This will not be a popular post

Woody Guthrie · Post by **Woody Guthrie** » 03 Mar 2020, 18:37

if that was the case they would've done it.

Who do you think processes your union subs?
We (the union) even pay them to do it.

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 03 Mar 2020, 18:42

Woody Guthrie wrote:
if that was the case they would've done it.
Who do you think processes your union subs?
We (the union) even pay them to do it.

that being the case then why didn't they stop the subs before the last few strikes we had which ended up costing them millions. instead of taking us to court and risk losing, just stop the subs. destroy the union and they wouldn't need to pay us nearly 12 quid an hour. no union would mean they could run the company as they see fit. paying us the same as Hermes, or DHL.

clashcityrocker · Post by **clashcityrocker** » 03 Mar 2020, 18:58

daveyeff wrote: that being the case then why didn't they stop the subs before the last few strikes we had which ended up costing them millions. instead of taking us to court and risk losing, just stop the subs. destroy the union and they wouldn't need to pay us nearly 12 quid an hour. no union would mean they could run the company as they see fit. paying us the same as Hermes, or DHL.

Because they need the union as much as the union needs them.
Why do you think RM pays out millions for full time release reps?

Hermes makes 30 million profit.

clashcityrocker · Post by **clashcityrocker** » 03 Mar 2020, 19:00

The relationship is symbiotic.
There is the word for the day.

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 03 Mar 2020, 19:03

I do not believe it one 'scintilla' there's another word.

clashcityrocker · Post by **clashcityrocker** » 03 Mar 2020, 19:24

Don't believe what?

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 03 Mar 2020, 19:25

clashcityrocker wrote:
daveyeff wrote: that being the case then why didn't they stop the subs before the last few strikes we had which ended up costing them millions. instead of taking us to court and risk losing, just stop the subs. destroy the union and they wouldn't need to pay us nearly 12 quid an hour. no union would mean they could run the company as they see fit. paying us the same as Hermes, or DHL.
Because they need the union as much as the union needs them.
Why do you think RM pays out millions for full time release reps?

Hermes makes 30 million profit.

and if there was no union it wouldn't need to pay out millions to full time release reps.

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 03 Mar 2020, 19:27

clashcityrocker wrote:Don't believe what?

I don't believe they could stop the subs or they would have done it, saving them millions in lost revenue. if they coul rid themselves of the union they would do it.

clashcityrocker · Post by **clashcityrocker** » 03 Mar 2020, 19:37

Ask your union rep then.
Check off they call it don't they? They have threatened to do it before I believe.

You cannot run a business the size of RM, especially considering its history, without the involvement of a trade union.
I say involvement but sometimes I think connivance.
Unfortunately for us, the sabre rattling has reached epic proportions with both the main actors involved desperate to prove they have the biggest willy.

Woody Guthrie · Post by **Woody Guthrie** » 03 Mar 2020, 19:44

It's called 'check off' davey.
Royal Mail deducts union subs directly from your wages and then pays it directly to the union.
Apparently this facility cost the union over £300,000 a year.
RMT used to use check off until the employer removed it, the union initially lost half its members overnight until they could set up a direct debit system.

Royal Mail also pays the wages of full-time release reps and then recovers the money through something called Central Billing. This facility also costs the union.

As Clash points out it is a symbiotic financial arrangement which if removed would throw the union into financial turmoil. A much easier way to bring the union to its knees than trying to fight industrial action.

So the question you have to ask yourself is if Rico is so intent on destroying the union why doesn't he do it with the press of a couple of buttons?

The truth is the business needs the union to manage the planned changes and to encourage the staff to swallow the bitter pill when the dust settles. All the rest is just hot air and posturing from both sides.

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 03 Mar 2020, 20:12

Well I've asked him and he doesn't think so either. If I can get it answered on tonight's q and a I will cos I believe if they could do that then they must definitely would. Why would they lose millions in strikes when they could disrupt us good style but attacking the subs

postslippete · Post by **postslippete** » 03 Mar 2020, 20:14

There's been plenty of posturing and hot air on this thread,at times going way off topic. Who would have thought that Royal Mail could quite easily cancel our Union subs? Can they also stop the deductions for tax and national insurance contributions as well, cause I'm sure I'm paying far too much tax

Woody Guthrie · Post by **Woody Guthrie** » 03 Mar 2020, 20:28

postslippete wrote:There's been plenty of posturing and hot air on this thread,at times going way off topic. Who would have thought that Royal Mail could quite easily cancel our Union subs? Can they also stop the deductions for tax and national insurance contributions as well, cause I'm sure I'm paying far too much tax

Straight from the government website.
https://www.gov.uk/working-with-trade-u ... scriptions" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Union subscriptions
Some trade union members pay their union subscriptions directly out of their wages.

The employer then gives these payments to the union.

This is often called the ‘check-off’.

It’s up to you if you want to run the check-off. A union can’t force you to run the check-off unless you’ve agreed to it in your workers’ employment contracts.

Authorising the check-off
A worker must give you written permission to take their union subscriptions from their wages.

This must be signed and dated. Their permission starts from this date and continues until they say otherwise.

If you take the check-off without proper permission you could be taken to an employment tribunal.

You can pre-print consent forms as long as the worker signs and dates the form themselves. Unions are also allowed to get the written consent from the worker then forward it to you.

Stopping the check-off
You must stop taking check-off payments if your employee asks you to.

They must give you written notice to stop the check-off and you must be given reasonable time to stop it.

You can stop running the check-off at any time. If it’s in your workers’ employment contracts, you may have to give them notice.

The role of the union in the check-off
The union doesn’t have to help run the check-off. However, you can involve it if you want to. You could, for example, ask the union to help you get initial consent from its members.

You could also charge the union for the work involved in administering the check off.

ssdd · Post by **ssdd** » 03 Mar 2020, 22:00

With the support and backing of it's members in recent times I would think that cancelling the Union subs would be a good way to fuel the fire in our contempt towards management.

If they did that, I would happily and quickly sign a direct debit for the CWU to take the money from my account, being all the more pleased that RM weren't getting a cut of it.

kingdazzler · Post by **kingdazzler** » 04 Mar 2020, 16:29

Has anyone else noticed that on the ballot paper there is a code on the top left corner. this code is duplicated on the front address sheet next to your name. The ballot paper states that if you cut off the code it will be null and void. I thought votes were meant to be secret