LTB 364/12 - National Negotiations/Postal Policy Forum

[dvbuk55]

The strong protect the weak - how does that jibe with the unions position of "there's winners and losers" in the BT 2010 agreement.

It may be true to say the Londoners race round in their cars to get to their second jobs but it isn't like that outside of there. We haven't used cars for a couple of years as have many places. It isn't those people who are feeling the rub it's the army of hard workers who are being harrassed to perform above and beyond a reasonable workload who complain, who have had revisions using the agreed tools.

For people to assume that the branch full time reps are not aware of the situation would assume them to be incompetent but not incompetent enough when it comes to protecting their own position and leaving much of the work to unit reps.

[fishtank]

I think if the union is to survive and thrive we have to move on from the position of blaming those who carve the job up and actually protect those who don't.
These are the members being targeted by management at the moment and they are getting very little support from a union that on the one hand promotes doing the job properly but on the other hand brushes the blatant bullying and harassment that comes with it under the table.
If Royal Mail wants new agreements on WCM and a deal to take us through the next 3 years they should be made to clean up their own act first.
If they can't or won't they should face a union that is not afraid to put the support of it's member before anything...including ridiculous notions of sitting on a pretend board.
Branches must also clean up their act,this union is not a charity to keep people who are plainly only interested in themselves in a comfortable seat,some of what goes on at some branches in the name of democracy from not informing members of elections and meetings to ignoring requests for advice from members would be better placed in a tin pot dictatorship.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Dingo I agree with nearly everything you posted, however, it doesn't address the issue of engaging ordinary members who really need the Union, and those who just want to do the job to their best ability without undue pressure or stress.

Me, I am a gobby git, I am not a rep, but thats because I don't feel I have the necessary skills YET. I however, do sit on our committee, I do aid the rep and ADR, I help organise when IA is looming, I go to all Union Meetings I can, and I even attend Demos when I can. I was at the London March on 29 Mar 2010, I was the only CWU presence in Huddersfield on the 30 Nov strike/march.

I think the main difference between you and me is not commitment or belief in the value of Trade Unionism, but in it how its applied. I firmly believe the Union needs to change it needs to be less monolithic, less autocratic, and less centralist, and more liberal (in the organisational sense not the political )

My own take is that the Union at the moment is concentrating on survival as an organisation, rather than surviving as a force for good in the workplace. Both are laudable aims and both should be achievable, but the focus seems to fully on the organisation rather than organising.

I really hope I am wrong.

[Martin Walsh]

TBT I admit there is different splinters at CWU HQs some who are only intent on survial , but there are many who believe unless you organise in the workplace you will not survive in any case.

Look the CWU has the best workplace organisation of any union across the UK. Yes the RMT is strong in London but not as strong across the UK.

Now we can all admit there some good Branch`s and local reps but how do you ensure we improve the reprsentation in units which do not belong to an organised and well functioning Branch.

Now there are a number of ways you can do this , here are just 3 ?

1/ Go back to the Old Union structure before 1992 when every office had its own Branch and its own money to organsie and therefore have to conuslt with the members in their catchment and persue policy in line with their members views and conference. The downside to this is that under the old structure there was just as many Branch`s who were bad and some who used the union finances for the wrong reasons.

2. Change the size of Branch`s to ensure they have a smaller geographical area to cover and enurse that they are held accountable for organsiing and resolving issues within this smaller Branch including office visits.

3. Retain the current Branch structure but give more power to the Divisional Reps , PEC and Regional Secretaries to ensure Branch`s are run better including forced mergers when Branch`s do not orgainse properly.

Equally lets be honest this is not the 70s or 80s or even early 90s when you have loads of reps released putting their feet up or in the pub. Industrial relations is tough , its far easier to criticise from afar then acutally try and do the job that people are happy to criticise. There are far less volunters in all postions then there were 5 , 10 , 15 or 20 years ago.

Local Reps role is differcult and members are nortious hard to please and far easier to displease. The area reps role is differcult and some travel huge distances weekly attempting to do their best. Divisional Reps roles are now hugely challenging dealing with far more important issues then 10 years ago.

All of that relects that Royal Mail has changed out of all propotion then it was 20 years ago.

[dvbuk55]

The alternative to any of your suggestions dingo, some of which have some merit, particularly following the wishes of the membership - is to take the path of least resistance and do nothing. Royal Mail has changed beyond recognition in the last 5 years and so has the CWU which appears to be another tier of management. The union is strong in London but not across the UK mainly due to the part time element which seem to have affected every other area except London. Part time employees are less interested in toeing a union line than trying to secure a full time post.

I have never doubted your passion for the union dingo but there comes a time when people of your experience must view the shambles that it is and take the bull by the horns and demand change.

[fishtank]

I wouldn't argue with most of your post dingo,my personal preference would be a mixture of options 2 and 3.
I don't think geography can be ignored when it comes to organising and some branches are obviously suffering from the limits of both members and reps having to travel long distances in order to meet and well attended meetings are the key to accountability from below.
The other obstructions to member participation at branch level also need to be addressed,member level apathy and branch level apathy,both obviously feed on each other and both are poisonous for the union.

A certain reasonable level of office visits by area reps has to be mandatory and not just to chat with the rep but to talk to the members,Each office should have a file at branch level detailing it's position with regards to revisions/membership levels/FT/PT split/level of representation/grievances/IR issues and this should be a live document updated regularly.
Compliance with this has to be mandatory,documented and accountable to Divisional level who must have the power to impose sanctions on branches continually failing including the ultimate sanction of merger.

Yes most reps at all levels are working hard but i believe that some are working hard in the wrong direction with the wrong focus on what members really need from an industrial union and what will ultimately protect the union and members if both are to have a future.