CANCELLING UNION SUBS = SECOND SICK ABSENCE FREE

[Linden14]

I'm out of the union ,how can we believe a word they say anymore

[Constance]

For all those who don't think change will happen think of all the branches that recommended a No vote. They all have standing at Conference and each have a vote on motions of no confidence. Back those guys. Give them the belief that when they stick their voting card in the air to get the Exec out or whatever motions made that support grass roots views that you are behind them. I personally believe lots voted yes because of the cost of living crisis, not because they think the deal was acceptable to them. The exec have a bad company to negotiate with but look how they fumbled the ball on strike legality , strike day strategy and even basic comms. And if course the overtime holiday pay deal was below what I consider acceptable and colours my judgement of their skills at negotiation in this dispute. I genuinely don't think they appreciate how the deals they made on sick pay and IHR given the workloads on delivery in particular are still unacceptable for most yes voters. Don't write anything off.

[gfte]

Cancel your home insurance, get a month off your mortgage.

Cancel your breakdown cover, get a free tank of fuel.

Cancel your pension payments for an instant pay rise!

Cancel netflix, get a library card and borrow DVDs for free. This one is actually legit though.

[Woody Guthrie]

I'm not sure if the strike strategy was wrong or just the expectation of the impact and the reaction of the business.

The last national strike had been 2009 and that only lasted 2 days, things have changed a lot since then.

With today's volumes we could have gone out for two weeks solid and not created a significant backlog in letters.

That leaves us with parcels but there's no monopoly on parcels so customers are free to go elsewhere, there's also no USO compliance to worry about, the more we went on strike the more work went to our competitors which is kind of like playing chicken with your own car against a guy in a company van.

While some people are shouting that we should have gone out for weeks at a time I'm not even sure if striking is or was ever a viable weapon in our arsenal in the present circumstance.

I certainly think that the fear of more strikes and more lost money would have played its part in the acceptance of this agreement so you could argue that at some point the threat of more industrial action actually became a useful weapon for management if that makes any sense.

It's difficult to know of course how the business would have reacted had we not called industrial action back in July 2022 and simply tried to negotiate the best deal possible, the business would claim that its executive action was a reaction to the strikes but I'm not really prepared to take them at their word on that.

What is frightening now is how the union would react to fresh attacks now knowing how ineffective industrial action actually was.

Perhaps we need to adopt more guerrilla tactics next time rather than trying to face them head on, small localised and random flare ups moving around the country? Obviously uncoordinated because that would be unlawful.

[stevejm]

Unfortunately RM will always have the union over the barrel in future negotiations because they will threaten to remove release time and union subs from wages and the union will fold again and again at the end of the day the CWU is a business and no business could afford to lose that amount of money and still function

The Union should send a mail out to every member asking people to commit to a direct debit sub arrangement. For a start it would give them an idea of remaining support and with good take up it would nullify that RM threat in the future. At any rate they need to start figuring out how to out manoeuvre RM before the next round of attacks in 2025.

[guardianangel]

Dear lord give me strength , they know not what they do.

You change the exec if you don't like the deal, you don't bail on the whole organisation. Reactions like this are all part of the current zeitgeist I guess, where if someone or something causes you the slightest discomfort, you walk away.

Erm, no, this is not what the Union is about. It's not a Spa that handed you a dirty towel. You change your Union. You Vote in a new Executive. It's not hard to do given the numbers who are unhappy with the negotiations. Takes only time and a bit of patience. What doesn't bring about change if you flounce off and take your money elsewhere like you're unhappy with the service in a bad hotel. As member of a democratic organisation, you are an agent of change by remaining a member.

People are brainwashed/conditioned so much by consumerism and the transactional nature of society that they apply it to anything and everything they spend money on.

I know it's 3 in the morning. I'm on holiday for a week. I'm going to do something useful now and get some sleep.

If you have 70% of members vote yes what is stopping that 70% of doughnuts voting Dave and his buddies back in again does he carry on with a union he has no faith in ,nah im with him the No voters have been shat on from a massive height i'd be amazed if any of them would stay around for it to happen again ,i did vote Tory once in my life never ever again and i was in the CWU once never ever again.

Why do no voters not realise all these changes are coming in regardless of a yes vote? Vote no? Then what? Go on strike indefinitely? Like the strikes worked last time! Burn it all to the ground? That'll look good won't it? Because if that did happen it would be the members of the CWU that would take the blame for the demise of R.M. The media in this country would slaughter the CWU.

jeez sounds like another one fell for it.

[guardianangel]

Unfortunately RM will always have the union over the barrel in future negotiations because they will threaten to remove release time and union subs from wages and the union will fold again and again at the end of the day the CWU is a business and no business could afford to lose that amount of money and still function

The Union should send a mail out to every member asking people to commit to a direct debit sub arrangement. For a start it would give them an idea of remaining support and with good take up it would nullify that RM threat in the future. At any rate they need to start figuring out how to out manoeuvre RM before the next round of attacks in 2025.

Next round they have already started in our office another 4 walks to be absorbed ,the ink isn't even dry and now they have a mandate to do what the hell they like because they know the union has now been beaten into submission,they don't have to fear anymore strikes i mean who the hell would strike now when even the members bottled the vote.

[guardianangel]

I'm not sure if the strike strategy was wrong or just the expectation of the impact and the reaction of the business.

The last national strike had been 2009 and that only lasted 2 days, things have changed a lot since then.

With today's volumes we could have gone out for two weeks solid and not created a significant backlog in letters.

That leaves us with parcels but there's no monopoly on parcels so customers are free to go elsewhere, there's also no USO compliance to worry about, the more we went on strike the more work went to our competitors which is kind of like playing chicken with your own car against a guy in a company van.

While some people are shouting that we should have gone out for weeks at a time I'm not even sure if striking is or was ever a viable weapon in our arsenal in the present circumstance.

I certainly think that the fear of more strikes and more lost money would have played its part in the acceptance of this agreement so you could argue that at some point the threat of more industrial action actually became a useful weapon for management if that makes any sense.

It's difficult to know of course how the business would have reacted had we not called industrial action back in July 2022 and simply tried to negotiate the best deal possible, the business would claim that its executive action was a reaction to the strikes but I'm not really prepared to take them at their word on that.

What is frightening now is how the union would react to fresh attacks now knowing how ineffective industrial action actually was.

Perhaps we need to adopt more guerrilla tactics next time rather than trying to face them head on, small localised and random flare ups moving around the country? Obviously uncoordinated because that would be unlawful.

Strike action was effective the union just took its foot off the gas too early once they threatened them ,they bottled it for self preservation not in the interest of its members,we all know this ,Royal Mail played their ace card as soon as they thought they were done for with a 97% vote and the cwu fell for it hook line and sinker we should of carried on striking through the local elections.

[worktotime]

I’m presuming you will be donating your lump sum, won by your ‘inept, underhand’ union to charity? Good man. Stand by those principles.

People who cancel have every right to the lump sum . We lost a lot of money from striking and have every right to recuperate some of it .
This was never about change , it was happening.
It was about the t&c .

to right and well said , i cancelled mine and that money will cover the 16 days i lost through waste of time strikes and the annual leave they took off me as well , oh and if theres any change that will go towards the 30 hours i will be working in winter for free .

[scotchy1962]

I'm not sure if the strike strategy was wrong or just the expectation of the impact and the reaction of the business.

The last national strike had been 2009 and that only lasted 2 days, things have changed a lot since then.

With today's volumes we could have gone out for two weeks solid and not created a significant backlog in letters.

That leaves us with parcels but there's no monopoly on parcels so customers are free to go elsewhere, there's also no USO compliance to worry about, the more we went on strike the more work went to our competitors which is kind of like playing chicken with your own car against a guy in a company van.

While some people are shouting that we should have gone out for weeks at a time I'm not even sure if striking is or was ever a viable weapon in our arsenal in the present circumstance.

I certainly think that the fear of more strikes and more lost money would have played its part in the acceptance of this agreement so you could argue that at some point the threat of more industrial action actually became a useful weapon for management if that makes any sense.

It's difficult to know of course how the business would have reacted had we not called industrial action back in July 2022 and simply tried to negotiate the best deal possible, the business would claim that its executive action was a reaction to the strikes but I'm not really prepared to take them at their word on that.

What is frightening now is how the union would react to fresh attacks now knowing how ineffective industrial action actually was.

Perhaps we need to adopt more guerrilla tactics next time rather than trying to face them head on, small localised and random flare ups moving around the country? Obviously uncoordinated because that would be unlawful.

I think under the current leadership this ship has sailed and the future looks decidedly rocky unless there's a change at the top.
Hopefully some younger forward thinking people will drive the union on and figure a way to counter the latest country wide strategy of trying to kill off the unions. Not sure if they exist, but who knows.
If i am still on here at the time of the next pay rise somebody remind me to retire as i must have forgotten too.
We are fecked in terms of the workplace as the company will probably call their bluff first chance they get knowing there will be no response.
My two bobs worth and i would gladly be proved wrong.

[pieoftheday]

I'm not sure if the strike strategy was wrong or just the expectation of the impact and the reaction of the business.

The last national strike had been 2009 and that only lasted 2 days, things have changed a lot since then.

With today's volumes we could have gone out for two weeks solid and not created a significant backlog in letters.

That leaves us with parcels but there's no monopoly on parcels so customers are free to go elsewhere, there's also no USO compliance to worry about, the more we went on strike the more work went to our competitors which is kind of like playing chicken with your own car against a guy in a company van.

While some people are shouting that we should have gone out for weeks at a time I'm not even sure if striking is or was ever a viable weapon in our arsenal in the present circumstance.

I certainly think that the fear of more strikes and more lost money would have played its part in the acceptance of this agreement so you could argue that at some point the threat of more industrial action actually became a useful weapon for management if that makes any sense.

It's difficult to know of course how the business would have reacted had we not called industrial action back in July 2022 and simply tried to negotiate the best deal possible, the business would claim that its executive action was a reaction to the strikes but I'm not really prepared to take them at their word on that.

What is frightening now is how the union would react to fresh attacks now knowing how ineffective industrial action actually was.

Perhaps we need to adopt more guerrilla tactics next time rather than trying to face them head on, small localised and random flare ups moving around the country? Obviously uncoordinated because that would be unlawful.

Not sure about not causing an significant backlog if we had gone out for 2 weeks, after our last revision it took just 1 week for a massive backlog to appear

[Jpro747]

Today I have cancelled my Disney plus subscription.

Just thought since we were randomly sharing our financial decisions I would join in.

I'm pretty sure they're an even more inept, underhanded organisation than the CWU.

I've decided I'm now going to represented by Netflix.

Amazon Prime would have been a better choice

[thefox]

I'm not sure if the strike strategy was wrong or just the expectation of the impact and the reaction of the business.

The last national strike had been 2009 and that only lasted 2 days, things have changed a lot since then.

With today's volumes we could have gone out for two weeks solid and not created a significant backlog in letters.

That leaves us with parcels but there's no monopoly on parcels so customers are free to go elsewhere, there's also no USO compliance to worry about, the more we went on strike the more work went to our competitors which is kind of like playing chicken with your own car against a guy in a company van.

While some people are shouting that we should have gone out for weeks at a time I'm not even sure if striking is or was ever a viable weapon in our arsenal in the present circumstance.

I certainly think that the fear of more strikes and more lost money would have played its part in the acceptance of this agreement so you could argue that at some point the threat of more industrial action actually became a useful weapon for management if that makes any sense.

It's difficult to know of course how the business would have reacted had we not called industrial action back in July 2022 and simply tried to negotiate the best deal possible, the business would claim that its executive action was a reaction to the strikes but I'm not really prepared to take them at their word on that.

What is frightening now is how the union would react to fresh attacks now knowing how ineffective industrial action actually was.

Perhaps we need to adopt more guerrilla tactics next time rather than trying to face them head on, small localised and random flare ups moving around the country? Obviously uncoordinated because that would be unlawful.

Woody do you think an overtime ban would have been effective from the start i get some people would have struggled without o.t especially the part timers bur when we were on 2 day strikes the place was awash with people coming in early to get money back and backlog was cleared quickly.

[thefox]

I'm not sure if the strike strategy was wrong or just the expectation of the impact and the reaction of the business.

The last national strike had been 2009 and that only lasted 2 days, things have changed a lot since then.

With today's volumes we could have gone out for two weeks solid and not created a significant backlog in letters.

That leaves us with parcels but there's no monopoly on parcels so customers are free to go elsewhere, there's also no USO compliance to worry about, the more we went on strike the more work went to our competitors which is kind of like playing chicken with your own car against a guy in a company van.

While some people are shouting that we should have gone out for weeks at a time I'm not even sure if striking is or was ever a viable weapon in our arsenal in the present circumstance.

I certainly think that the fear of more strikes and more lost money would have played its part in the acceptance of this agreement so you could argue that at some point the threat of more industrial action actually became a useful weapon for management if that makes any sense.

It's difficult to know of course how the business would have reacted had we not called industrial action back in July 2022 and simply tried to negotiate the best deal possible, the business would claim that its executive action was a reaction to the strikes but I'm not really prepared to take them at their word on that.

What is frightening now is how the union would react to fresh attacks now knowing how ineffective industrial action actually was.

Perhaps we need to adopt more guerrilla tactics next time rather than trying to face them head on, small localised and random flare ups moving around the country? Obviously uncoordinated because that would be unlawful.

Woody do you think an overtime ban would have been effective from the start i get some people would have struggled without o.t especially the part timers bur when we were on 2 day strikes the place was awash with people coming in early to get money back and backlog was cleared quickly.

[aiden01]

I'm not sure if the strike strategy was wrong or just the expectation of the impact and the reaction of the business.

The last national strike had been 2009 and that only lasted 2 days, things have changed a lot since then.

With today's volumes we could have gone out for two weeks solid and not created a significant backlog in letters.

That leaves us with parcels but there's no monopoly on parcels so customers are free to go elsewhere, there's also no USO compliance to worry about, the more we went on strike the more work went to our competitors which is kind of like playing chicken with your own car against a guy in a company van.

While some people are shouting that we should have gone out for weeks at a time I'm not even sure if striking is or was ever a viable weapon in our arsenal in the present circumstance.

I certainly think that the fear of more strikes and more lost money would have played its part in the acceptance of this agreement so you could argue that at some point the threat of more industrial action actually became a useful weapon for management if that makes any sense.

It's difficult to know of course how the business would have reacted had we not called industrial action back in July 2022 and simply tried to negotiate the best deal possible, the business would claim that its executive action was a reaction to the strikes but I'm not really prepared to take them at their word on that.

What is frightening now is how the union would react to fresh attacks now knowing how ineffective industrial action actually was.

Perhaps we need to adopt more guerrilla tactics next time rather than trying to face them head on, small localised and random flare ups moving around the country? Obviously uncoordinated because that would be unlawful.

Woody do you think an overtime ban would have been effective from the start i get some people would have struggled without o.t especially the part timers bur when we were on 2 day strikes the place was awash with people coming in early to get money back and backlog was cleared quickly.

How do you implement an ot ban.