POLL:Vote of no confidence?

[MrGoose]

Simple question really....

Here we go again, london walking out very soon again, with the rest of country to follow again...

Management up to same old tricks trying to fragment the union.

Wouldnt really be a problem with strong leadership follows a strong union.

There comes a time in all battles to be strong and stand together, batten down the hatches, stiffen the sinues...Theres a stiff wind blowing ladies and gents.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Sorry to be picky but I think you have asked the wrong question and yes it does make a difference:

Do you have confidence in the Union Leadership is probably the question you meant to ask - In other words do you think we need a change in leadership at some point.

Are you confident of the Union Leadership means to me that your asking if they are making the right decisions etc.

For the confidence in the Union Leadership I would say I am Yes - A little - Why because change may be good for the CWU, but the time for change is not now. The WORST time to change any leaders is just when your about to enter a period of unrest or conflict and all the signs are that's exactly what's happening.

Am I confident of the Union Leadership making the right decisions - well based on 2010 and my stance against it which I have widely publicised on here and my own blog I am certainly extremely nervous and would say that no I am not confident at all.

[hazzeem025]

Got to be brutally honest and admit that I don't have an ounce of confidence in the union leadership or in how it handles itself and how it communicates with its members. I think Ward and Hayes are out of touch with the opinion cwu members have of them, they broke our trust with the 2010 agreement. They took us from a position of great strength while we were on strike to agreeing to push forward a deal that fractured the union (d2d into work load/paycut for nearly all delivery staff VERSES pay rise for people who don't handle d2d-simple way off putting it I know but thats how it looks to me).

Yes we got job security as part of the deal BUT we didn't really did we? Look at the mail centre closures. RM played a blinder last time round and in my opinion conned the CWU top brass, I think RM knew all along that the new business plan wouldn't work, didn't want it to work so that they could come back 12 months down the line wittering on about it not working etc etc and the need for more changes.

Quite frankly i think the union fell for it hook line and sinker. How do Billy and Dave look now after ramming down our throats the 2010 agreement? Best thing since sliced bread apparently?

[MrGoose]

What I dont understand the most is why this is only a london vote?
Surely the threat of any forced redundancy anywhere is a national issue?

[hans solo]

on ly when it suits

[jack straw]

communicates with its members. .

IT DOESN'T COMMUNICATE WITH IT'S MEMBERS. Hayes and Ward are only in it for themselves. Until you get some new leaders in to run the union, you'll never convince anyone to strike ever again. :ncfo :dcfo

[Spedley]

I always have the feeling the union is run by beer drinking working class folk who are the topic of jokes inside RM. i.e. normal people like you'd expect in a local office.

On a national scale we should be led by £100k salaried solicitors, accountants and business men, not Billy from down t' pub!

[fishtank]

I always have the feeling the union is run by beer drinking working class folk who are the topic of jokes inside RM. i.e. normal people like you'd expect in a local office.

On a national scale we should be led by £100k salaried solicitors, accountants and business men, not Billy from down t' pub!

Definitely not Spedley...the leadership is disengaged from the membership as it is....that would only increase that feeling.

The problem with union leadership in general is one of protectionism.
If you start as a local rep you do it for nothing and therefore you have nothing to protect or lose,your only priority are your members....if you are elected to Area Rep you may be on full-time release from a very physical job so for the first time you have two priorities,protecting your members and your position.
If you make it to a salaried union position you may be on a wage roughly equal to a manager,that is a lifestyle you can easily get used to so the balance of priorities shifts again,you may have a nice house with a union funded mortgage and you don't want to see that disappear.
Once you get to the top of the union there is no going back,senior union official is not a job that comes up very often at the job centre and where else outside a union are you qualified to earn £60-100k?

So you can see the further up you get in any union the less it is about protecting the members and the more it is about protecting the institution that pays your salary.
When a senior official says "where would we be without the union?"...they don't necessarily mean us.