Moya's Oscar winning performance

wannabeek · Post by **wannabeek** » 19 Sep 2017, 20:08

Her performance was so bad I am now pretty convinced that they actually want us to strike.

It would mean they can tear up all old promises thanks to that last ghastly 'no-strike deal' in the last agreement.

Basically we are screwed either way but at least we still have the option to go down fighting.

Post by **Lounge Lizard** » 19 Sep 2017, 20:47

postslippete wrote:This video came too little, too late as I already voted.

What annoys me about Royal Mail LEADERSHIP is the fact that they want to steer us all headlong down an avenue which no one else in the company really wants to go. I understand that in business you must make tough decisions, but why all at once and why now?? Surely the senior management team at Royal Mail must be pondering over their strategy. The pensions crisis and knowing that our pensions when we come to retire to be a lot less would have been a terrible blow but that on its own probably wouldn't have been sufficient enough to anger most Royal Mail posties. What would is the constant barrage to informing us that mail is dwindling as some sort of excuse to make BIG changes within the company, reminding us that we are all well paid for what we do, possibly changing our shifts to work evenings and nights instead of mornings without being entirely clear about what FLEXIBILITY is and what we will be working like in future.

Royal Mail have just got it all wrong.

Yes, why all at once and why now??
Why nothing the past couple of years and all this now ?
Or why not pensions this year, later starts next year, walk ownership 2019 ?

bloot · Post by **bloot** » 19 Sep 2017, 20:48

wannabeek wrote:Her performance was so bad I am now pretty convinced that they actually want us to strike.

It would mean they can tear up all old promises thanks to that last ghastly 'no-strike deal' in the last agreement.

Basically we are screwed either way but at least we still have the option to go down fighting.

can i ask how you come to that conclusion

TheTrolleyMan · Post by **TheTrolleyMan** » 19 Sep 2017, 20:52

Jpro747 wrote:She looked a bit worn out bless her

Probably jet lag

Acca Dacca · Post by **Acca Dacca** » 19 Sep 2017, 20:53

postslippete wrote:This video came too little, too late as I already voted.

What annoys me about Royal Mail LEADERSHIP is the fact that they want to steer us all headlong down an avenue which no one else in the company really wants to go. I understand that in business you must make tough decisions, but why all at once and why now?? Surely the senior management team at Royal Mail must be pondering over their strategy. The pensions crisis and knowing that our pensions when we come to retire to be a lot less would have been a terrible blow but that on its own probably wouldn't have been sufficient enough to anger most Royal Mail posties. What would is the constant barrage to informing us that mail is dwindling as some sort of excuse to make BIG changes within the company, reminding us that we are all well paid for what we do, possibly changing our shifts to work evenings and nights instead of mornings without being entirely clear about what FLEXIBILITY is and what we will be working like in future.

Royal Mail have just got it all wrong.

They'd rather one strike over many things than many over one

wannabeek · Post by **wannabeek** » 19 Sep 2017, 20:55

bloot wrote:
wannabeek wrote:Her performance was so bad I am now pretty convinced that they actually want us to strike.

It would mean they can tear up all old promises thanks to that last ghastly 'no-strike deal' in the last agreement.

Basically we are screwed either way but at least we still have the option to go down fighting.
can i ask how you come to that conclusion

Well, they tear up agreements because we strike or... we agree to them tearing up agreements because we don't strike.

Glenno · Post by **Glenno** » 19 Sep 2017, 20:57

Moya's contribution to this WTLL is about as as good as her contribution in the negotiations "missing moya" is what is being banded around I wonder why?
My plea to Moya is simple, do not wait until things become untenable, you have a Business Plan, share this with the people that matter and we can decide how it affects us, from then on we have to rebuild trust and values to rebuild this company going forward, do not lose this oppertunity to engage with your staff and value their opinions

Post by **Lounge Lizard** » 19 Sep 2017, 21:03

Glenno wrote:Moya's contribution to this WTLL is about as as good as her contribution in the negotiations "missing moya" is what is being banded around I wonder why?
My plea to Moya is simple, do not wait until things become untenable, you have a Business Plan, share this with the people that matter and we can decide how it affects us, from then on we have to rebuild trust and values to rebuild this company going forward, do not lose this oppertunity to engage with your staff and value their opinions

A plea ?

'Stable door' and 'horse bolted' springs to mind.

parforthewalk · Post by **parforthewalk** » 19 Sep 2017, 21:05

It's all bluff, bluster & desperation from the RM hierarchy!

Let's take it to the wire & have a clean sweep of the Board!

If they want to take me/us down, then they are coming with me/us

bloot · Post by **bloot** » 19 Sep 2017, 21:21

wannabeek wrote:
bloot wrote:
wannabeek wrote:Her performance was so bad I am now pretty convinced that they actually want us to strike.

It would mean they can tear up all old promises thanks to that last ghastly 'no-strike deal' in the last agreement.

Basically we are screwed either way but at least we still have the option to go down fighting.
can i ask how you come to that conclusion
Well, they tear up agreements because we strike or... we agree to them tearing up agreements because we don't strike.

is it possible to tear up agreements if there is no strike , as cwu put it , we want a massive yes vote to show solidarity , but want to avoid a strike . I take it new agreements would be put in place ?

wannabeek · Post by **wannabeek** » 19 Sep 2017, 21:46

Ok, let me rephrase it. Either they tear up agreements because we strike or we agree to a set of really bad deals because we won't strike.

As I said, screwed either way in my opinion.

LaggyBand · Post by **LaggyBand** » 20 Sep 2017, 14:11

Gagging to see this vid.

Simply to consider the other side of course

bloot · Post by **bloot** » 20 Sep 2017, 16:29

wannabeek wrote:Ok, let me rephrase it. Either they tear up agreements because we strike or we agree to a set of really bad deals because we won't strike.

As I said, screwed either way in my opinion.

isnt the idea that threat of strike because of a huge yes vote gets us in a good position for good deals fought on our behalf by the union ? thats how i thought it worked .

k979aaa · Post by **k979aaa** » 20 Sep 2017, 16:39

Probably not fit for public consumption!

wannabeek · Post by **wannabeek** » 20 Sep 2017, 19:16

bloot wrote:
wannabeek wrote:Ok, let me rephrase it. Either they tear up agreements because we strike or we agree to a set of really bad deals because we won't strike.

As I said, screwed either way in my opinion.
isnt the idea that threat of strike because of a huge yes vote gets us in a good position for good deals fought on our behalf by the union ? thats how i thought it worked .

Huge yes vote gives us a chance of victory? (By victory i mean not being totally screwed) I do hope so. Maybe we have a chance then. Time will tell.