One absolute sure and solid reason to NOT vote yes!

[axeman]

operational needs can be chalenged sucsesfully without going to the extremes of law ..royal fails managers are told to use this 'tool' to try to prevent posties say from having a day off if there unsure that a duty might not be covered just bad management etc...but in all honesty what do you expect from inept managers which nearly all are within royal fail

[fishtank]

I am going to vote yes even though i have not read the agreement and i doubt most of you have yet,because it doesn't matter what ever the union came up with, you lot would have still voted no because that's the nature of this forum.

That's what we need on here......reasoned debate.

[Lincox]

If that is the case Mountec why have you bothered joining this forum. You are obviously in no position to mount a reasonable vote because you have not bothered to read the document so dont start slating members that have taken this agreement apart tooth and nail, to try and find some benefit for delivery posties.

[opgpat]

I am going to vote yes even though i have not read the agreement and i doubt most of you have yet,because it doesn't matter what ever the union came up with, you lot would have still voted no because that's the nature of this forum.

Do you realise this post makes you look really stupid? You are going to vote Yes for why? You have no reasons and you don't know what you are voting for yet you are patronising people here who HAVE read the agreement and are making an informed decision. This forum is full of people saying what needs to be in a new Agreement so you couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

[MinisterofCucumber]

If it is so easy to bring in changes without agreement, why have RM put forward this proposal?

I am assuming that this proposal is based on RM suggestions. I hope the union didn't suggest working to the top ten per cent performance or having no cap on delivery span.

[mountec1]

I am going to vote yes even though i have not read the agreement and i doubt most of you have yet,because it doesn't matter what ever the union came up with, you lot would have still voted no because that's the nature of this forum.

Do you realise this post makes you look really stupid? You are going to vote Yes for why? You have no reasons and you don't know what you are voting for yet you are patronising people here who HAVE read the agreement and are making an informed decision. This forum is full of people saying what needs to be in a new Agreement so you couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

The reason i joined is to annoy people like you and the fact is most of the changes are coming in now whether you like it or not and it's funny how people have read the agreement when the union have not even sent it out yet.

[BELIAL]

Crikey even the negotiators are posting on here now

[Tman]

It doesn't matter WHAT RM put in their correspoindence to you. The bottom line in a court of law is - is there a breach of employment law occuring. A change on this scale MUST be agreed or it is clearly illegal looking at the simple and clear wording here.

If you think changing employee's start/finishing times or changing thier workload in some way is a big enough change to mount a legal challenge, then go for it. Probably be laughed out of court, though, if it even got that far.
Apart from the fact that companies have been allowed to make some changes arbitrarily since employment laws were first drafted by citing the reason of "business necessities", RM would argue that this proposal has been negotiated with the employee's union AND is being put to a general vote. Hardly non-agreed or imposed.

[Lincox]

Tman you have obviously not read this properly. What the member is saying is that if there is a no vote by the members and RM introduce by executive action, then there could be a valid claim for breach of employment contract.

[Tman]

And wouldn't RM's barristers then argue that as the CWU represent the rank and file workers and had negotiated this very deal, it couldn't possibly be bad enough to be somehow illegal?
They would argue (rightly or wrongly) that by definition the CWU wouldn't have been party to anything illegal or detrimental to it's members, so it doesn't take a crystal ball to see how any judge would rule on any alleged "illegality" issues in this case.

[Stormproof]

I am going to vote yes even though i have not read the agreement and i doubt most of you have yet,because it doesn't matter what ever the union came up with, you lot would have still voted no because that's the nature of this forum.

You must be a very lazy or stupid person for
1. Not reading the agreement
2. Voting on something you know nothing about (see 1.)
I bet you will be the first to complain when your job changes

[Lincox]

It is not the judges decision to decide whether the agreement between CWU and RM is reasonable or not. The case would be that RM had unilaterally changed contracts of employment against a majority vote not to ratify the agreement

[Tman]

Which, as has happened time and again over the years,employers have a right to do (in law, if not morally).

Later working Saturdays or extra stuff to deliver would hardly constitute a fundamental change to any implied contract of employment.

NCU-represented grades had a similar situation when RM wanted to end the so-called Twenty four hour Shift Rota Agreement some years ago. The legal advice was that businesses have the legal right to change and adapt to survive, and can't be held back by employees not wishing to change when change is deemed necessary.
As long as adequate notice and /or compensation is given, there's not much an employee can do about it other than leave.

[banddy]

Surely no one would be as gullible to vote 'yes' on this agreement because there is no plan B?

Vote no! Stand up for yourself and your fellow colleagues! Do not listen to the propaganda machine of the CWU/Royal Mail. And certainly don't fall for their lines of

'it's the best deal considering the financial situation were in'

or

'there is no plan B'

or

'if we don't vote this in they'll bring in the changes anyway'



Let them bring/force in their changes at least you have tried to stand up for yourself by voting no. You would still have your self respect knowing you voted no or is a few bits of silver worth more?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
you've answered your OWN question !

THEY WILL BRING IN THE CHANGES - THE WAY THEY WANT - WITHOUT LOCAL INPUT/NEGOTIATION and YOU WONT GET MANY OF THE BENEFITS.
Glabally, mail volumes are falling - jobs are being lost and wage increases are few and far between - some are getting wages cut (BA).
the EU parliament, the tories and even the crwtins (mandelson,brown etc) in the 'New Labour' party all have it in for us (CWU) in Royal Mail.
they have lost sight of the fact it is a postal 'service' and want to privatise it.
BETTER the devil you know!?

if we have no agreements in place before the next election and the tories win - that will be the the best scenario for RM directors - they WILL have the backing of the majority of the new government and the "liberals" and the sell out merchants within 'new Labour' to sell us off - to the highest bidder (no matter who) and guess what, that highest bidder will want their money back pronto and

WE WILL ALL BE PART-TIME - waiting on the manager offering odd extra hours here and there - no overtime 'rates' - no shift allowances and more changes to the pension, coz no way will the tories agree to bail the POPS out, so savings will have to be made to sort that out and a pension is
DEFERRED WAGES, so if you vote NO, you are voting for a - LONG TERM PAY CUT !

[studmuffin]

Plan B is adhere to members wishes and return to the negotiating table - that's the LAW in a democracy.

Plan b, is.....er.....to... stand on a picket line and watch a agency guy do my job, come on guys, do you really think if it’s a no vote then the cwu would not call a strike?????? They have just spent 4 months thrashing out a deal!!!! so if its a no vote, we will see hayes and ward going back to royal mail and saying, 'the members think the deal is cack, can we alter a few things' {and yes, they would be correct in saying that, because it is a cack deal by the way} what do you think rm are going to say ??? ah yes, come in billy and dave, hope you have some biscuits with you, we will put the kettle on and discuss it over a nice cup of tea !!! I tell you what’s going to happen, they are going to have the door firmly slammed shut in their faces, being told, you signed the agreement, YOU have to sell it to your membership, and that’s what they are trying to do.
ive been on the job 22 years, and each time the membership has not voted in a deal, that the union executive have ratified , guess what ? I have been standing on a picket line..... What makes it different this time????
In no way I am saying it’s a good deal, it’s a, absolutely, appalling, dreadful, crap, Mickey Mouse deal, but plan b is to stand on a picket line. I am a realist; I think you have to make the best out of a bad situation. If it’s a no vote, royal mail will bring it in by executive action anyway.....