Begging Letter From Rico Back

[eastie]

send the letter back as refused, 110.000 being returned would piss them off

[postslippete]

Smacks of desperation to me. Royal Mail desperately want to brainwash us into accepting their rather paltry offer. They did this the last time we had a dispute with Moya at the helm; they offered us a few crumbs and churned out as much publicity as to why it was such a good offer. Remember all them messages sent to our PDAs? Only when the CWU had a big YES vote to strike did RM come up with a better deal that was mutually agreed with the CWU.

I can see pretty much the same thing happening here. Royal Mail know that a strike would be far more damaging and far reaching now much more than it could ever be back in the days when we had a monopoly and provided a public service. And even if we don't get a mandate to strike, what about all those disillusioned postal workers that are being forced to work with Royal Mail's executive action constantly pulling the strings? Its certainly not a productive environment when people are not working together. When you've lost the dressing room and half the players don't really want to play for the team, you've got a problem on your hands.

[bunji]

I thought it was a good sensible letter

Thats good, but care to expand on why and particularly which parts stood out for you.

Things have got to change to compete, no one losing their job, bit of a pay rise, no zero hour contracts. I may be a bit naive but see how others have it- I may be wrong as I am quite new but have come from far worse

[ssdd]

I thought it was a good sensible letter

Thats good, but care to expand on why and particularly which parts stood out for you.

Things have got to change to compete, no one losing their job, bit of a pay rise, no zero hour contracts. I may be a bit naive but see how others have it- I may be wrong as I am quite new but have come from far worse

to which you, and the whole workforce will be heading if you believe the 'cover' story.

[hero22]

I thought it was a good sensible letter

Thats good, but care to expand on why and particularly which parts stood out for you.

Things have got to change to compete, no one losing their job, bit of a pay rise, no zero hour contracts. I may be a bit naive but see how others have it- I may be wrong as I am quite new but have come from far worse

Try being in the job a bit longer then you may change your tune. But if you want the change then I doubt there will be a job for you

[LouBarlow]

until they realise we arent all f***ing thick and everything doesnt revolve around a shite pay increase (unlike the golden carrot for the mangers) that has nothing to do with our dispute , 100% CWU.

I think you overestimate your colleagues. I've lost count of how many half-assed agreements we have voted for over the years, when a few quid has been dangled our way.

[WASD]

Cannot see how breaking down rounds and removing some big parcels will make the whole company's lives better.

Part timers at our place are already 0.5hrs minimum overtime a day. Wednesday it's like 2hrs. Many full timers due for retirement in few years so sorting won't be done. Rounds aren't prepped by any full timers. We have a good turnover of staff, and with bigger rounds this will only happen more.

I guess i'll be cutting off now. So they'll get less work out of me than now, good plan RM. And i'm not a salty worker, i prefer to complete my round, and help out. RM are delusional.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Just because someone has a different viewpoint or political position to you, it does not mean that they are a 'Manager' or a 'Union fanatic', any posts making such assumptions or generalisations will be pulled or amended and the poster warned. This also applies to posts that are not aimed at individuals but at groups.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

I thought it was a good sensible letter

Thats good, but care to expand on why and particularly which parts stood out for you.

Things have got to change to compete, no one losing their job, bit of a pay rise, no zero hour contracts. I may be a bit naive but see how others have it- I may be wrong as I am quite new but have come from far worse

Yes, they do have to change, and Royal Mail and the Union came to a national agreement that outlined how changes would be made for the benefit of the Customers, Business and Employees.

Mr Back has decided, without consultation (as he should have per the agreement) to abandon the agreement totally and impose changes by executive action. Its either suicide of the business by management, gross incompetence, a failure to understand the company's culture, an attempt to de-unionise Royal Mail or a combination of them in some form.

[rambo1]

The main problem with the leaderships’ strategy on comms is they actually think all frontline staff are thick.

They must be thick, that’s why they’re frontline.

The tricks are built on that foundation.

Maybe it's because they see people coming in an hr early and not taking breaks. Maybe that's why they think posties are thick. Ever thought about that aspect?

[ssdd]

Got the letter today with the accompanying leaflet. So 2% per year for the next 3 years and that's CONDITIONAL on the Sacred Plan being carried out.

All the commitments you're making to us? Again CONDITIONAL.

So assuming we, even in an act of desperation, were to vote for this, you can just decide that we're not implementing the plan quick enough and renege on the deal?

Also, what do you mean by 'speedier, simpler dispute resolution procedures with CWU'?
And 'reviewing local attendance patterns and adjust where needed'? saying 'the work is there when you are there'.
Are you actually trying to say 'you are there when the work is there'?

Let me have a think about it Rico..........I'll get back to you..............promise.......

[rambo1]

Got the letter today with the accompanying leaflet. So 2% per year for the next 3 years and that's CONDITIONAL on the Sacred Plan being carried out.

All the commitments you're making to us? Again CONDITIONAL.

So assuming we, even in an act of desperation, were to vote for this, you can just decide that we're not implementing the plan quick enough and renege on the deal?

Also, what do you mean by 'speedier, simpler dispute resolution procedures with CWU'?
And 'reviewing local attendance patterns and adjust where needed'? saying 'the work is there when you are there'.
Are you actually trying to say 'you are there when the work is there'?

Let me have a think about it Rico..........I'll get back to you..............promise.......

Or, could just have a load of compulsory redundancy like most companies would.

[postslippete]

I thought it was a good sensible letter

Thats good, but care to expand on why and particularly which parts stood out for you.

Things have got to change to compete, no one losing their job, bit of a pay rise, no zero hour contracts. I may be a bit naive but see how others have it- I may be wrong as I am quite new but have come from far worse

The first point to make is that we are always changing and evolving. Our attendance has changed, our working hours have changed, the way we deliver has changed, the amount of parcels we deliver has significantly changed. I agree we also need to adapt to new ways of working to handle more parcels but the way Royal Mail are going about it by forcing through changes via Executive Action is not the way forward. Anyone can say that there will be no zero hour contracts or compulsory redundancies but until it has been agreed with the Union, it would be very naive to accept the Royal Mail's word on this. The CWU simply wants some assurances on this preferably with some sort of legal binding agreement with Royal Mail. This dispute is not about pay; its about the Royal Mail honouring previous agreements and to not give us any bull by telling us that its now unaffordable when they are prepared to spend billions on new parcel hubs that will directly affect our working lives.