PEC REPORT NOVEMBER 2008

[lovejoy]

Moving on from the Dispute

November 2007 Executive Council Report

Pay & Conditions

The result of the pay ballot is no doubt well known to everyone by now. The fact that nearly 30,000 voted against and less than half the total membership voted for means that we, as a Postal Executive, are very much on notice to try and heal the splits that were an inevitable product of the campaign around the ballot. We can only do this by showing that our strategy of dealing with both the future of the business and of our members’ terms and conditions was the right one. That means holding management to the commitment in the agreement to moving away from adversarial relationships and achieving change by agreement at all levels.

It also means that we are going to have to come to our own conclusions on what we want to get out of the discussions that will take part under phase 4. What do we think a new IR Framework or conduct and attendance procedure should look like? What sort of new pay package could we come up with and are there any ideas on flexible working that would benefit rather than harm us? What do we want a future mail centre/delivery/network structure to look like in an age of new technology? Could this be used to improve our working lives? Over the next few months the Postal Executive are going to have to come up with answers to all of these and more. We need branches and members to look at these as well and feed in your views. One thing is certain. We won’t be doing anyone a favour by adopting our usual method of having no ideas ourselves and just saying no to everything management put forward.

Management need to take note of the ballot result as well. The majority of our members have yet to be convinced that they stand to benefit from what’s planned for the future. The only way to convince the doubters is if they now show they’re willing to listen to and act on the views of their staff and the Union. If they try to carry on in the way they’ve been doing recently then there’s no doubt that the gloves will be coming off again before long.

Pensions

The first issue that will test if management are prepared to listen is the pension proposals. There is little doubt that the changes they are consulting on are unacceptable to most members and, contrary to some reports, the Postal Executive have not agreed them. We are committed to trying to negotiate a way back into a final salary scheme for new entrants and to push forward any new ideas that come up during the consultation period. We will then see how management respond to that before making a recommendation in the final ballot that will go to every member in the Royal Mail Group. If management refuse point blank to make any changes then there will be a strong case for recommending a No vote. What would be dishonest, though, is for us to pretend to our members that we could not only mount but win a campaign for no change to the current scheme. In the meantime, we need to involve as many members as possible in the debate so that their views can come forward. The PEC are scheduled to meet on December 5 to discuss the issue further.


Post Office Limited

Following the settlement in the Royal Mail dispute, there was a real fear that our members in POL Counters would be left hanging on the wire. DGSP Dave Ward got involved with the talks and along with Andy Furey managed to negotiate a deal for them. This involved an hour off the working week for those outside London, an increase in London Weighting to Royal Mail rates, Saturday Premium to continue until 2009 and then a further 3.5 years compensation after that and a three year pay deal which gives the CSA grades increases between 11% and 30%. For PO’s there is a lump sum of £1000 this year, 3.08% plus £95 lump sum in 2008 and a further £1000 in 2009. Pensionable pay for PO’s will be protected by the creation of a nominal pensionable salary 6.7% higher than base salary.

I had grave reservations about both the idea of a three year deal and lump sum payments. After consulting with POL reps in both my own branch and outside, who reported that their members were likely to accept the deal and that there was little chance of resurrecting the industrial action, I voted to endorse it at the PEC, as did all the other members. I attended the national briefing for Counters Reps and the views expressed there were similar. The deal goes out to ballot on 28 November and closes on 12 December.

The PEC also unanimously endorsed the deal negotiated for POL admin members. This involved a pay settlement of around the same level as in Royal Mail, a one hour reduction in the working week outside London and an increase in London Weighting and a buy-out of Saturday Premium on the same level as with the deal in Counters.

Walk Sequencing

I attended a meeting with management to get a further update on their plans for walk sequencing machines. They reported that the Royal Mail Board have now made a decision in principle to go ahead with the machines but that this depends on the outcome of the contract negotiations they are having with the preferred supplier Solystic and this is proving difficult at the moment. Adam Crozier has been given authority to make the final decision, which they think will be taken by Xmas. If they decide to go ahead it will be on the basis of probably no more than 6 further machines in 2008 and the rest from 2009 on a three year staggered basis. It is unlikely that they would place an order for the full total of around 530 in one go so the final number deployed could be less than that. They have not made a final decision on where the machines will go and are happy to involve the Union in those discussions.

As far as management are concerned the trials of the existing machines have come to an end. No real operational issues have been thrown up other than where some of the machines have been sited in offices. The major issue is going to be the amount of time management think the machines will save. They have calculated that 20 minutes per town/rural walk and 30 minutes per firms walk can be saved and they are looking to take this out of the offices that already have them. We have asked to see the figures they’ve used to check them. In any case, we will expect any proposals at local level to be dealt with via the IR Framework in the normal way. If they’re right though, 20-30 minutes a day off 60,000 walks works out at 3000 full time equivalent jobs lost by 2012 and we are going to have to deal with that in the discussions with management over the next few months.

Vehicle Telemetry

I attended a meeting with management to receive an update on the project to install telemetry equipment into Royal Mail vehicles. The plan at the moment is to fit these into all vehicles at Mail Centres and at the 3 largest DO’s in each AGM area, some 7839 in total. 6504 have been fitted to date and although these are transmitting data, this is not being used except for system testing purposes. There is also a trial going on at Swindon Mail Centre and Dorcan & Cheltenham DO’s and we are told there has been no adverse reactions from the staff there.

The use of telemetry equipment, although already widely used in other companies, throws up two major issues. The first is what happens to the savings generated? As the equipment tracks both routes and vehicle utilisation, we can expect the business to make substantial savings in vans if not always in duties. We need to make sure we get some of this back, either in pay or in time off the working week. If we can’t do that by existing agreements we need to make sure it becomes part of the new deployment framework we are committed to agreeing in the pay & modernisation agreement.

The second issue concerns individual drivers. The equipment will throw up a lot of information about both the performance and whereabouts of drivers. It reports on speed, braking and acceleration and idling time among other things. It also tracks the route of every van fitted. Management have told us that it is not their intention to use this as a big stick in discipline terms and that it’s their aim to keep drivers on the road. They see it very much as a tool to improve driving behaviours and to prevent accidents and accumulation of points on a licence, to be used in connection with other initiatives to improve driving standards. Our worry is that individual DOM’s or Mail Centre Managers, who will have access to this information, could use it to target particular staff. We intend to sit down with management and develop a process for implementing this that avoids the use of the conduct code. We are also pushing for drivers’ coaches who would be CWU grades, rather than managers, to deal with the training issues that may arise.

Pegasus

The CWU approached management to try and get joint training on Pegasus for Reps and to deal with other outstanding issues. They declined to reply so we’ve decided to set up our own training programme. Divisional Reps have now been through this and they will roll it out to other Reps in the New Year. The aim of the training is so that Reps will be able to know when management try to pull the wool over their eyes with revision proposals.

Campaign for a Review of Competition

The November meeting of the Policy sub-committee of the NEC discussed three CWU submissions to Postcomm, dealing with zonal pricing, the Licensing Framework and Postcomm’s strategy review. The documents came out strongly against Royal Mail’s attempts to charge different amounts to deliver to different areas and Postcomm’s plans to make it even easier for the competition to nick our work. The document on the strategy review strongly criticised Postcomm for putting the needs of the competitors above the continuation of the USO and argued that competition has resulted in a worse service for everyone apart from the big posters. The document also argued strongly against suggestion from Postcomm that Royal Mail be split up into separate businesses.

General Secretary Billy Hayes reported that he was due to meet Pat McFadden, the minister in charge, next week to discuss Labour’s manifesto commitment to review the effects of competition. He stated that the campaign to hold Labour to that pledge and to begin to haul back the effects of competition would begin in earnest after Xmas. The reason why little had happened so far was that everyone was waiting for the result of the pay ballot.

Support Karen Reissmann

The Policy sub-committee also received a report on the campaign to support Karen Reissmann. Karen is a psychiatric nurse from Manchester who has been sacked by her management for being an effective, if troublesome, Rep and for speaking out against the cut-backs in the service. Nearly 150 of her members have now been out on indefinite official strike for three weeks demanding her re-instatement. Her case has received widespread publicity and she has won support from her own union, many other unions and even the local evening paper. We agreed as the CWU to give her our support and donated £1000 to the campaign. An LTB will now be sent to branches asking them to add their support.

During the past month I’ve attended meetings of Reps or members in Leeds (twice), of the Shropshire & Mid Wales branch and at several DO’s. I’ve attended the North West Regional Committee and the AGM of the Labour Representation Committee as a delegate of the national Union. I also attended the national briefing on Counters pay.

Pete Keenlyside
Postal Executive
30 November 2007

[BELIAL]

Moving on from the Dispute

November 2007 Executive Council Report

Pay & Conditions

The result of the pay ballot is no doubt well known to everyone by now. The fact that nearly 30,000 voted against and less than half the total membership voted for means that we, as a Postal Executive, are very much on notice to try and heal the splits that were an inevitable product of the campaign around the ballot. We can only do this by showing that our strategy of dealing with both the future of the business and of our members’ terms and conditions was the right one. That means holding management to the commitment in the agreement to moving away from adversarial relationships and achieving change by agreement at all levels.

It also means that we are going to have to come to our own conclusions on what we want to get out of the discussions that will take part under phase 4. What do we think a new IR Framework or conduct and attendance procedure should look like? What sort of new pay package could we come up with and are there any ideas on flexible working that would benefit rather than harm us? What do we want a future mail centre/delivery/network structure to look like in an age of new technology? Could this be used to improve our working lives? Over the next few months the Postal Executive are going to have to come up with answers to all of these and more. We need branches and members to look at these as well and feed in your views. One thing is certain. We won’t be doing anyone a favour by adopting our usual method of having no ideas ourselves and just saying no to everything management put forward.

Management need to take note of the ballot result as well. The majority of our members have yet to be convinced that they stand to benefit from what’s planned for the future. The only way to convince the doubters is if they now show they’re willing to listen to and act on the views of their staff and the Union. If they try to carry on in the way they’ve been doing recently then there’s no doubt that the gloves will be coming off again before long.

Pensions

The first issue that will test if management are prepared to listen is the pension proposals. There is little doubt that the changes they are consulting on are unacceptable to most members and, contrary to some reports, the Postal Executive have not agreed them. We are committed to trying to negotiate a way back into a final salary scheme for new entrants and to push forward any new ideas that come up during the consultation period. We will then see how management respond to that before making a recommendation in the final ballot that will go to every member in the Royal Mail Group. If management refuse point blank to make any changes then there will be a strong case for recommending a No vote. What would be dishonest, though, is for us to pretend to our members that we could not only mount but win a campaign for no change to the current scheme. In the meantime, we need to involve as many members as possible in the debate so that their views can come forward. The PEC are scheduled to meet on December 5 to discuss the issue further.



Support Karen Reissmann

The Policy sub-committee also received a report on the campaign to support Karen Reissmann. Karen is a psychiatric nurse from Manchester who has been sacked by her management for being an effective, if troublesome, Rep and for speaking out against the cut-backs in the service. Nearly 150 of her members have now been out on indefinite official strike for three weeks demanding her re-instatement. Her case has received widespread publicity and she has won support from her own union, many other unions and even the local evening paper. We agreed as the CWU to give her our support and donated £1000 to the campaign. An LTB will now be sent to branches asking them to add their support.

During the past month I’ve attended meetings of Reps or members in Leeds (twice), of the Shropshire & Mid Wales branch and at several DO’s. I’ve attended the North West Regional Committee and the AGM of the Labour Representation Committee as a delegate of the national Union. I also attended the national briefing on Counters pay.

Pete Keenlyside
Postal Executive
30 November 2007

Ta for the low down LJ ,but whilst not wishing to be controversial this is distinctly underwhelming,how many Karen Reissmann's do we have in RM and not even a mention.

'Moving on from the dispute' a luxury only available to PEC members the ordinary membership are going to be living with the consequences of this dispute day in day out.
Still if we get shafted on a local basis it is now completely our own fault and the national leadership has secured "plausible deniability".
As far as face saving self serving deals go this one's a lulu, nothing to do with us chaps your local bods don't cut the mustard: Talk about ducking responsibillity.
"inevitable splits" well obviously in any dispute , but to this depth and on this scale? Not at all inevitable ,and a direct result of the methods ,tactics and aims of our leadership.

As for the future has'nt anyone on the Pec considered the most lasting cost of this deal? They have succesfully converted 98% support for strike action to 28% support for this deal, 36% no +36% no voting, add to this the percentage dissillusioned as the effects of the deal bite and what chance future action? Of course this may be the desired outcome for some of our union leaders.

I'm a fighter as are many of my workmates but when your trainer urges you into the ring then slips you a mickey when you get knocked down, you ain't to keen to get up again cos he might slip you another, it's a question of trust and sometimes saving your own arse and earning trust don't go hand in hand

[weetrogg]

A split, there appears to be no split, rm and the union leadership seem to be lying quite happily in the same bed, as for pete kennlyside enjoy your remaining few months on the pec, cos we are going to do everything to get rid of you, you fu**ing spineless sell out!!!



WE are the union

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Moving on from the Dispute

November 2007 Executive Council Report

The first issue that will test if management are prepared to listen is the pension proposals.

Sorry although this is no doubt a very big issue for everyone including me but its not the issue that will test management. On the shop floor already they are ignoring the agreement and refusing early starts on Saturdays which is part of the agreement. So sorry CWU PEC but perhaps you are out of touch and still appear not to be listening to the grass roots.

[kill Joy]

Moving on from the Dispute

November 2007 Executive Council Report

Pay & Conditions

The result of the pay ballot is no doubt well known to everyone by now. The fact that nearly 30,000 voted against and less than half the total membership voted for means that we, as a Postal Executive, are very much on notice to try and heal the splits that were an inevitable product of the campaign around the ballot. We can only do this by showing that our strategy of dealing with both the future of the business and of our members’ terms and conditions was the right one. That means holding management to the commitment in the agreement to moving away from adversarial relationships and achieving change by agreement at all levels.

It also means that we are going to have to come to our own conclusions on what we want to get out of the discussions that will take part under phase 4. What do we think a new IR Framework or conduct and attendance procedure should look like? What sort of new pay package could we come up with and are there any ideas on flexible working that would benefit rather than harm us? What do we want a future mail centre/delivery/network structure to look like in an age of new technology? Could this be used to improve our working lives? Over the next few months the Postal Executive are going to have to come up with answers to all of these and more. We need branches and members to look at these as well and feed in your views. One thing is certain. We won’t be doing anyone a favour by adopting our usual method of having no ideas ourselves and just saying no to everything management put forward.

Management need to take note of the ballot result as well. The majority of our members have yet to be convinced that they stand to benefit from what’s planned for the future. The only way to convince the doubters is if they now show they’re willing to listen to and act on the views of their staff and the Union. If they try to carry on in the way they’ve been doing recently then there’s no doubt that the gloves will be coming off again before long.

Pensions

The first issue that will test if management are prepared to listen is the pension proposals. There is little doubt that the changes they are consulting on are unacceptable to most members and, contrary to some reports, the Postal Executive have not agreed them. We are committed to trying to negotiate a way back into a final salary scheme for new entrants and to push forward any new ideas that come up during the consultation period. We will then see how management respond to that before making a recommendation in the final ballot that will go to every member in the Royal Mail Group. If management refuse point blank to make any changes then there will be a strong case for recommending a No vote. What would be dishonest, though, is for us to pretend to our members that we could not only mount but win a campaign for no change to the current scheme. In the meantime, we need to involve as many members as possible in the debate so that their views can come forward. The PEC are scheduled to meet on December 5 to discuss the issue further.



Support Karen Reissmann

The Policy sub-committee also received a report on the campaign to support Karen Reissmann. Karen is a psychiatric nurse from Manchester who has been sacked by her management for being an effective, if troublesome, Rep and for speaking out against the cut-backs in the service. Nearly 150 of her members have now been out on indefinite official strike for three weeks demanding her re-instatement. Her case has received widespread publicity and she has won support from her own union, many other unions and even the local evening paper. We agreed as the CWU to give her our support and donated £1000 to the campaign. An LTB will now be sent to branches asking them to add their support.

During the past month I’ve attended meetings of Reps or members in Leeds (twice), of the Shropshire & Mid Wales branch and at several DO’s. I’ve attended the North West Regional Committee and the AGM of the Labour Representation Committee as a delegate of the national Union. I also attended the national briefing on Counters pay.

Pete Keenlyside
Postal Executive
30 November 2007

Ta for the low down LJ ,but whilst not wishing to be controversial this is distinctly underwhelming,how many Karen Reissmann's do we have in RM and not even a mention.

'Moving on from the dispute' a luxury only available to PEC members the ordinary membership are going to be living with the consequences of this dispute day in day out.
Still if we get shafted on a local basis it is now completely our own fault and the national leadership has secured "plausible deniability".
As far as face saving self serving deals go this one's a lulu, nothing to do with us chaps your local bods don't cut the mustard: Talk about ducking responsibillity.
"inevitable splits" well obviously in any dispute , but to this depth and on this scale? Not at all inevitable ,and a direct result of the methods ,tactics and aims of our leadership.

As for the future has'nt anyone on the Pec considered the most lasting cost of this deal? They have succesfully converted 98% support for strike action to 28% support for this deal, 36% no +36% no voting, add to this the percentage dissillusioned as the effects of the deal bite and what chance future action? Of course this may be the desired outcome for some of our union leaders.

I'm a fighter as are many of my workmates but when your trainer urges you into the ring then slips you a mickey when you get knocked down, you ain't to keen to get up again cos he might slip you another, it's a question of trust and sometimes saving your own arse and earning trust don't go hand in hand

Nice to know you're still fighting. When you posted a thread asking how to leave the union I thought you'd done one but as you previously said I should not assume!

Your twist on the maths of the vote is novel to say the least. In my experience those people who are opposed to something nearly always vote so it is perhaps just as, if not more, valid to add the non voters to the YES vote.

I remember when we lost a national strike ballot a few years ago many were saying we'll never deliver again. Similar was said about 5 or 6 years ago when keggie and the pec led us to the top of the hill, again and again. People seem to forget who, dispite this background, led us into battle - the current leadership. Ok you and some others dont like the outcome, I'd have prefered a better deal, I just don't believe for all the reasons given that we would have delivered. Dispite a well organised NO campaign the members voted in favour, no one is to blame thats democracy.

Also, many people here have complained about CWU publicity. The only criticism I think is valid is the week or so when the pec was considering the final agreement, that silence was inexcusable. Apart from that everybody had been raving about how good the comms has been and how it has improved over the years. I reckon the well oiled machine here really helped get such a massive YEs vote and turn out in the first place. So there was a mistake, ok a pretty big one, but on the whole its been sh"t hot.

As far as your continued negitivity, how about taking a leaf out of weetrogg's thread ENOUGH!!! :

"We now really need to show the same unity and togetherness thhat was shown during the dispute, at my office they tried to remove s.a. for the first week of pressure, so we got together and basically let them know that nobody will be coming in to perform the o.t., so they said fine, came back today and told us we can have s.a. All those DOs who have been told that they cant return to sat times, its simply get your rep and a few workers together and tell your dim thats its there in the agreement and that as of next sat you will revert to the old sat times, badger your area rep to get involved and do not take no for an answer!!! We all know that if all d.o. staff did the job properly a lot of the worst parts of this agreement become unworkable, but doing the job properly also applys in mcs, pulling two yorks at a time, over filling yorkies, bags and boxes, doing the job properly applies to everybody. Anyway lets stop all the silliness and regroup for the big battles ahead, the deals done now let us make the best of it

WE are the union"

Glad you decided not to leave but for christ sake dont drag everyone down with all your negativity. If you really are a fighter how about telling us how you are going to tackle the battles ahead.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Also, many people here have complained about CWU publicity. The only criticism I think is valid is the week or so when the pec was considering the final agreement, that silence was inexcusable. Apart from that everybody had been raving about how good the comms has been and how it has improved over the years. I reckon the well oiled machine here really helped get such a massive YEs vote and turn out in the first place. So there was a mistake, ok a pretty big one, but on the whole its been sh"t hot.

Just a few quick notes about this part of your post Killjoy.

1. People will always complain about the Union its in the nature of Political movements and Unions. If they had secured everything I wanted there would still be others who would have thought the Union did not go far enough.

2. On here we were not raving about how good the communication was, in fact quite the opposite one of the common complaints from the start of the dispute was the lack of communication. In fact this lack of communication is what helped RMC get off the ground in such a big way. People were hearing things from their local union contacts and posted it on here. In some cases we were ahead of the Union in "announcing" things.

3. From this bit you posted

I reckon the well oiled machine here really helped get such a massive YEs vote and turn out in the first place.

I must point out that we are separate from both the Union and Royal Mail, it just happens that most who post here are members and employees of these 2 organisations.

[dvbuk55]

Moving on from the Dispute


Pegasus

The CWU approached management to try and get joint training on Pegasus for Reps and to deal with other outstanding issues. They declined to reply so we’ve decided to set up our own training programme. Divisional Reps have now been through this and they will roll it out to other Reps in the New Year. The aim of the training is so that Reps will be able to know when management try to pull the wool over their eyes with revision proposals.


Pete Keenlyside
Postal Executive
30 November 2007

To me this single paragraph speaks volumes for the supposed "new understanding and working relationship between managers, reps and workforce" - even this PEC member doesn't believe his own leaderships hype at the time of the ballot. He knows deliveries are going to get shafted, we know we are going to get shafted and yet we have the tired old cliche "Moving on from the Dispute". To add insult to injury there is a diatribe about a person from another union, never mind the state the PEC have left this unions membership. As a previous poster has already stated the Saturday problem is still going to be a problem, local agreements are a total negative for collective bargaining and as a PEC member he should be aware of that.

What exactly are the PEC going to discuss NOW that couldn't have been ironed out at the time of the dispute? To me the deal is done and dusted and so is the pension - there's plenty of brave talk NOW but where was it when we needed it? I know where my next voting X will be going.

[IWW Fellow Worker]

A split, there appears to be no split, rm and the union leadership seem to be lying quite happily in the same bed, as for pete kennlyside enjoy your remaining few months on the pec, cos we are going to do everything to get rid of you, you fu**ing spineless sell out!!!



WE are the union

It makes me sad to read that mate, but I can't disagree with you. Pete Keenlyside was someone I used to have a bit of time for, but not now. Fecking plastic socialists!

[BELIAL]

Nice to know you're still fighting. When you posted a thread asking how to leave the union I thought you'd done one but as you previously said I should not assume!

Your twist on the maths of the vote is novel to say the least. In my experience those people who are opposed to something nearly always vote so it is perhaps just as, if not more, valid to add the non voters to the YES vote.

I remember when we lost a national strike ballot a few years ago many were saying we'll never deliver again. Similar was said about 5 or 6 years ago when keggie and the pec led us to the top of the hill, again and again. People seem to forget who, dispite this background, led us into battle - the current leadership. Ok you and some others dont like the outcome, I'd have prefered a better deal, I just don't believe for all the reasons given that we would have delivered. Dispite a well organised NO campaign the members voted in favour, no one is to blame thats democracy.

Also, many people here have complained about CWU publicity. The only criticism I think is valid is the week or so when the pec was considering the final agreement, that silence was inexcusable. Apart from that everybody had been raving about how good the comms has been and how it has improved over the years. I reckon the well oiled machine here really helped get such a massive YEs vote and turn out in the first place. So there was a mistake, ok a pretty big one, but on the whole its been sh"t hot.

As far as your continued negitivity, how about taking a leaf out of weetrogg's thread ENOUGH!!! :

"We now really need to show the same unity and togetherness thhat was shown during the dispute, at my office they tried to remove s.a. for the first week of pressure, so we got together and basically let them know that nobody will be coming in to perform the o.t., so they said fine, came back today and told us we can have s.a. All those DOs who have been told that they cant return to sat times, its simply get your rep and a few workers together and tell your dim thats its there in the agreement and that as of next sat you will revert to the old sat times, badger your area rep to get involved and do not take no for an answer!!! We all know that if all d.o. staff did the job properly a lot of the worst parts of this agreement become unworkable, but doing the job properly also applys in mcs, pulling two yorks at a time, over filling yorkies, bags and boxes, doing the job properly applies to everybody. Anyway lets stop all the silliness and regroup for the big battles ahead, the deals done now let us make the best of it

WE are the union"

Glad you decided not to leave but for christ sake dont drag everyone down with all your negativity. If you really are a fighter how about telling us how you are going to tackle the battles ahead.

See,
you've got to stop this assuming thing,but Ido agree that the nay sayers are more likely to vote ,however that was not the point made,rather it concerned what the effect of the consequences of this deal would be on the attitude and moral of the membership, irrespective of how of how they voted.
It also unwise to say never,but your point about losing the previous national ballot does reinforce what I was saying, unless you believe the conduct of the leadership in previous battles had no bearing on that result?
IT's good to see that we agree that this is not a good deal, But with overwhelming and solid support for IA,the only reason I can see for not delivering a better one is a tacit acceptance of managements business model.Rest assured I will not forget who led us into battle ,how our generals conducted that battle and how they led us out again.
And yes if I am completely honest ,me and a couple of others are not best pleased with this result.
However well organised the No lobby was, to overcome HQ with it's access to mailing lists ,financial resources, trusted position and best of all VOTE yes ballot papers ,would ,I think you must concede, have been a difficult task.Given these circumstances I think people would be wise to take care when using words like democratic, a vote yes but full and fair democracy? Don't know if that assertion would stand scrutiny?
AS for publicity being s**t hot fraid I can't agree. 1 weeks silence the only communications error, not in my opinion.
What about the four weeks information blackout during the "talks", did that make the membership feel empowered ,included or informed?
What about the less than penetrating media campaign, not exactly' Cadburys take them and they......' memorable?
What about our leaderships media performance, stilted ,and rambling reeked of a lack of conviction like being assaulted with a three week old celery stick. To tell the truth the most convincing presentations I heard came in ad hoc interviews on the line with reps and members[unprepped, unschooled,and unfamiliar with public speaking]

As for Weetrogs point I agree completely ,sheer folly to misdirect anger ,the point is to learn the lessons.
Sadly there appear to be a lot of negatives as a consequence of this agreement ,failure to admit this seems perverse, but to brand all criticsm of our leaderships performance as negativity and silliness begins to look like a tactic to stifle debate. If you don't question you never learn ,if you don't learn you repeat your mistakes.


Once again on the issue of solidarity and unity I am in complete agreement with you, I believe all tiers of the union should act in common purpose to improve our terms and conditions whatever the scale of the attacks. Pleased to hear also that your office has won the first of many skirmishes, but I see others are not faring so well.
I sincerely hope my misgivings and fears about this deal are proved utterly groundless, for the sake of the membership. I truly hope that this agreement is a cleverly disguised CWU stealth victory masterstroke.
Don't think I've got the influence to drag anyone down with my negativity especially since I feel quite positive about the ongoing struggle, and my first step in preparing for battle will be to push for a fighting leadership who are prepared to be transparent in their dealings, and fully accountable and mandateable to conference and the membership, not much point going over the top with a blunt bayonnet and a dud jammed in the chamber.

By the way ,The bit in bold hope it was tongue in cheek cos it certainly is rather patronising you ain't a teacher addressing a class of slightly naughty five year olds ,hope it is'nt a true reflection of your attitude

[kill Joy]

Nice to know you're still fighting. When you posted a thread asking how to leave the union I thought you'd done one but as you previously said I should not assume!

Your twist on the maths of the vote is novel to say the least. In my experience those people who are opposed to something nearly always vote so it is perhaps just as, if not more, valid to add the non voters to the YES vote.

I remember when we lost a national strike ballot a few years ago many were saying we'll never deliver again. Similar was said about 5 or 6 years ago when keggie and the pec led us to the top of the hill, again and again. People seem to forget who, dispite this background, led us into battle - the current leadership. Ok you and some others dont like the outcome, I'd have prefered a better deal, I just don't believe for all the reasons given that we would have delivered. Dispite a well organised NO campaign the members voted in favour, no one is to blame thats democracy.

Also, many people here have complained about CWU publicity. The only criticism I think is valid is the week or so when the pec was considering the final agreement, that silence was inexcusable. Apart from that everybody had been raving about how good the comms has been and how it has improved over the years. I reckon the well oiled machine here really helped get such a massive YEs vote and turn out in the first place. So there was a mistake, ok a pretty big one, but on the whole its been sh"t hot.

As far as your continued negitivity, how about taking a leaf out of weetrogg's thread ENOUGH!!! :

"We now really need to show the same unity and togetherness thhat was shown during the dispute, at my office they tried to remove s.a. for the first week of pressure, so we got together and basically let them know that nobody will be coming in to perform the o.t., so they said fine, came back today and told us we can have s.a. All those DOs who have been told that they cant return to sat times, its simply get your rep and a few workers together and tell your dim thats its there in the agreement and that as of next sat you will revert to the old sat times, badger your area rep to get involved and do not take no for an answer!!! We all know that if all d.o. staff did the job properly a lot of the worst parts of this agreement become unworkable, but doing the job properly also applys in mcs, pulling two yorks at a time, over filling yorkies, bags and boxes, doing the job properly applies to everybody. Anyway lets stop all the silliness and regroup for the big battles ahead, the deals done now let us make the best of it

WE are the union"

Glad you decided not to leave but for christ sake dont drag everyone down with all your negativity. If you really are a fighter how about telling us how you are going to tackle the battles ahead.

See,
you've got to stop this assuming thing,but Ido agree that the nay sayers are more likely to vote ,however that was not the point made,rather it concerned what the effect of the consequences of this deal would be on the attitude and moral of the membership, irrespective of how of how they voted.
It also unwise to say never,but your point about losing the previous national ballot does reinforce what I was saying, unless you believe the conduct of the leadership in previous battles had no bearing on that result?
IT's good to see that we agree that this is not a good deal, But with overwhelming and solid support for IA,the only reason I can see for not delivering a better one is a tacit acceptance of managements business model.Rest assured I will not forget who led us into battle ,how our generals conducted that battle and how they led us out again.
And yes if I am completely honest ,me and a couple of others are not best pleased with this result.
However well organised the No lobby was, to overcome HQ with it's access to mailing lists ,financial resources, trusted position and best of all VOTE yes ballot papers ,would ,I think you must concede, have been a difficult task.Given these circumstances I think people would be wise to take care when using words like democratic, a vote yes but full and fair democracy? Don't know if that assertion would stand scrutiny?
AS for publicity being s**t hot fraid I can't agree. 1 weeks silence the only communications error, not in my opinion.
What about the four weeks information blackout during the "talks", did that make the membership feel empowered ,included or informed?
What about the less than penetrating media campaign, not exactly' Cadburys take them and they......' memorable?
What about our leaderships media performance, stilted ,and rambling reeked of a lack of conviction like being assaulted with a three week old celery stick. To tell the truth the most convincing presentations I heard came in ad hoc interviews on the line with reps and members[unprepped, unschooled,and unfamiliar with public speaking]

As for Weetrogs point I agree completely ,sheer folly to misdirect anger ,the point is to learn the lessons.
Sadly there appear to be a lot of negatives as a consequence of this agreement ,failure to admit this seems perverse, but to brand all criticsm of our leaderships performance as negativity and silliness begins to look like a tactic to stifle debate. If you don't question you never learn ,if you don't learn you repeat your mistakes.


Once again on the issue of solidarity and unity I am in complete agreement with you, I believe all tiers of the union should act in common purpose to improve our terms and conditions whatever the scale of the attacks. Pleased to hear also that your office has won the first of many skirmishes, but I see others are not faring so well.
I sincerely hope my misgivings and fears about this deal are proved utterly groundless, for the sake of the membership. I truly hope that this agreement is a cleverly disguised CWU stealth victory masterstroke.
Don't think I've got the influence to drag anyone down with my negativity especially since I feel quite positive about the ongoing struggle, and my first step in preparing for battle will be to push for a fighting leadership who are prepared to be transparent in their dealings, and fully accountable and mandateable to conference and the membership, not much point going over the top with a blunt bayonnet and a dud jammed in the chamber.

By the way ,The bit in bold hope it was tongue in cheek cos it certainly is rather patronising you ain't a teacher addressing a class of slightly naughty five year olds ,hope it is'nt a true reflection of your attitude

Good to read a response without the abuse! Understand your views just think the emphasis is wrong. In many ways I think the main thing between us, and I know I am a minority on here, is I believe that the leadership struck the deal at the right time. As imperfect as it is it is my sincere view we would not have taken the members with us. There did not appear to be a clear objective from anyone here wot we would have continued the fight to achieve. Yes I've had responses about various things we should have fought for but many of them did not feature in our propoganda with the members. And I think that when the whole of the pec and many on here said pay wasn't the issue I am really not sure where we would have gone. I know we disagree but I think had we continued we would not have been able to articulate it to the majority of the members and we would have lost them. I think it is the responsibility of the leadership not only to lead us into battle when the time is right but to know when to cut a deal. I honestly think I'd have done the same thing in there shoes.

I think you are right we all have to learn by our mistakes and I believe we are awful at doing that. I saw no conclusion to why we lost the previous ballot. In many ways i think it was brave to lead us into another battle.

I understand what you are saying about the comms but I think its much better to start with a sobber analysis and I think most people believe in general communications has improved significantly. I heard that Div REps were reporting to Ward time and time again the letters to members were spot on. Very little criticism was raised until the week of silence at the end. As far as the 4 weeks during the so called period of calm I understand this came about partly as a result of leaks that embarrased both side. Now I am all for openess but if you've been involved in difficult negotiations as I have over the years you'll know this is difficult due to the changing nature of either sides position.

As for the bit in bold this was a quote from weetroggs posting. I didn't take it as patronising but then I wouldn't would I!

Lastly, great to hear you are feeling positive about the battle ahead. On this I take back previous views that all you peddle is negativity. I may disagree that the answer is to change the leadership. However, as long as your efforts here also focus in building from the roots then I wish you luck.

PS - Wot was your request for info on how to leave the union all about?

[kill Joy]

Also, many people here have complained about CWU publicity. The only criticism I think is valid is the week or so when the pec was considering the final agreement, that silence was inexcusable. Apart from that everybody had been raving about how good the comms has been and how it has improved over the years. I reckon the well oiled machine here really helped get such a massive YEs vote and turn out in the first place. So there was a mistake, ok a pretty big one, but on the whole its been sh"t hot.

Just a few quick notes about this part of your post Killjoy.

1. People will always complain about the Union its in the nature of Political movements and Unions. If they had secured everything I wanted there would still be others who would have thought the Union did not go far enough.

2. On here we were not raving about how good the communication was, in fact quite the opposite one of the common complaints from the start of the dispute was the lack of communication. In fact this lack of communication is what helped RMC get off the ground in such a big way. People were hearing things from their local union contacts and posted it on here. In some cases we were ahead of the Union in "announcing" things.

3. From this bit you posted

I reckon the well oiled machine here really helped get such a massive YEs vote and turn out in the first place.

I must point out that we are separate from both the Union and Royal Mail, it just happens that most who post here are members and employees of these 2 organisations.

TBT I think you've perhaps missed the points I was making. On 1. no problems. On 2. my reference to how good many people were saying the comms was wasn't a reflection of postings on this site - clearly not. I was refering to the wider union. Ever since the introduction of Postal and Telcom Voice there has been heaps of broad based praise for the improvements. i had report backs from numerous meetings ward had with Div reps and everyone said the comms was spot on. I believe the quality of comms helped deliver a magnificent yes vote for action. And lets not forget that we had the front page of the mirror on pensions - most of my mates thought that was genuis, and come on that sort of thing doesnt happen without real work from our comms dept.

Not sure I understand point 3. please explain.

[pinstripe]

[quote="lovejoy"]Moving on from the Dispute


Management need to take note of the ballot result as well. The majority of our members have yet to be convinced that they stand to benefit from what’s planned for the future. The only way to convince the doubters is if they now show they’re willing to listen to and act on the views of their staff and the Union. If they try to carry on in the way they’ve been doing recently then there’s no doubt that the gloves will be coming off again before long.



I've highlighted the part I'm interested in. What does he mean by this, that the PEC may grow a pair of b****, or that we, as the membership will follow their call for action? This from the union that folded and threw away all the advantages we had, they cannot seriously expect us to do anything except watch our own backs, what with everything being agreed locally. They've ripped the teeth out of the union it'll take time for us to recover, that is, if we don't all just act like RM lapdogs.

[yorkie]

WEETROG YOU SEEM TO BE THE SPINELESS PR..K WHO HAS NOT EVEN PUT
LOCATION DOWN.WELL IF YOU ARE NOT A REP STAND UP AND PROVE THAT YOU HAVE GOT BALLS..
WA..ER!!!!!!!!

[Malatesta1954]

check this link to London Region site

http://home2.btconnect.com/cwulrc/pensions.html

[weetrogg]

WEETROG YOU SEEM TO BE THE SPINELESS PR..K WHO HAS NOT EVEN PUT
LOCATION DOWN.WELL IF YOU ARE NOT A REP STAND UP AND PROVE THAT YOU HAVE GOT BALLS..
WA..ER!!!!!!!!

Im from stockport, whether that makes any difference to the point i was making i dont know, and no im not a rep but have just put myself in the ballot and the voting beggins next week. let me get this right you think the pec were correct to recommend the deal??? where you from near manchester, well that narrows it down!!!

Pete k came to our office to canvass for votes last time, yet during the dispute failed to answer any of our letters or emails, well that might be acceptable to you from a pec rep but im sorry its just good enough for me from a so called left winger, so i repeat the guys SPINELESS!!!


WE are the union