CWU appeal : Update : Appeal has been dismissed!

smok3y666 · Post by **smok3y666** » 28 Nov 2019, 14:39

Bye bye appeal.

theargyspy · Post by **theargyspy** » 28 Nov 2019, 16:37

Court of Appeal found against the CWU what a surprise

Chelseablue · Post by **Chelseablue** » 28 Nov 2019, 16:38

Appeals been dismissed watched it live , shakes my head

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 28 Nov 2019, 16:39

see what RM run to the court with after the next ballot.

Chelseablue · Post by **Chelseablue** » 28 Nov 2019, 16:39

Appeals been dismissed watched it live , shakes my head. All bcause of some idiots

Post by **the beautiful bd south** » 28 Nov 2019, 16:40

Did anyone really expect anything else??

Post by **greengiant** » 28 Nov 2019, 16:57

If the CWU does reballot, then keep it off all social media.
No selfies of people filling in their ballot papers at their frames.

And no encouragement from the CWU to take photos of people posting their ballots either...
"Keep it secret, keep it safe" as a wise wizard once said...

Post by **charlatans** » 28 Nov 2019, 16:57

I watched it and thought we had a chance.
Whats next?

SpongeBobPants · Post by **SpongeBobPants** » 28 Nov 2019, 17:23

The argument was that the breaches of the legislation were trivial and that the CWU never set out to break the law. Honestly I don’t think the judges had any choice but to not grant the appeal.

Hopefully the CWU already had the wheels in motion for a reballot. It’s really frustrating how long it feels since we voted.

hans solo · Post by **hans solo** » 28 Nov 2019, 17:25

should have reballoted weeks ago seen this coming
and cwu should have announced proposed dates of strike action to show our intention
i will now work to time all xmas
take out election material to time every day leaving loops of mail each time
girfut

Woody Guthrie · Post by **Woody Guthrie** » 28 Nov 2019, 17:56

SpongeBobPants wrote:The argument was that the breaches of the legislation were trivial and that the CWU never set out to break the law. Honestly I don’t think the judges had any choice but to not grant the appeal..

Yes it seems the main thrust of that very expensive appeal is that the union only broke the law a little bit.
Genuis argument.

Chelseablue wrote:Appeals been dismissed watched it live , shakes my head. All bcause of some idiots

The judges ruled that the union broke the law not the members.

So who are the 'idiots'?

wandle · Post by **wandle** » 28 Nov 2019, 18:29

I hope the CWU’s lawyers asked whether Royal Mail would have made their challenge to the result if those people who had filmed themselves, and posted clips on social media, has been voting ‘no’ ???
You can bloody bet they wouldn’t have, even though such actions would have been a similar breach...

Post by **rogersh** » 28 Nov 2019, 19:10

wandle wrote:I hope the CWU’s lawyers asked whether Royal Mail would have made their challenge to the result if those people who had filmed themselves, and posted clips on social media, has been voting ‘no’ ???
You can bloody bet they wouldn’t have, even though such actions would have been a similar breach...

Good point wandle. What would happen if in the next ballot just one member deliberately posted a video of themself taking their ballot paper from the frame & completing it in the workplace.
Would that be enough evidence for the same high court proceedings?

Post by **General Mannerheim** » 28 Nov 2019, 19:31

Them cockney spivs and their shitty comms department need to feck off . Tubthumping rhetoric only gets you so far.

Woody Guthrie · Post by **Woody Guthrie** » 28 Nov 2019, 19:41

rogersh wrote:
wandle wrote:I hope the CWU’s lawyers asked whether Royal Mail would have made their challenge to the result if those people who had filmed themselves, and posted clips on social media, has been voting ‘no’ ???
You can bloody bet they wouldn’t have, even though such actions would have been a similar breach...
Good point wandle. What would happen if in the next ballot just one member deliberately posted a video of themself taking their ballot paper from the frame & completing it in the workplace.
Would that be enough evidence for the same high court proceedings?

You're both completely missing the point.
The judges didn't rule against the union because members opened their ballot papers at work or because they posted it online.

They ruled against the union because the union actively encouraged members to do it.