing of the CWU at national level. A YES vote will mean local reps really will be adrift from the union. I wouldn't not be in a union, but if this abomination gets voted in I can see us losing very many members. The best thing would be a massive NO vote then we get rid of Hayes and Ward rather than lose possibly hundreds of good union men and women.

I agree, surely a no vote would see the departure of Hayes and Ward due to being out of touch with their membership. Or would they cling on by their fingernails?

Vote SPANNER!!!
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=bOrW7z6rtfY

[BELIAL]

I will and glad to hear you will too. But once again for the fourth time I am curious ,how do you believe this deal improves our terms and conditions Can't see it myself but I do have an open mind and am more than willing to be pleasantly surprised if you can reveal something I've missed. We all like good news, could do with some

Stil still still still waiting, I know it's a hard one but just one improvement then even a little one

How about the Saturday start reverting back to before EA, Unfortunately it has to have agreement of local management but you did say small.

Hmm ,already questioned Dom on this, said he was quite happy for folks to start at 5.30 on Sat.,but had no control over inward arrival times,currently 75% of mech/coded turns up at 7.45.
So thats still start plus 30 mins and most prep after 8.00. Couple this with longs/shorts ,flexible working banked hours all dependant on local agreement looks like Sat finish at 13.30, best case ,Hope I'm wrong
Even if status quo is maintained on Sats it's still not an improvement is it

Sorry I didn't reply earlier i've been having to catch up that thing called life for a few hours

Back to normal now ha

Firstly I will say it is very very rare you enter into a dispute to BETTER terms and conditions. Disputes (this one included) are about protecting terms and conditions.

So what have we got thats better is a hard one to answer but specifics include

Grandfather rights dated back to May 05 - Whilst many of us have stayed on the 0500 starts there have been hundreds of DOs who had already moved! These people are on MTSF payments already and would never have been expecting grandfather rights.

Th 5.4% is in my view better than 2.5%. I know you can argue that over the 12 months the value is much the same but with the 5.4% the value of any future pay rises is much greater!

Constantly LAs and MDEC workers were told they would not receive the pay rise and through united action they have now secured a pay rise

Theres a couple of things for you

As I have stated though i think disputes are about protecting things. The 'final' offer from Royal Mail stated that they wanted to
Remove MTSF
Change IR framework
Change Conduct Code
Change Attendance Procedure

All of the above would have had a much bigger affect on us than flexibility ever will and we have fought those proposals off!

Still like I say , just an opinion

Glad youve got a life and a personal opinion but in my opinion ,your's has some serious flaws.
Yes 5.4 % is better than 2.5% but we all surely know by now that the re al figure is 2.66 % and the £175 was already owed to us under ESSOS. Since RPI/inflation is running at 4.6% I am sure LA,s + MDEC's will be happy that their pay cut is smaller than proposed, but it is still a pay cut in real terms.

Grandfather rights are merely a continuation of the status quo despite operational changes , next year these will change in RM speak to the dreaded Spanish practises c.f. Job and finish

Looks to me like Flexibility will impact on all the other changes you believe are protected and prevented, perhaps I,m just a cynic, but everything I've seen at RM tells me management will exploit every ambiguity to it's advantage and the local reps will forever be playing catchup.

Protecting things is good ,but this deal does'nt. Improving things is better , but well you know

[zaphod]

As I understand it tonight, Bristol will be recommending NO.
Fair play.

[BELIAL]

Looks to me like Flexibility will impact on all the other changes you believe are protected and prevented, perhaps I,m just a cynic, but everything I've seen at RM tells me management will exploit every ambiguity to it's advantage and the local reps will forever be playing catchup.

Protecting things is good ,but this deal does'nt. Improving things is better , but well you know

Not meant as 'told you so' more of a ,please not again