London posties sold short

[Red Postie]

Support London’s call to restart the national strike
http://www.redpostie.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

“This is a national agreement they’re breaking, it’s a national union, therefore it requires national action.”

London division officials are demanding the PEC restore the national strike, under pressure from their own members. Finally! It will surprise nobody that London Royal Mail managers have refused to budge on cuts or dismantled scab mail centres.

London postal activists, reps and branches should demand that the calls to lobby the PEC are put into effect by calling a demonstration at the PEC to show national leaders a little bit of the anger – and determination to fight – that exists among posties in London and further afield.

Branches all around the country, especially the 500+ that balloted before the national action began, should send in emergency resolutions to back up London and make sure that we stay united. Royal Mail will try to say, “this is a London thing, the militants are trying to sabotage the agreement”.

Nothing could be further from the truth, all the reports from Bristol, Glasgow and elsewhere show that Royal Mail is not retracting cuts or dragging its feet. The lack of progress after 3 weeks has even leaked out into the press, with one source close to the secret national talks has said “So far, it’s been a case of talks about talks.”

The London call for restarting the national strike has come late but is a welcome move that the rank and file need to push forward. If the PEC does not heed the call, London workers should vote with their feet and walkout.

A wasted month – let’s recover lost ground

The same London officials were quick to line up behind Dave Ward and the PEC to sell the Interim Agreement (IA) three weeks ago. They have argued that the deal isn’t a “sell out”, the local and national ballots are still live, and Xmas strikes could still hit the Royal Mail if it would not seriously negotiate its 2009 local cuts and 2010 modernisation plans. Well if proof was needed, now it’s here!

The truth is this is spin. The London CWU leaders by backing Dave Ward’s strategy have wasted a precious month. The IA has stopped the national strike’s momentum, and undermined the magnificent action of London postal workers who have led the CWU with 18 to 23 days of unpaid strike action. While many London officials have defended the deal, the term sell-out is unavoidable:

1. Royal Mail just wants to play for time

If this agreement came at any other time it would still be wrong because it has allowed the backlog to be cleared in many parts of the country. However this is not just any old six week period. Dropping the strikes at Christmas time, when we are strongest, is downright destructive. Even if the PEC calls a strike this Tuesday, the earliest we will be out is 1 December – four weeks wasted.

In other words, as many postal activists argued, Royal Mail has used the process as they always intended: to delay. Momentum has been broken and a demoralising near silence from the leadership, just like in August-September 2007 where negotiations saw nearly 6 weeks without a peep from the tops. A month has been thrown away to “explore” whether Royal Mail could be trusted. Thousands of angry CWU members, especially in London, have been proven right.

2. The agreement has built in divide-and-rule

The IA is meant to divide London from the rest. RM will bend over backwards to avoid confrontation in some areas, so it can point the finger at London as militants obstructing “modernisation”. If strikes are back on this will be a key part in a media offensive against our union. Some postal workers were already nervous about Christmas strikes thanks to the hysterical squeals by journalists, business groups and government ministers. The pressure will be even worse this time.

The question is, after surrendering once, will our national leaders all of a sudden discover their backbone and call the whole union out in such an atmosphere, especially when some regional officials will no doubt argue behind the scenes against being called out again?

The danger is that we will go back to the situation before the national strike, with stronger areas like London going it alone. That is why it is so important that every branch piles on the disagreement and calls on the leadership to immediately revive the national strike.

What about trust?

Mark Palfrey, a leading London official recently interviewed by the Commune before the IA, laid out how Royal Mail bosses were completely untrustworthy: “Basically, RM completely went back on an agreement they had made – there’s no other way of putting it. They’ve broken their own agreement. They’ve broken the terms of the existing national agreement, and they’ve broken large numbers of the local agreements our branches have… They’ve done this by what they call executive action, which means without agreement.” So why have the same London officials wasted the last few weeks backing Ward’s arguments to give Royal Mail a chance to rebuild trust? Royal Mail was never going to change its spots for the IA – it wasn’t required to!

Palfrey also said, “There’s a war going on…We’re in a war with Royal Mail, a war that we must win.” But what general supports a truce without concessions from the enemy, when our side had the upper hand and was giving them a pounding? The fact is Ward and PEC are looking for any way out of a strike they never wanted to call in the first place.

The London Division leaders have defended the Interim Agreement out of loyalty to Ward – just like they did for the 2007 Pay and Modernisation deal. Their support was crucial to allowing the IA to go ahead. But this has put a dent in the national strikes’ momentum and threatens to divide the union – it therefore hits the interests of their London members most of all.

Just as they have led the national action, it is London posties who will have to develop an independent rank and file movement to force the national strike back on track, with or without the leaders, and take back our union from the bureaucrats in order to lead it to victory. London branches against the IA can take the lead and call a national meeting to kick start such an initiative.

Lobby the PEC on Tuesday: restart the national strike!

[steven100]

Stop supporting Ward and Co.

[Red Postie]

Article updated to emphasise my support for London's call to restart strikes nationally

[steven100]

The country of men and woman postman have been sold short, not just London.
All we are is Donkeys for the bigwigs to cream the profits.

[lazyjack]

Is it not just a case of london finaly catching up with the rest of the uk?

[stokes11eg]

Hope a copy of this has been sent to the Gruesome Twosome--it may just, once again, provoke them into some kind of action to support US--not R/M which is what they seem to be doing.
Billy---you seem to always quote Union leaders of note in your speeches---how will you go down in the pages of Union history?

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Is it not just a case of london finaly catching up with the rest of the uk?

Nope more like London sticking to CWU policy of no local agreements without a National Agreement as a Blue Print. All the other areas, mine included, that made changes under pegasus etc did so against national policy.

So its a case of one division sticking up for itself and other sections of the country feeling the effects of not.

Anyway the strikes themselves, IMHO were not about London refusing to change, but Royal Mail refusing to negotiate, RMs institutional B&H, RM imposition of unworkable changes and most important of all RM not sticking to agreements they had already made nationally and locally. Although it does sadden me somewhat that loads seem to have bought into RMs propaganda.

[prowler]

Is it not just a case of london finaly catching up with the rest of the uk?

Nope more like London sticking to CWU policy of no local agreements without a National Agreement as a Blue Print. All the other areas, mine included, that made changes under pegasus etc did so against national policy.

So its a case of one division sticking up for itself and other sections of the country feeling the effects of not.

Anyway the strikes themselves, IMHO were not about London refusing to change, but Royal Mail refusing to negotiate, RMs institutional B&H, RM imposition of unworkable changes and most important of all RM not sticking to agreements they had already made nationally and locally. Although it does sadden me somewhat that loads seem to have bought into RMs propaganda.

Let's just remember that offices in Scotland(and elsewhere) were taking action before London got involved and have had to put up with all this crap without much support being offered from the CWU. My office (Scotland) has had all the changes imposed by EA, like many others and have agreed to nothing. In fact its a credit to many of the smaller offices that they stood firm with very little backup from the union until the dispute went national.

[Glenno]

Nope more like London sticking to CWU policy of no local agreements without a National Agreement as a Blue Print. All the other areas, mine included, that made changes under pegasus etc did so against national policy.

This is so untrue "how are you expected to follow National Policy
when HQ didnt inform Area or branch until WELL after this was
voted for Locally" as this is what happened in my DO. In fact
I mentioned it to REP and was told that if we didnt agree it would
be brought in by EA Isaid bring it on was voted down 2-3weeks later
HQ come out with this no local agreements thingy FFS this was the
beginning of "divide & conquer IMO

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Nope more like London sticking to CWU policy of no local agreements without a National Agreement as a Blue Print. All the other areas, mine included, that made changes under pegasus etc did so against national policy.

This is so untrue "how are you expected to follow National Policy
when HQ didnt inform Area or branch until WELL after this was
voted for Locally" as this is what happened in my DO. In fact
I mentioned it to REP and was told that if we didnt agree it would
be brought in by EA Isaid bring it on was voted down 2-3weeks later
HQ come out with this no local agreements thingy FFS this was the
beginning of "divide & conquer IMO

I think you have mistaken the no local agreements without National Agreements as a Blue Print (such as Peagus revisions, CDVs, WSM) with the instruction that came out earlier this year (or was it late last ) which said no agreements on "Local Savings" because RM were refusing to discuss anything or make movement on Phase 4.

Mind you it is very very confusing and its not helped because as an organisation the CWU don't disseminate information very well.

[Glenno]

TBT whats the name of the Union again? COMMUNICATION

[dvbuk55]

TBT whats the name of the Union again? COMMUNICATION

Our area had asked for clarification on certain issues only to be told that this was OK and that the agreement of 2007 was in force for local agreements - 4 MONTHS later we got the "no agreements, no cooperation blah blah blah prior to which it had been the North West alignment or some such bullsh*t. TBH the union have absolutely no idea how to put forward theories for change and I do believe they listen to the wrong people - they'd be much better off getting their backsides down to the shop floor and listen to the REAL postmen and women and not the psychophantic hangers on at HQ.

[dogfood]

the union have absolutely no idea how to put forward theories for change and I do believe they listen to the wrong people - they'd be much better off getting their backsides down to the shop floor and listen to the REAL postmen and women and not the psychophantic hangers on at HQ.