Why you should support the agreement

[renrag40]

The fact that 24 important issues are still being negotiated but the union expect the membership to rubber stamp approval of those future negotiations says it all about this agreement and the hierarchy of this union. This is little short of a disgrace. It should be voted down followed swiftly by the resignation of Pullinger and anybody on the executive committee that believes it is acceptable to expect members of this union to blindly agree in advance the outcome of national negotiations. Where is the pressure on Royal Mail and for that matter the union negotiating team if there is no oversight from the membership of the union?
Oh, and before Martin Walsh comes on to tell me to be careful what I wish for...... don’t bother Martin........ what I wish for is the right to know what I am being expected to vote yes or no for? This agreement does not do that..... therefore it is an automatic NO.
I have a few questions for Martin.......
why are the 24 outstanding issues tied to this agreement?
why are they not in a stand alone agreement so the member can express their opinions on said negotiations through the ballot box?
Which side of the negotiations insisted that they be included in this agreement?

[freespeech]

In case anyone hasn’t read the negotiating letter the Royal Mail proposal is to trigger a stage one at 12 days or 3 absences in a 12 month period as opposed to 4 absences or 14 days now. It will also take 12 months to get off a stage one as opposed to 6 months now.

Having not had that level of absence in over 30 years, yet alone one year, I don't see the issue. It must still be one of the best conditions in the market especially when combined with 6 months full pay. To be off sick FULLY PAID for six months and then receive one stage warning isn't unreasonable in my view.

[P13]

In case anyone hasn’t read the negotiating letter the Royal Mail proposal is to trigger a stage one at 12 days or 3 absences in a 12 month period as opposed to 4 absences or 14 days now. It will also take 12 months to get off a stage one as opposed to 6 months now.

Having not had that level of absence in over 30 years, yet alone one year, I don't see the issue. It must still be one of the best conditions in the market especially when combined with 6 months full pay. To be off sick FULLY PAID for six months and then receive one stage warning isn't unreasonable in my view.

Do you walk about outside for 5 hours a day in all weathers

[Zicomurphy]

In case anyone hasn’t read the negotiating letter the Royal Mail proposal is to trigger a stage one at 12 days or 3 absences in a 12 month period as opposed to 4 absences or 14 days now. It will also take 12 months to get off a stage one as opposed to 6 months now.

Why write something if you have not read the agreement???

The agreement says attendance procedure is one of the issues still to be negotiated. I’m not claiming Royal Mail will get what they want as a result of these negotiations. My point is we are being asked to vote to accept the agreement when important elements of it have still to be negotiated and agreed.

[General Mannerheim]

The fact a member of the PEC has to come on here to sell this pile of pretentious piffle and expects the membership to vote on future negotiations as if Royal mail can be trusted just goes to show how out of touch the bag avoiders really are.

[luddite]

Think it will be a no from our office, hate to say that but too vague.
Nothing about bullying and we know all about local agreements. Still fighting those now!
Sad day.

[postieblueshirt]

In case anyone hasn’t read the negotiating letter the Royal Mail proposal is to trigger a stage one at 12 days or 3 absences in a 12 month period as opposed to 4 absences or 14 days now. It will also take 12 months to get off a stage one as opposed to 6 months now.

Having not had that level of absence in over 30 years, yet alone one year, I don't see the issue. It must still be one of the best conditions in the market especially when combined with 6 months full pay. To be off sick FULLY PAID for six months and then receive one stage warning isn't unreasonable in my view.

My sick record and length of service rivals yours..but..what's to say you might have a bad year develop an ailment have a fall whatever? It could happen to anyone.

[aiden01]

In case anyone hasn’t read the negotiating letter the Royal Mail proposal is to trigger a stage one at 12 days or 3 absences in a 12 month period as opposed to 4 absences or 14 days now. It will also take 12 months to get off a stage one as opposed to 6 months now.

Having not had that level of absence in over 30 years, yet alone one year, I don't see the issue. It must still be one of the best conditions in the market especially when combined with 6 months full pay. To be off sick FULLY PAID for six months and then receive one stage warning isn't unreasonable in my view.

My sick record and length of service rivals yours..but..what's to say you might have a bad year develop an ailment have a fall whatever? It could happen to anyone.

Yes of course it can but lets be honest its still a very good agreement on sick leave. Maybe im wrong?

[renrag40]

In case anyone hasn’t read the negotiating letter the Royal Mail proposal is to trigger a stage one at 12 days or 3 absences in a 12 month period as opposed to 4 absences or 14 days now. It will also take 12 months to get off a stage one as opposed to 6 months now.

Having not had that level of absence in over 30 years, yet alone one year, I don't see the issue. It must still be one of the best conditions in the market especially when combined with 6 months full pay. To be off sick FULLY PAID for six months and then receive one stage warning isn't unreasonable in my view.

My sick record and length of service rivals yours..but..what's to say you might have a bad year develop an ailment have a fall whatever? It could happen to anyone.

Yes of course it can but lets be honest its still a very good agreement on sick leave. Maybe im wrong?

Will it be though? Attendance is 1 of the 24 important outstanding issues that still have to be negotiated....... yet we are expected to rubber stamp these negotiations now? Why should we? We should have the power of oversight, through the ballot box on those future negotiations. There will be no accountability to the membership ....... we will already have agreed to whatever they come up with. That should never take place.
I can’t help but think that these outstanding issues have already been resolved but the union knows that they would not have a hope in hell of carrying the vote if we knew exactly what we are agreeing to. Bingo!! We will get the membership to agree beforehand and just slip the really unpalatable bits in after the vote in February.

[freespeech]

In case anyone hasn’t read the negotiating letter the Royal Mail proposal is to trigger a stage one at 12 days or 3 absences in a 12 month period as opposed to 4 absences or 14 days now. It will also take 12 months to get off a stage one as opposed to 6 months now.

Having not had that level of absence in over 30 years, yet alone one year, I don't see the issue. It must still be one of the best conditions in the market especially when combined with 6 months full pay. To be off sick FULLY PAID for six months and then receive one stage warning isn't unreasonable in my view.

My sick record and length of service rivals yours..but..what's to say you might have a bad year develop an ailment have a fall whatever? It could happen to anyone.

It would need to be a pretty bad year as they can't issue stages while off so even 12 months absence would only get you to the first stage.

[Woody Guthrie]

As most people in delivery know it's not the specifics of the attendance procedure that's the problem, it's the mechanistic approach to implementing it.

Any attendance standards look fine on paper but if you completely ignore any mitigation and issue stages automatically it's very easy to move through the process rapidly

Illnesses and especially conditions caused by the physical nature of the delivery role don't just arrive in one 12 month block, they tend to come and go and when you're under constant pressure to return to work it's easy to find yourself having multiple absences.

Many are also dismissed after the procedure has been applied incorrectly and not all of them have the resources or strength of character to proceed through the Employment Tribunal process.

Personally I think it's an embarrassment to the union that delivery staff are held to the same attendance standards as those who sit in an office all day

It's a very unfunny joke.

[freespeech]

As most people in delivery know it's not the specifics of the attendance procedure that's the problem, it's the mechanistic approach to implementing it.

Any attendance standards look fine on paper but if you completely ignore any mitigation and issue stages automatically it's very easy to move through the process rapidly

Illnesses and especially conditions caused by the physical nature of the delivery role don't just arrive in one 12 month block, they tend to come and go and when you're under constant pressure to return to work it's easy to find yourself having multiple absences.

Many are also dismissed after the procedure has been applied incorrectly and not all of them have the resources or strength of character to proceed through the Employment Tribunal process.

Personally I think it's an embarrassment to the union that delivery staff are held to the same attendance standards as those who sit in an office all day

It's a very unfunny joke.

It would be useful if part of the review could look at those exact points. What are the main reasons around absence in different parts of the business, do we need different standards etc, etc. Problem is that this may mean the office workers (in your reply) have harsher terms rather than delivery being relaxed. Would be useful to get an idea of absence related dismissals across different business sectors.

[scoobydo79]

I smell a sell out. It’s a no here.

[kevbo]

12. We have agreed 1% pay rise which is where most economists believe inflation will be at in April 2021 and we have agreed an hour off the working week based on a revision. For 40% of the work force that will be the equivalent of 2.6% pay rise. For full timers it will mean that minus their meal reliefs they will work 34 hours per week on the same rate of pay as they did on 38.

Do full timers not currently work 34 hours 40 mins per week minus their break? Looks like CWU have already agreed to fund 20 mins of the "hour off" from meal reliefs.

[fb1969]

27 Nov 20 - viewtopic.php?f=69&t=98517 "Highest level talks continue and both CWU and Royal Mail Group have committed to conclude these next week, including a pay deal which both CWU and Royal Mail Group want to agree in time for our members to see the benefit of before Christmas."

Five weeks later and we are supposed to vote to accept an agreement that still has 24 unresolved issues, and no clue on what those issues are. No end to bullying and harassment, in fact not even any mention of those words - even the CWU prefer to hide it all behind "culture". Loads of revisions to be carried out in a short space of time - and anyone working in delivery knows that there won't be any duties added, despite parcel volumes being through the roof and RM chasing more and more business when they simply cannot handle what they already have. I know full well that chasing business is the right thing to do, but when you will probably end up letting people down and paying out 'compensation' for failures - you are just heading for disatser.

But there is a pay offer which wasn't even part of the original dispute. Disillusioned with how out of touch the hierarchy of the CWU are with what Delivery Offices are actually like.