The ''be lucky to have a job'' stick only works on people who think the job would be worth keeping.
Many of those voting not to accept the deal are doing so because if the agreement was in place, they wont want to stick around anyway.
In my place, people are leaving in their droves as it stands nevermind the job becoming even worse.
People can only be frightened into losing a good job.
It's nothing to do with being lucky to have a job.
The fact that it's a s**t deal is not a legitimate reason to vote no.
Punishing the CWU or Royal Mail is not a legitimate reason to vote no.
The fact that you personally might not fancy working under these terms is not a legitimate reason to vote no.
The only legitimate reason to vote no is because you truly believe that voting no will lead to a significantly better outcome.
If that is your reason for voting no I totally respect that but there's a lot of working out to get to that place and I don't share your confidence.
I think it’s fair to say that there has been a lot of threats of potential mass job losses should the deal not be agreed.
My point is that using that as a reason to agree the deal is only threatening to the people who are still happy to do the job as it stands and after the changes
Those aren’t the people who need convinced
I don’t think the threat of losing your job worries the people who already have one eye on leaving anyway and constantly telling those people that if you don’t agree then your job is at stake doesn’t really work
I think there is a vast underestimation of just how many people are completely sick of the job and are looking elsewhere
Rather than tell them that they might lose their job and the changes are coming in anyway it’d be more fruitful to convince them that there is hope for the future and the job won’t be such that no one really cares if they lose it and new entrants will be in and out on a constant basis
Right now I don’t see that hope
If you tolerate this, then your paid break will be next
Some interesting comments on this thread. Disagree with some but respect each persons view nonetheless. I’m voting no, not because I believe a no vote will get us anything better because with the current union hierarchy there is simply no chance of that.
I’m voting no because this deal is simply the first step to completely ripping this job to pieces and RM will be back for more within 18 months.
I went on strike to get a decent payrise, maintain current terms regarding sick pay, not work later so I can pick up young children, and not be “coached” or “performance managed” via PDA data because I stopped to have a breather for 6 minutes. This deal gives me none of that and the union have told bold face lies throughout the dispute.
Maybe I’m being idealistic but I think the hard graft we do to the point of exhaustion deserves far better pay + conditions and if the company can’t give that without burning to the ground then you know what? So be it.
I say this as someone with two kids under 8 and a mortgage
with 28 years left to pay so i certainly haven’t took this decision lightly. I know full well the risks of a no vote but there is no way I can bring myself to back this deal.
I'm not really interested in threats by either side.
My lack of confidence in a no vote achieving a better outcome is based on 12 months of negotiation, 18 days of IA including Christmas, massive rallies in London and Edinburgh, parliamentary scrutiny and huge QofS failures... and Royal Mail's willingness to continue imposing change and tearing up agreements throughout...
Just to get to where we are..
I've spoken to CWU members, Area reps and branch officials who have recommended a no vote, all intelligent people with buckets of experience in the business and although they all have plenty to say about how s**t the deal is none of them can come up with the answer to the question my members want to know.
I'm not really interested in threats by either side.
My lack of confidence in a no vote achieving a better outcome is based on 12 months of negotiation, 18 days of IA including Christmas, massive rallies in London and Edinburgh, parliamentary scrutiny and huge QofS failures... and Royal Mail's willingness to continue imposing change and tearing up agreements throughout...
Just to get to where we are..
I've spoken to CWU members, Area reps and branch officials who have recommended a no vote, all intelligent people with buckets of experience in the business and although they all have plenty to say about how s**t the deal is none of them can come up with the answer to the question my members want to know.
What happens after a no vote?
Dave Ward addressed reps in Glasgow and stated whilst there is currently no clear plan B, a no vote returned would mean re engaging with the company for better terms and conditions and/or more industrial action.
I'm not really interested in threats by either side.
My lack of confidence in a no vote achieving a better outcome is based on 12 months of negotiation, 18 days of IA including Christmas, massive rallies in London and Edinburgh, parliamentary scrutiny and huge QofS failures... and Royal Mail's willingness to continue imposing change and tearing up agreements throughout...
Just to get to where we are..
I've spoken to CWU members, Area reps and branch officials who have recommended a no vote, all intelligent people with buckets of experience in the business and although they all have plenty to say about how s**t the deal is none of them can come up with the answer to the question my members want to know.
What happens after a no vote?
Dave Ward addressed reps in Glasgow and stated whilst there is currently no clear plan B, a no vote returned would mean re engaging with the company for better terms and conditions and/or more industrial action.
Some interesting comments on this thread. Disagree with some but respect each persons view nonetheless. I’m voting no, not because I believe a no vote will get us anything better because with the current union hierarchy there is simply no chance of that.
I’m voting no because this deal is simply the first step to completely ripping this job to pieces and RM will be back for more within 18 months.
I went on strike to get a decent payrise, maintain current terms regarding sick pay, not work later so I can pick up young children, and not be “coached” or “performance managed” via PDA data because I stopped to have a breather for 6 minutes. This deal gives me none of that and the union have told bold face lies throughout the dispute.
Maybe I’m being idealistic but I think the hard graft we do to the point of exhaustion deserves far better pay + conditions and if the company can’t give that without burning to the ground then you know what? So be it.
I say this as someone with two kids under 8 and a mortgage
with 28 years left to pay so i certainly haven’t took this decision lightly. I know full well the risks of a no vote but there is no way I can bring myself to back this deal.
You've said it better than I could. I'm in an almost identical situation, same age kids and a mortgage. I don't want to pay someone to pick my kids up and I don't want to get skin cancer working late in the summer. If this deal does through the job is over for me. If it doesn't there's still a chance it might work out. Very slim chance but worth a shot. So I will vote no.
Dave Ward addressed reps in Glasgow and stated whilst there is currently no clear plan B, a no vote returned would mean re engaging with the company for better terms and conditions and/or more industrial action.
I know I was one of them.
What else could he say?
It was less than convincing.
I'm not really interested in threats by either side.
My lack of confidence in a no vote achieving a better outcome is based on 12 months of negotiation, 18 days of IA including Christmas, massive rallies in London and Edinburgh, parliamentary scrutiny and huge QofS failures... and Royal Mail's willingness to continue imposing change and tearing up agreements throughout...
Just to get to where we are..
I've spoken to CWU members, Area reps and branch officials who have recommended a no vote, all intelligent people with buckets of experience in the business and although they all have plenty to say about how s**t the deal is none of them can come up with the answer to the question my members want to know.
What happens after a no vote?
If a NO vote returned, is it then the negotiators to go back to Royal Mail carrying out the wishes of its members to secure a better deal?
It is not the job of the member to propose and come up with alternatives, as they are not involved in any negotiations. Professional mediators are paid and appointed to carry out that service. Anything else, will appoint an individual to a position that is above their paygrade and experience, a recipe for disaster.
The members though will need to be prepared to backup a no vote with boots on the ground if necessary. That at the moment cannot be guaranteed.
Was told today by our ex d.o.m that we will be expected to do an 8am to 16.30 p.m shift pattern within a year and that 5 hour delivery spans will be the norm
This can about out of a loud conversation he was having with several disgruntled staff over the future of the company
I would also say that the manager in question is being groomed for greater things within the company,so I have no reason to doubt the veracity of his claims
Exactly the problem with this agreement people are expected to vote on. It is things that might happen, nothing set in stone with future interpretations and reviews.
That is not an agreement, but future proposals yet to be decided.
How can anybody decide their future financial stability on that?.
Exactly the problem with this agreement people are expected to vote on. It is things that might happen, nothing set in stone with future interpretations and reviews.
That is not an agreement, but future proposals yet to be decided.
How can anybody decide their future financial stability on that?.
The CWU have said you'll get your finish times before you vote. What's Trump's favourite saying? "Fake news"
Was told today by our ex d.o.m that we will be expected to do an 8am to 16.30 p.m shift pattern within a year and that 5 hour delivery spans will be the norm
This can about out of a loud conversation he was having with several disgruntled staff over the future of the company
I would also say that the manager in question is being groomed for greater things within the company,so I have no reason to doubt the veracity of his claims
Exactly the problem with this agreement people are expected to vote on. It is things that might happen, nothing set in stone with future interpretations and reviews.
That is not an agreement, but future proposals yet to be decided.
How can anybody decide their future financial stability on that?.
The CWU have said you'll get your finish times before you vote. What's Trump's favourite saying? "Fake news"
That might be for now, but this agreement expires in 2025, less than two years, hardly fake news but the Ballot in less than a week and still no update from the CWU. But an agreement ripe for manipulation and future exploitation.
Cannot see how any office will know its start/finish time will be releaed before the Vote as the Network has yet to be upgraded to feed the delivery office
Last edited by redlen on 20 May 2023, 18:30, edited 1 time in total.
Exactly the problem with this agreement people are expected to vote on. It is things that might happen, nothing set in stone with future interpretations and reviews.
That is not an agreement, but future proposals yet to be decided.
How can anybody decide their future financial stability on that?.
The CWU have said you'll get your finish times before you vote. What's Trump's favourite saying? "Fake news"
That might be for now, but this agreement expires in 2025, less than two years, hardly fake news but an agreement ripe for manipulation and future exploitation.
Cannot see how any office will know its start/finish time will be releaed before the Vote as the Network has yet to be upgraded to feed the delivery office
You could be right. Under the agreement, Network will move collections 3 hours later.
Exactly the problem with this agreement people are expected to vote on. It is things that might happen, nothing set in stone with future interpretations and reviews.
That is not an agreement, but future proposals yet to be decided.
How can anybody decide their future financial stability on that?.
The CWU have said you'll get your finish times before you vote. What's Trump's favourite saying? "Fake news"
They have told us we will get the proposed and 'worst case' finish time
What really matters is that 'worst case' finish time as it doesnt matter what RM initially change it to - what matters is what they CAN change it to through the agreement.
They could tell our office we are only moving 20 minutes later initially but then later next year decide to move it 60 minutes later because the agreement gave them that scope to do so
So dont look at what time is proposed. Look at what the latest time could be and assume thats what it will end up.
If you tolerate this, then your paid break will be next