Serious question. Historically at RoyalMail what has striking actually achieved?

[WalkerX]

All I would say is if we don’t have the deterrent of strike action our bosses will walk straight over the top of us. The terms we have right now are as a result of those who stood up and took strike action in the past. The way things are at the moment in big companies is to shaft the workforce and work them harder for less in T&C’S all to feed shareholder and executive greed. It’s as simple as that!!!

[WalkerX]

If you take an extreme left point of view unions are a barrier to class progression.
Bismark recognised the danger back in the 19 th century and developed a welfare system for the working classes to dampen socialist appeal.
We all know that we need collective bargaining and every major employer knows that it's easier to deal with representives than putting out fires every day.
But this time seems different , The CEO says there will be a big announcement st the AGM tomorrow.

You know your history.
RM seem to want to provoke. AGM announcement seems quite sinister.

[PMC Network Driver]

Sick pay should be looked at and changed why? because we all abuse it, I have been with RM for 37 years and sick leave to the vast majority has become an extension of annual leave, workers in competing companies just don't get the sort benefits we get so when we lose it and we will don't blame RM blame the feckless among us who constantly abuse the system.

[twoloops]

Can we still not go on strike for a few weeks regardless what happens, show them we mean business

[SpacePhoenix]

Sick pay should be looked at and changed why? because we all abuse it, I have been with RM for 37 years and sick leave to the vast majority has become an extension of annual leave, workers in competing companies just don't get the sort benefits we get so when we lose it and we will don't blame RM blame the feckless among us who constantly abuse the system.

If someone is sick at the beginning of a week, say Monday only and that'll put them on a stage then chances are they'll just take the whole week as sick

[theargyspy]

Sick pay should be looked at and changed why? because we all abuse it, I have been with RM for 37 years and sick leave to the vast majority has become an extension of annual leave, workers in competing companies just don't get the sort benefits we get so when we lose it and we will don't blame RM blame the feckless among us who constantly abuse the system.

I've been with RM for the same time as you 37+ years and I don't recognise what you are saying at all, my office, one of the biggest in the country has the odd idiot who abuses the system but most of my colleagues come to work even when ill, carrying injuries, etc I know of at least one who hasn't been sick for over 30 years. OK there are some working for RM that think of it as an extension of annual leave, or go sick for the slightest cold, but that is more than made up for by all the colleagues who come in when they really should be off sick. Very difficult to quantify, but if you had a list of all the people over a given year that went sick when NOT ill, and a list of all those who SHOULD have gone sick but didn't I don't think their would be much in it

[Schiff]

Sick pay should be looked at and changed why? because we all abuse it, I have been with RM for 37 years and sick leave to the vast majority has become an extension of annual leave, workers in competing companies just don't get the sort benefits we get so when we lose it and we will don't blame RM blame the feckless among us who constantly abuse the system.

I've been with RM for the same time as you 37+ years and I don't recognise what you are saying at all, my office, one of the biggest in the country has the odd idiot who abuses the system but most of my colleagues come to work even when ill, carrying injuries, etc I know of at least one who hasn't been sick for over 30 years. OK there are some working for RM that think of it as an extension of annual leave, or go sick for the slightest cold, but that is more than made up for by all the colleagues who come in when they really should be off sick. Very difficult to quantify, but if you had a list of all the people over a given year that went sick when NOT ill, and a list of all those who SHOULD have gone sick but didn't I don't think their would be much in it

For some, the proposed changes will actually increase the amount of time that they are off sick. Those who return after illness or injury when "not 100% but I think that I'll probably OK to come in to work so I'll give it a go".

Currently these people don't lose out financially if, after a day or two back they realise that they aren't yet up to doing the job and need to go off sick again. Same with those who come back on light duties. If the proposed changes are brought in then, should they have to go off sick again then they would be on SSP only for a period. Giving it a go could hit them in the pocket.

Personally, once actually off work sick, I wouldn't consider returning to work until I was absolutely sure that I was 100% fit and well.

[Woody Guthrie]

The thing is people who take the piss will take the piss whether they get full pay or SSP so let's not pretend this is about helping the "team" or stopping the piss takers. Don't play their divide and conquer game, it's exactly what they want.

This is purely about saving money by reducing your terms and conditions down to the lowest level, this is only stage one of the plan, there's a lot more to come if we don't draw a line in the sand right here.