Better 'very' late than never! LTB 182/26 – Red and Amber Alert

[POSTMAN]

This LTB was sent out at 8:53 AM on the hottest day of the year, where records could be broken.

https://www.cwu.org/ltb/ltb-182-26-red-and-amber-alert/

LTB 182/26 – Red and Amber Alert
No. 182/26

23rd June 2026

Dear Colleague,

Red & Amber Alert

The Met Office has declared a red alert for parts of the Midlands, Southern England and South Wales.

The Met Office temperature for each location fluctuates during the day, getting hotter in the late afternoon on Wednesday and in the early afternoon on Thursday. We have been in discussions with Royal Mail and have agreed on the following Joint Statement, which should apply to all units and functions within the red and amber alert periods. Also attached is a copy of the RM SHE Alert which has been issued.

Underpinning this Joint Statement is the shared objective of keeping employees safe during the hottest periods of the day. This Joint Statement also provides a list of options which units can adopt to avoid delivering during this period.

We know that many units have already agreed on a plan to address the red and amber alerts. However, the aim is to ensure that all units have an agreed safe way of working over the next few days. We have also agreed on an escalation process for units without a safe plan in place. The escalation should be raised directly to Divisional Reps and RODs in the first place, and in other functions of the business to the relevant senior manager and senior field official, if they cannot resolve it, then to the signatories of the Joint Statement.

Finally, whilst we believe the Joint Statement will help mitigate our members working in the extreme heat of the day, we nevertheless want to remind all employees of the following:

Colleagues are reminded that workers are protected under Section 44 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, allowing them to remove themselves from situations where they reasonably believe there is a serious and imminent danger. This protection is limited to specific immediate risks to safety; however, it does not apply to general discomfort. If prevailing circumstances do represent a real risk of “serious and imminent danger”, colleagues should aim to seek immediate advice from their local CWU representatives before using rights under Section 44 and speak urgently to their line manager/employer. Protection under Section 44 is an individual choice, not a collective one, although representations can be made for whole groups of workers where higher UK temperatures and specific hot-weather risks are more prevalent.

Please can Branches give this LTB and the Joint Statement the widest possible circulation.

Any enquiries relating to the content of this LTB should be referred to the Deputy General Secretary (Postal) department hford@cwu.org , Outdoor Postal Dept pharacz@cwu.org or Processing, Distribution, Parcelforce, International & Quadrant Dept jrodrigues@cwu.org .

Yours sincerely,

Martin Walsh Tony Bouch
Deputy General Secretary (Postal) Assistant Secretary

Davie Robertson
Assistant Secretary

[tramssirhc]

What sort of union leaves workers to invoke section 44? That's not collectivism. Neither Boulch nor Walsh will be exposed to the risks and neither would have put up with it when they were on the bag. Too little, too late.

[Mr Rush]

Surely if you are at the point of "serious and imminent danger" then you have to have ignored your own safety for far too long to then be in a position to invoke Section 44? This feels like a Catch-22 - if you invoke it, you shouldn't have; if you don't invoke it, you should have.

[tramssirhc]

Surely if you are at the point of "serious and imminent danger" then you have to have ignored your own safety for far too long to then be in a position to invoke Section 44? This feels like a Catch-22 - if you invoke it, you shouldn't have; if you don't invoke it, you should have.

Yeah, section 44 is pretty useless really. Its a brave worker that invokes section 44.

[sindba]

But it's a brave employer who ignores it.

You don't have to say the exact words "I'm invoking S44"

If you go back to the office and face questions, just say " sorry, I was feeing really dodgy with the heat".

With a red warning in place, they wouldn't dare take it further.

[tramssirhc]

But it's a brave employer who ignores it.

You don't have to say the exact words "I'm invoking S44"

If you go back to the office and face questions, just say " sorry, I was feeing really dodgy with the heat".

With a red warning in place, they wouldn't dare take it further.

That's not what the agreement says. The CWU have failed to secure an agreement that puts suspension of work as the first decision. A number of mitigations have been agreed that are to be used. Because the CWU failed to get suspensions as the first decision they have advised members to invoke section 44 if the individual thinks the work is unsafe. The CWU believes that the loss of productivity is not justifiable. Just like when Pullinger said the job was the fourth emergency service and told us to get out there and get on with it. Whilst he stayed at home.

[sindba]

But it's a brave employer who ignores it.

You don't have to say the exact words "I'm invoking S44"

If you go back to the office and face questions, just say " sorry, I was feeing really dodgy with the heat".

With a red warning in place, they wouldn't dare take it further.

That's not what the agreement says. The CWU have failed to secure an agreement that puts suspension of work as the first decision. A number of mitigations have been agreed that are to be used. Because the CWU failed to get suspensions as the first decision they have advised members to invoke section 44 if the individual thinks the work is unsafe. The CWU believes that the loss of productivity is not justifiable. Just like when Pullinger said the job was the fourth emergency service and told us to get out there and get on with it. Whilst he stayed at home.

I'm not defending the CWU! It's a pathetic response from them, again.

Just saying that if they won't do anything, then it's up to us. Feel a bit unwell, then drop everything and get home. No-one will take it further.

[Fed]

Again the CWU have rolled over and had their bellies tickled by RM!

[funkflex55]

But it's a brave employer who ignores it.

You don't have to say the exact words "I'm invoking S44"

If you go back to the office and face questions, just say " sorry, I was feeing really dodgy with the heat".

With a red warning in place, they wouldn't dare take it further.

That's not what the agreement says. The CWU have failed to secure an agreement that puts suspension of work as the first decision. A number of mitigations have been agreed that are to be used. Because the CWU failed to get suspensions as the first decision they have advised members to invoke section 44 if the individual thinks the work is unsafe. The CWU believes that the loss of productivity is not justifiable. Just like when Pullinger said the job was the fourth emergency service and told us to get out there and get on with it. Whilst he stayed at home.

I'm not defending the CWU! It's a pathetic response from them, again.

Just saying that if they won't do anything, then it's up to us. Feel a bit unwell, then drop everything and get home. No-one will take it further.

Correct. Even for the lower weather warnings, anyone that stopped work due to the heat would be highly unlikely to face action and any action taken would fail.

Personally, I think there should be a company wide agreed maximum temperature for work and lower temperatures for changes in what will be delivered.

[Wullie10]

Its an individual choice not collective. Been. Like that for 30 years. The brave speak up and get bullied. The meek stay quiet and get bullied and prey for a collective agreement. Supposed to be a union but it's everyone for themselves. Always has been . This new system relies on teamwork so much. Thats why it'll fail big time.

[Flashman_]

Surely if you are at the point of "serious and imminent danger" then you have to have ignored your own safety for far too long to then be in a position to invoke Section 44? This feels like a Catch-22 - if you invoke it, you shouldn't have; if you don't invoke it, you should have.

Spot on. Also if you are suffering the effects of heat stroke your judgement and ability to clearly know that, is impaired and at that point it could be life threatening. I have suffered the effects of heat exhaustion many times in the past, but its a fine line from that to potentially death inducing heat stroke.
A temperature above which you should have a right to refuse certain work. This company does not give a f**k about its people.

[tramssirhc]

Why would bag weights need reducing? Are the lightweight trollies prone to failure in the heat?

[postmanplod2026]

just think the poor people with no van tempertaure blower working 3rd world conditions

[tramssirhc]

just think the poor people with no van tempertaure blower working 3rd world conditions

There is no 1st or 3rd world (nor was there ever a 2nd, because the thinking behind 3rd world was misguided). There's explotation and degrees of it. All workers everywhere working in heatwaves are exploited. We risk our lives to deliver profits for the bosses. Bezos ain't out there delivering that essential bag of compost. Would it really have dented the bosses profits if they'd given workers a break.

[tonytucker]

Remember look after yourself,they genuinely don’t care about you