RMCtv : Simon Thompson : Update on the last three days of talks at Acas : CWU Facebook live

[Halfhappy]

I have said already that with him in charge there is no chance for a compromise. I appreciate cwu are trying to fight for our rights but what are we supposed to do? Government will never side with us neither CEO and greedy shareholders who never have enough and they pay us pittance for our hard work and many years of dedication.

Can anybody see this being resolved? What's else can we do to secure half decent working conditions and pay? I doubt there is anything we can do at this point. Keep striking and starve ourselves and achieve nothing?

I can't believe how rapidly this country is going down. The government allowing super rich to flush us working class down the toilet.
Ultimately it all starts with government. CEOs of all sorts know they have legal advantage over us. Simon knows this and looks like he is willing to destroy the company to achieve his goals whatever it is.

I challenge anybody to make a point for further striking after xmas. Surely we can try dragging this company down but at what cost to us? Remember these parasites will still be paid huge salaries regardless if company is record loss making or not while you are not.

Easy... We have no other option. If you think holding our hands up and accepting what is in front of us now, will be the end, then you're deluded. You're job is done, it's over, the minute this union is busted. The vision for this business, is precarious workforce, that costs as little as possible, in pay, breaks, sick, pensions and so on... The union is in the way of that. The CEO is not going to destroy this business. He wants to destroy its union, that is his goal, this is his job. Rm can take these hits. I'm sick of explaining, the competitors we have, are nowhere near RM's capacity, infrastructure or market share. RM is 500yr old household name, its well established and trusted. That is why businesses are kicking off about the strikes. That is why offices and mailcentres are storing mail in trailers, carparks and God knows where else. That is why there's no equipment as everything is literally in use. The fact that the CEO is still sitting at a table, and actually being present this time, is testament to the effectiveness of these strikes. You can't let this run away with you. You're standing with 115,000 other people in the same boat, with the same anxieties, and frustrations. U ain't alone.

You are quite right. My question is the fight still winnable? I know cwu is his main enemy and a lot things point that this is simon's primary target. What if the cwu has no plan or even if they do it fails. Wouldn't be easier and smarter to invest th money, energy and time into learning something else or looking for another job? I have zero confidence in ceo and my confidence in cwu leadership is fading too. Company is basically on its knees and it will only get worse next week and yet he still refuses to back down on anything and has the cheek to blame us for all of this.

I'd say it's winnable, but will we win? Well... Wouldn't we all like to know? I've always believed it's the long term threat of disruption that the CEO fears, not a Christmas backlog. No business can operate with constant uncertainty. It's only then when RM really will start losing customers, who'll never return. It gives the competition time and space to expand, and accommodate. At the moment, competition is being overwhelmed. I mentioned this in an earlier response to you. The less the CWU says about plans, the better. They whole debate around the dispute will become the feasibility of the CWU's plans. The job loses, the cuts to terms and conditions won't get a mention, as Dave Ward will be spending his time defending whatever he's put forward. It's an instant attack line from the RM and the media, who just seem to regurgitate the employers talking points, most of the time. Look, you could be right and the CWU might have no plan, they still shouldn't declare it. As for training, if you're in a position to retrain, you don't have to wait for a dispute to do it, go and do it. Honestly, if you can, go for it. I don't think there's a single person who wouldn't wish you the best.

[yellowbelly]

Where is that nob end getting the idea we have all lost £1200. For a start you would be unlucky for all the strike days to fall on a work day, and by the time you take into account the less tax you pay, it would not be that much anyway even if none of the days landed on rest days. I am quiet content, personally to lose 2 days pay every week indefinitely. by my calculation its a loss of very roughly about £36 per day.

I thought that too about the 1200. However when we were out two days a couple of weeks ago both hit my working days
and I lost just under 190 gross. But that doesn't take account of the benefit of PSE pension contributions and employers
pension contributions that have been lost. RM will have saved on employer NI contributions though!

However, if he wants to talk about each postie losing 1200 that's fine. If lets say each strike day there are 80,000 of us
on strike (to account for strike breakers, people on days off and leave).

So 80k x 1200 is £96 million in total RM have saved on staff wages (if they've paid for agency then that's their problem).

[redrobbo]

If and when RM defeat the union as some seem to think, does that mean we have no protection at all from bullying manager's, we've all experienced managers trying to make you work faster,walk faster,adding more houses onto duties etc , this bullying culture has been common in the workplace long before this strike was called , but if that were to happen they'd have free reign to do what they wanted these so called managers aren't fit to lace our shoes it's a pity we can't get rid of all of them , run this business as a cooperative we the frontline are making massive profits for RM with all the hard work going the extra mile not these lazy scroats keep the faith

[FilthyBloke]

If and when RM defeat the union as some seem to think, does that mean we have no protection at all from bullying manager's, we've all experienced managers trying to make you work faster,walk faster,adding more houses onto duties etc , this bullying culture has been common in the workplace long before this strike was called , but if that were to happen they'd have free reign to do what they wanted these so called managers aren't fit to lace our shoes it's a pity we can't get rid of all of them , run this business as a cooperative we the frontline are making massive profits for RM with all the hard work going the extra mile not these lazy scroats keep the faith

According to bbc article just now the talks have ‘broken down’.
Both sides claiming that the other isn’t compromising. Usual propaganda from both parties again.

It was clear from the off that ST wasn’t going to budge and IMO the union should have gone for long strikes in august and September. If nothing else it would have highlighted a lot more to the public and to ST that the union meant business.
Instead it was dribs and drabs and Black Friday came and went and now Christmas is going to come and go as well. Disruption has been made. And there is more news coverage but I can’t help but feel it’s too little too late.

Despite what others may think, strikes after Christmas will have a lot less impact.

ST will look very silly if he allows Black Friday and Christmas to be ruined and then gives in in January.

[Acca Dacca]

I’ve heard it all now

A strikebreaker telling us the union should have announced longer strikes

Maybe you should have used that period to save up some money rather than now pleading on here that you are strike breaking because you refuse to use food banks whilst saying we should have went on strike for LONGER

If you could have afforded to strike for longer in August and September then you could have afforded to save the money whilst working

[clashcityrocker]

I thought that too about the 1200.

We have people on 4 day weeks.
A 2 day strike, when it falls on their working days, costs them half a week's wages.

[FilthyBloke]

I’ve heard it all now

A strikebreaker telling us the union should have announced longer strikes

Maybe you should have used that period to save up some money rather than now pleading on here that you are strike breaking because you refuse to use food banks whilst saying we should have went on strike for LONGER

I wasn’t a strike breaker then. I was on the picket. I saved what I could. It’s the bills that need paying. It’s the food that needs buying. Food banks are fine but according to the news earlier this month a lot have run out of food as 320,000 new users have joined the queue.
I think the strategy of the union has been poor.

The union would have known that in October (and again in April) the electric and gas is going up again. Food and fuel is going up daily. But instead of making a big strike in august and September before these bills increased, they faffed about with the odd day here, the odd cancelled strike day there….and now…. At the most expensive time of the year they want us to strike pretty much 2 days a week.

ST has seen the union wave heading towards him and has jumped over it like a child playing in the sea at a beach.

There is only so long of striking before more people go back to work and the support of the public begins to fade.

[Acca Dacca]

You aren’t understanding what I am saying - I am not saying you should have saved more because you were working the strikes

I’m saying if you thought we should and could have been striking more back then, you should have saved the money we weren’t losing by us not striking as much as you think we should have

You chose not to

You can’t say we should have went on strike more whilst saying you couldn’t save any more either because your argument for crossing a picket line would then just be made in September rather than now

In short it’s just excuses and a way to have your cake and eat it - criticise the union for not striking more earlier and saying you can’t afford to strike any more now

It’s still only been what? 10 days of action overall? So if they strikes more earlier you would still have lost the same amount of money if not more so what’s your excuse? It’s just been spread over months which actually makes it easier to manage our finances.

You knew there was a good chance of it going on longer than two months

[sindba]

You aren’t understanding what I am saying - I am not saying you should have saved more because you were working the strikes

I’m saying if you thought we should and could have been striking more back then, you should have saved the money we weren’t losing by us not striking as much as you think we should have

You chose not to

You can’t say we should have went on strike more whilst saying you couldn’t save any more either because your argument for crossing a picket line would then just be made in September rather than now

In short it’s just excuses and a way to have your cake and eat it - criticise the union for not striking more earlier and saying you can’t afford to strike any more now

It’s still only been what? 10 days of action overall? So if they strikes more earlier you would still have lost the same amount of money if not more so what’s your excuse? It’s just been spread over months which actually makes it easier to manage our finances.

You knew there was a good chance of it going on longer than two months

Yeahbut mate. Simon has magnificently seen the strike waves coming towards him and gracefully skipped over them like a beautiful angel on a sunny beach. *sigh* :

[FilthyBloke]

You aren’t understanding what I am saying - I am not saying you should have saved more because you were working the strikes

I’m saying if you thought we should and could have been striking more back then, you should have saved the money we weren’t losing by us not striking as much as you think we should have

You chose not to

You can’t say we should have went on strike more whilst saying you couldn’t save any more either because your argument for crossing a picket line would then just be made in September rather than now

In short it’s just excuses and a way to have your cake and eat it - criticise the union for not striking more earlier and saying you can’t afford to strike any more now

It’s still only been what? 10 days of action overall? So if they strikes more earlier you would still have lost the same amount of money if not more so what’s your excuse? It’s just been spread over months which actually makes it easier to manage our finances.

You knew there was a good chance of it going on longer than two months

Because in august and September and early October the price increases in energy hadn’t taken effect. It was easier for me in those months to save and get by. After that, it became more difficult as not only were my bills higher, but my savings had dwindled down. By November my savings had nearly all gone but I wasn’t willing to go into debt. Not when the talks are still miles apart and not when everything else around me is going up.

People ask why I didn’t sign up for agency work… well I did. But they wanted week long commitments and short term work. Not Wednesday this week, Tuesday and Friday the week after and a Thursday the week after that.

If people have very little savings and decide to go to food banks and cancel Christmas and go into debt because they are striking then fair enough. I’m not willing to do that. The old mining strikes, sure, entire communities were based on the mines and miners living there so those strikes were fighting for a whole lot more.

But this? Terms and conditions? I’d love for things to stay as they are/were but i won’t put my family in jeopardy and house on the line for it. If people want to insult me for it then great. I got no problem with that.

But IMO the union should have started the heavy strikes sooner.

[FilthyBloke]

You aren’t understanding what I am saying - I am not saying you should have saved more because you were working the strikes

I’m saying if you thought we should and could have been striking more back then, you should have saved the money we weren’t losing by us not striking as much as you think we should have

You chose not to

You can’t say we should have went on strike more whilst saying you couldn’t save any more either because your argument for crossing a picket line would then just be made in September rather than now

In short it’s just excuses and a way to have your cake and eat it - criticise the union for not striking more earlier and saying you can’t afford to strike any more now

It’s still only been what? 10 days of action overall? So if they strikes more earlier you would still have lost the same amount of money if not more so what’s your excuse? It’s just been spread over months which actually makes it easier to manage our finances.

You knew there was a good chance of it going on longer than two months

Yeahbut mate. Simon has magnificently seen the strike waves coming towards him and gracefully skipped over them like a beautiful angel on a sunny beach. *sigh* :

Not magnificently. He didn’t need to. He’s probably laughing at how poor the unions response has been.
Plus the board are probably right behind him or they would have sacked him already.

Come January I think more people will go back to work and the union will scramble to salvage any deal that still remains. Could well be April.

[Acca Dacca]

The crux of it is you think we should have been on strike for longer earlier, which would have been more than 8 days ( 8 since you worked the last ones ), whilst at the same time saying you can’t afford to strike more than the 8 days you say you have been out on

The rest of us will just pick up the slack for you don’t worry

[CRIBMAD]

Where is that nob end getting the idea we have all lost £1200. For a start you would be unlucky for all the strike days to fall on a work day, and by the time you take into account the less tax you pay, it would not be that much anyway even if none of the days landed on rest days. I am quiet content, personally to lose 2 days pay every week indefinitely. by my calculation its a loss of very roughly about £36 per day.

me and my partner have only been paid for ONE strike day ! and for peoples info i picked up £160 this week but i would rather starve than be a scab !

[FilthyBloke]

The crux of it is you think we should have been on strike for longer earlier, which would have been more than 8 days ( 8 since you worked the last ones ), whilst at the same time saying you can’t afford to strike more than the 8 days you say you have been out on

The rest of us will just pick up the slack for you don’t worry

Thanks. You are doing a great job.

And no, the crux is the situation was different in august and September and most of October. My outgoings were less then. I could have gone to other offices to grab some overtime in days after the strike and still got by (even though doing overtime is frowned upon as well!).
But because it was the odd day here, any overtime was gobbled up by the usual gobblers.

In November (late November) my outgoings were a lot more and most offices aren’t giving out overtime at all.

No excuses. Just facts.

[FilthyBloke]

Where is that nob end getting the idea we have all lost £1200. For a start you would be unlucky for all the strike days to fall on a work day, and by the time you take into account the less tax you pay, it would not be that much anyway even if none of the days landed on rest days. I am quiet content, personally to lose 2 days pay every week indefinitely. by my calculation its a loss of very roughly about £36 per day.

me and my partner have only been paid for ONE strike day ! and for peoples info i picked up £160 this week but i would rather starve than be a scab !

What a hero! You would rather starve than go to work! Wow.