But local reps do get paid by RM for their union work. It is all done in company time, and they are given release time for TU work. As such, they are paid the same as other posties yet do at least 20% less real work.
As a postman i worked 8 hours/day.
As a rep I worked 16 hours a day.
Members problems aren't confined to working hours.
Understanding the different agreements and how they were intended to be implemented doesn't happen overnight.
Researching medical conditions and outlining defences for attendance procedures and conduct cases is time consuming.
I could go on.
You are so far off the mark it is embarrassing. Perhaps you should give it a go and see for yourself.
Couldn't agree more.
High levels of stress too.
Impossible to switch off, even when you are on leave.
Some do maybe, but many don't.
For the life of me i can't remember the name of the "google" lawyer we used to have running around this forum, spouting all sorts of laws and cases picked up with a simple google search.
While i have no reason to dispute what smooth is saying about her background, perhaps coming onto this forum and trying to educate us in the ways of RM and employment law isn't the way to go. Serve your time, learn what really goes on behind the scenes and don't quote employment law like it's some sort of gospel, it isn't, and as i have said companies treat them more as a guidance than actual law.
When people on here spout rubbish about a poor CWU rep running around like a headless chicken and working 10 times harder than the rest of us — when in reality they do at least 20% less real work than us — I will continue to put the record right and put the counterfactual situation. Time and time again.
So yet again — the ET and EAT judgments overwhelmingly prove that ultimately RM follows the law prescriptively and almost to the letter in a vast majority of cases, rather than “treating it as guidance” as others on here spout. Fact.
Stop trying to discredit me or dispute my bona fides. Do you try to discredit me because you can’t dispute the irrefutable facts and findings in the thousands of publicly available judicial judgments?!
Why don't you stand then.
If it is such a cushy number that comes with such appealing perks challenge your unit rep.
As you are such an expert on employment laws you should be an ideal candidate.
Do it for for six months and then re-read this thread.
For the life of me i can't remember the name of the "google" lawyer we used to have running around this forum, spouting all sorts of laws and cases picked up with a simple google search.
While i have no reason to dispute what smooth is saying about her background, perhaps coming onto this forum and trying to educate us in the ways of RM and employment law isn't the way to go. Serve your time, learn what really goes on behind the scenes and don't quote employment law like it's some sort of gospel, it isn't, and as i have said companies treat them more as a guidance than actual law.
When people on here spout rubbish about a poor CWU rep running around like a headless chicken and working 10 times harder than the rest of us — when in reality they do at least 20% less real work than us — I will continue to put the record right and put the counterfactual situation. Time and time again.
So yet again — the ET and EAT judgments overwhelmingly prove that ultimately RM follows the law prescriptively and almost to the letter in a vast majority of cases, rather than “treating it as guidance” as others on here spout. Fact.
Stop trying to discredit me or dispute my bona fides. Do you try to discredit me because you can’t dispute the irrefutable facts and findings in the thousands of publicly available judicial judgments?!
Why don't you stand then.
If it is such a cushy number that comes with such appealing perks challenge your unit rep.
As you are such an expert on employment laws you should be an ideal candidate.
Do it for for six months and then re-read this thread.
I’m not a union member and nor do I desire to be. Union membership, “repping” and all of that stuff is the sole preserve of the Old Boys Club.
But I am always happy to help my workmates, especially those who like me are on new-entrant contracts. Indeed, I have already informally helped several colleagues with issues they’ve encountered both in the workplace and outside of it.
For the life of me i can't remember the name of the "google" lawyer we used to have running around this forum, spouting all sorts of laws and cases picked up with a simple google search.
While i have no reason to dispute what smooth is saying about her background, perhaps coming onto this forum and trying to educate us in the ways of RM and employment law isn't the way to go. Serve your time, learn what really goes on behind the scenes and don't quote employment law like it's some sort of gospel, it isn't, and as i have said companies treat them more as a guidance than actual law.
When people on here spout rubbish about a poor CWU rep running around like a headless chicken and working 10 times harder than the rest of us — when in reality they do at least 20% less real work than us — I will continue to put the record right and put the counterfactual situation. Time and time again.
So yet again — the ET and EAT judgments overwhelmingly prove that ultimately RM follows the law prescriptively and almost to the letter in a vast majority of cases, rather than “treating it as guidance” as others on here spout. Fact.
Stop trying to discredit me or dispute my bona fides. Do you try to discredit me because you can’t dispute the irrefutable facts and findings in the thousands of publicly available judicial judgments?!
Why don't you stand then.
If it is such a cushy number that comes with such appealing perks challenge your unit rep.
As you are such an expert on employment laws you should be an ideal candidate.
Do it for for six months and then re-read this thread.
I’m not a union member and nor do I desire to be. Union membership, “repping” and all of that stuff is the sole preserve of the Old Boys Club.
But I am always happy to help my workmates, especially those who like me are on new-entrant contracts. Indeed, I have already informally helped several colleagues with issues they’ve encountered both in the workplace and outside of it.
So you have made a judgement about a position in an organisation you choose not to belong to in presumably a very short space of time.
Maybe you had preconceived ideas of 'repping' and 'unions' before you took the job.
Your analysis of the role doesn't even slightly match up with reality.