The postman’s knock must be answered, Billy Hayes insists

[TrueBlueTerrier]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/p ... 878677.ece" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As he prepares to lead 120,000 Royal Mail workers out on national strike next week, Billy Hayes is keen to highlight how different he is from the militant and vainglorious trade union leaders of the past.

Touching the top of his head for reassurance, he said: “I’ve got more hair than Arthur [Scargill] — just about.” And not just hair. Mr Hayes believes that his Communication Workers’ Union (CWU) is in a stronger position to force employers and the Government back to the negotiating table.

He pointed out that Mr Scargill never balloted National Union of Mineworkers members before embarking on its epic struggle in the 1980s and that he faced an implacable foe in a Thatcher Government that had long been ready for the fray. “The miners went out in the summer, coal stocks were prepared for at least two or three years,” he said. “We had a ballot, a 76.24 per cent ‘yes’ vote, an absolute majority.

“The other thing is that mail volumes increase by three times in the run-up to Christmas. Mail is not something that you can stockpile.” Asked whether that is an implicit threat of further strikes that would cripple the delivery of Christmas cards and presents, Mr Hayes said that he would prefer to describe it as an “analysis of the objective circumstances”.

Although he declined to specify plans for further strikes, he is waving a large stick. “The impact of any future action will not be unimportant. Royal Mail is a key sector of the economy, so my point is that everybody needs to drive quicker for an agreement.”

Mr Hayes is unapologetic if such power appears a throwback to an earlier era. While conceding that unions are generally weaker than they were, he sees the CWU as an exception because almost all Royal Mail workers are signed up and angry.

As a Labour Party member of 35 years’ standing, he is aware that industrial unrest in the winter before a general election brings back uncomfortable memories of the last time the party lost power in 1979. “I am not saying this helps the Government, hence the reason why we want to get it sorted, but the problems Labour face cannot be laid at the door of the CWU. It is in the Government’s gift to ensure that this matter is brought to a head and settled.”

He has a similar answer to the cries of pain from small businesses, three quarters of which are, according to a survey, considering abandoning Royal Mail deliveries because of this strike. “Our people meet more people from small businesses any day of the week than any senior manager in Royal Mail. They know what it’s all about, they know that the cheque in the post is a serious problem. It is absolutely crucial we get this dispute settled.”

Mr Hayes is incredulous that the employers and Lord Mandelson, the Business Secretary, have so far refused to agree to independent arbitration through Acas.

For many critics of the strike, the difficulty is determining exactly why it is necessary. Lord Mandelson, having already stepped back from plans for a partial privatisation of the Royal Mail, has gone so far as to suggest that the industrial action next week is suicidal.

A letter setting out the union’s demands to Royal Mail this week included several statements that appear to be more abstract notions of industrial relations than specific measures for negotiation. It included, for example, a call for the employers to agree “the principle that budgets should not drive staffing levels”.

Mr Hayes acknowledged that next week’s strikes were a consequence of pent-up frustration among his members. “If you have worked in an industry that has lost 65,000 jobs, seen 3,000 post office counters closed, Sunday collection gone, second delivery gone, lots of bullying and harassment — you are going to feel pretty fed up.

“Strong trade unions distil the generalised antipathy and say, ‘How do we articulate that and what do we do?’. We recognised that we have to change, we have to be more flexible, we need more technology. But there has to be some logic and rationale for it. We want change to be introduced by agreement and not simply arbitrarily.”

Could he sum up the purpose of next week’s strikes in a slogan? “I’ll give it to you in a word: ‘compromise’. We are not saying we are angels of virtue, what we are saying is that there are faults on all parts, it takes two to tango, and at the moment we seem to have a reluctant partner in Royal Mail. Maybe we need Len Goodman [a Strictly Come Dancing judge] involved.”

The man he wants to bring this dance couple together is Lord Mandelson, a politician often castigated by the union Left. “I don’t dislike him,” Mr Hayes said. “I think Peter Mandelson is a compromiser; he has done the biggest one in his life by going to work for Gordon Brown.”

So could it be beer and sandwiches at the Business Secretary’s Victoria Street headquarters? No — Mr Hayes, contrary to his working-class image, prefers wine. Anyone for “chardonnay and vol au vents?” he asked.

Phase 4 too far for union

• The current dispute between the Royal Mail and the Communication Workers Union dates back to a 2007 Phase 4 agreement that aimed to introduce workplace reforms. At the heart of the agreement were modernisation plans, including machines to electronically sort letters and changes to working practices.

• The CWU claims that the Royal Mail discussed the changes with the first three planned phases but on phase 4, which is how modernisation will affect job security, it is silent. The union fears that thousands of posts will go and there will be a huge increase in part-time staff.

• Adding to concerns is the Royal Mail’s burgeoning pension deficit. Earlier this year Lord Mandelson backed down over plans to part-privatise the company, with the Government proposing to cover the deficit after opposition from backbenchers. Uncertainty over the future has aggravated tensions.