fishtank wrote:I'm not condoning reps "overeagerness" to agree revisions though a lot of these revisions seem to have had at least some "persuasion" from Area and above...why i don't know.north london driver wrote: the longer you dont agree to revisions the worst the managers become.
What you also have to understand is that the net result of stalling revisions will not necessarily be good revisions but the watering down of the revision process altogether.
We've already seen that with the extension of the BTA into what looks like 2015 and later starts being bought for revision payments without the benefits to members that delivery methods,new attendance patterns and the shorter working week brings.
The longer the revision process drags out the more chance you will have of being caught in the nuclear option which will come when RM is privatised,changes imposed not negotiated and the union effectively sidelined.
It's not a pretty picture i'm painting but it is realistic.
We will be unskilled labour in a world full of unskilled labour.
The changes will be rapid and severe and no amount of union blustering will save us unless the membership can be organised and galvanised to fight.
Can i see that happening with the leadership we have and the legacy of the "deal of the century"?
No.
You are absolutely right Fishtank,
Deep down we all know we are nearly privatised, the signs are all too clear.
Lets at least get the money/shorter week out of them-it's not much for what we are going to go through but when the axe falls who knows what will happen to the job.
Employment contracts without a doubt will change anyway(it should'nt affect the 39 hour week though)
The CWU heirachy have'nt been in contact with members for ages, only Bob gibson!