Compulsory Redundancies

[postieblueshirt]

BUT!!!! it's only a threat......till it becomes reality...then you can worry...but don't till then....

[norris9]

Surely the USO is the biggest hindrance to Royal Mail. I am no expert on the USO - is there any way for Royal Mail to get around the USO other than failing it and getting fined. The country needs a reliable mail service.... businesses, the public, councils, banks, NHS etc etc rely on it.

If Royal Mail have no interest in it then they can bugga off - time to renationalise!

[goneaway]

[/quote]
There was a reference on a this topic not that long ago where the Employment Law Firm quoted as you have above. Another poster supplied that same link supposedly from the same Law firm as RM are using about Compulsory Redundancy in this dispute.
Unfortunately I have tried but unable to reference that post… Maybe someone can find it for you
[/quote]

I think this is the thread you were thinking of: viewtopic.php?p=1007964#p1007964

I did a search at the time, and found out that the authors of the article on the web worked for Simkins solicitors and it didn't take much digging to find out that Simkins are on Royal Mail's legal panel!

[FilthyBloke]

Surely the USO is the biggest hindrance to Royal Mail. I am no expert on the USO - is there any way for Royal Mail to get around the USO other than failing it and getting fined. The country needs a reliable mail service.... businesses, people, councils, banks, NHS etc etc rely on it.

If Royal Mail have no interested in it then they can bugga off - time to renationalise!

Get rid of USO more like. A 5 day letter service is more than enough.
And renationalise? Last time we hardly had any investment at all. We were stuck in the past for too long and ended up having to play catch-up with other companies.

Best thing we can do is agree on a deal. It’ll probably be close to the deal we already have been offered.

[Postee2]

This is now a serious concern. For anybody who wishes to be made voluntary redundant that is fine, but otherwise there are some serious questions to be asked.
Do we have any kind of clarity on how people could be made redundant while agency workers are involved ?
Also, I believe that before anybody can be forced out, all other options have to be exhausted first such as redeployment, or a different duty where possible ?
Royal Mail in my opinion can not have it both ways - ie claiming that the work is unskilled but then selecting people for redundancy based on "skills". Apart from driving most OPG Grade jobs can be undertaken by anybody with a day or 2 training and often not even that. Many agency workers are given very basic training for some jobs now classed as skilled and any permanent member of staff could be trained in the same way to move to a different role.
Can the union please offer some clarity on any of this ? This is a very serious situation and proper, concrete advice rather than motivational gestures is required for peace of mind.

IMO, compulsory redundancies are now the biggest issue .

So does that mean that anytime in future there is a dispute over anything, RM can just threaten compulsory redundancies and that becomes the focus rather than what the dispute is about?

No. It's not the "threat" that the issue is about, it is the potential reality that needs to be heeded and addressed. Never before to my knowledge have we been even threatened with compulsory redundancies. In fact we've always been assured it wont happen.
It is not us forcing this issue. But only we can be the ones to quash it.

You best get used to it because it’s going to be threatened a lot going forward.

If there is still a union presence every single time there’s even a murmur of a ballot for strike action for whatever reason - be prepared for compulsory redundancies to be spoken about by the company. It is their new tactic to focus the mind.

Even if it’s a threat they are prepared to carry out - it will still become the focus of every dispute going forward now.

I'm sure you know the union have had absolutely no choice but to strike this time. You know that as well as any of us.
But to say redundancies will become the focus of every dispute going forward is slightly disingenuous.
Yes, it is a very serious issue in this particular dispute now - but the primary focus is for the union and the business to agree on principles going forward to avoid future industrial action in the first place. . . . .
And for people to be treated fairly and decently and to have job security, with an inflation based pay rise and not have our terms and conditions torn apart.
That is the focus, along with the avoidance of compulsory redundancies, - specifically to avoid these types of repercussions in the future.

[aiden01]

Surely the USO is the biggest hindrance to Royal Mail. I am no expert on the USO - is there any way for Royal Mail to get around the USO other than failing it and getting fined. The country needs a reliable mail service.... businesses, people, councils, banks, NHS etc etc rely on it.

If Royal Mail have no interested in it then they can bugga off - time to renationalise!

Get rid of USO more like. A 5 day letter service is more than enough.
And renationalise? Last time we hardly had any investment at all. We were stuck in the past for too long and ended up having to play catch-up with other companies.

Best thing we can do is agree on a deal. It’ll probably be close to the deal we already have been offered.

No doubt if an when deal is ever agreed we will be stung but at least we can vote yes or no.

[Acca Dacca]

This is now a serious concern. For anybody who wishes to be made voluntary redundant that is fine, but otherwise there are some serious questions to be asked.
Do we have any kind of clarity on how people could be made redundant while agency workers are involved ?
Also, I believe that before anybody can be forced out, all other options have to be exhausted first such as redeployment, or a different duty where possible ?
Royal Mail in my opinion can not have it both ways - ie claiming that the work is unskilled but then selecting people for redundancy based on "skills". Apart from driving most OPG Grade jobs can be undertaken by anybody with a day or 2 training and often not even that. Many agency workers are given very basic training for some jobs now classed as skilled and any permanent member of staff could be trained in the same way to move to a different role.
Can the union please offer some clarity on any of this ? This is a very serious situation and proper, concrete advice rather than motivational gestures is required for peace of mind.

IMO, compulsory redundancies are now the biggest issue .

So does that mean that anytime in future there is a dispute over anything, RM can just threaten compulsory redundancies and that becomes the focus rather than what the dispute is about?

No. It's not the "threat" that the issue is about, it is the potential reality that needs to be heeded and addressed. Never before to my knowledge have we been even threatened with compulsory redundancies. In fact we've always been assured it wont happen.
It is not us forcing this issue. But only we can be the ones to quash it.

You best get used to it because it’s going to be threatened a lot going forward.

If there is still a union presence every single time there’s even a murmur of a ballot for strike action for whatever reason - be prepared for compulsory redundancies to be spoken about by the company. It is their new tactic to focus the mind.

Even if it’s a threat they are prepared to carry out - it will still become the focus of every dispute going forward now.

I'm sure you know the union have had absolutely no choice but to strike this time. You know that as well as any of us.
But to say redundancies will become the focus of every dispute going forward is slightly disingenuous.
Yes, it is a very serious issue in this particular dispute now - but the primary focus is for the union and the business to agree on principles going forward to avoid future industrial action in the first place. . . . .
And for people to be treated fairly and decently and to have job security, with an inflation based pay rise and not have our terms and conditions torn apart.
That is the focus, along with the avoidance of compulsory redundancies, - specifically to avoid these types of repercussions in the future.

It is the number one thing people are concerned about now and Royal Mail know that. It’s very naïve of you to think they won’t use it in the future again.

[walthmstowman]

This is now a serious concern. For anybody who wishes to be made voluntary redundant that is fine, but otherwise there are some serious questions to be asked.
Do we have any kind of clarity on how people could be made redundant while agency workers are involved ?
Also, I believe that before anybody can be forced out, all other options have to be exhausted first such as redeployment, or a different duty where possible ?
Royal Mail in my opinion can not have it both ways - ie claiming that the work is unskilled but then selecting people for redundancy based on "skills". Apart from driving most OPG Grade jobs can be undertaken by anybody with a day or 2 training and often not even that. Many agency workers are given very basic training for some jobs now classed as skilled and any permanent member of staff could be trained in the same way to move to a different role.
Can the union please offer some clarity on any of this ? This is a very serious situation and proper, concrete advice rather than motivational gestures is required for peace of mind.

IMO, compulsory redundancies are now the biggest issue .

So does that mean that anytime in future there is a dispute over anything, RM can just threaten compulsory redundancies and that becomes the focus rather than what the dispute is about?

One battle at a time . We could be out the door by the time the next dispute comes along.

[Acca Dacca]

Yeah but when the company are saying “no compulsory redundancies until…..x date” then you know its going to be hanging over us for longer than the here and now no matter what resolution we get - the cats out the bag

I agree that we can only fight this battle now it’s just demoralising that for many of us there will never be any real sense of decent job security anymore.

Non drivers especially will now feel like dead men walking

[walthmstowman]

Yeah but when the company are saying “no compulsory redundancies until…..x date” then you know its going to be hanging over us for longer than the here and now no matter what resolution we get - the cats out the bag

I agree that we can only fight this battle now it’s just demoralising that for many of us there will never be any real sense of decent job security anymore.

Non drivers especially will now feel like dead men walking

Sadly I agree with you.

[Postee2]

This is now a serious concern. For anybody who wishes to be made voluntary redundant that is fine, but otherwise there are some serious questions to be asked.
Do we have any kind of clarity on how people could be made redundant while agency workers are involved ?
Also, I believe that before anybody can be forced out, all other options have to be exhausted first such as redeployment, or a different duty where possible ?
Royal Mail in my opinion can not have it both ways - ie claiming that the work is unskilled but then selecting people for redundancy based on "skills". Apart from driving most OPG Grade jobs can be undertaken by anybody with a day or 2 training and often not even that. Many agency workers are given very basic training for some jobs now classed as skilled and any permanent member of staff could be trained in the same way to move to a different role.
Can the union please offer some clarity on any of this ? This is a very serious situation and proper, concrete advice rather than motivational gestures is required for peace of mind.

IMO, compulsory redundancies are now the biggest issue .

So does that mean that anytime in future there is a dispute over anything, RM can just threaten compulsory redundancies and that becomes the focus rather than what the dispute is about?

No. It's not the "threat" that the issue is about, it is the potential reality that needs to be heeded and addressed. Never before to my knowledge have we been even threatened with compulsory redundancies. In fact we've always been assured it wont happen.
It is not us forcing this issue. But only we can be the ones to quash it.

You best get used to it because it’s going to be threatened a lot going forward.

If there is still a union presence every single time there’s even a murmur of a ballot for strike action for whatever reason - be prepared for compulsory redundancies to be spoken about by the company. It is their new tactic to focus the mind.

Even if it’s a threat they are prepared to carry out - it will still become the focus of every dispute going forward now.

I'm sure you know the union have had absolutely no choice but to strike this time. You know that as well as any of us.
But to say redundancies will become the focus of every dispute going forward is slightly disingenuous.
Yes, it is a very serious issue in this particular dispute now - but the primary focus is for the union and the business to agree on principles going forward to avoid future industrial action in the first place. . . . .
And for people to be treated fairly and decently and to have job security, with an inflation based pay rise and not have our terms and conditions torn apart.
That is the focus, along with the avoidance of compulsory redundancies, - specifically to avoid these types of repercussions in the future.

It is the number one thing people are concerned about now and Royal Mail know that. It’s very naïve of you to think they won’t use it in the future again.

It's hardly naivety since I started this particular thread. It is incredibly serious.
I'm simply saying the way to address it (and the way the CWU will be wanting to tackle it) is to establish agreements on job security right now to avoid this being an issue again at least in the near future.
I get that appears unlikely right now but that still has to be the strategy. Signed and sealed.
I know ST wants the opposite. There is no naivety there whatsoever.

[TopperGas]

Can anybody see how job security can be confirmed by the RM when it's spending £100m's on parcel hubs, once they are opened next year surely jobs will be cut if people can't or won't move to the parcel hubs or transfer to nearby D0's?

[TopperGas]

Can anybody see how job security can be confirmed by the RM when it's spending £100m's on parcel hubs, once they are opened next year surely jobs will be cut if people can't or won't move to the parcel hubs or transfer to nearby D0's?

[postieblueshirt]

people worried about there jobs but want rid of the uso

[LaggyBand]

Its all Physiological,

Damn right, or in my words mind control.

You know this to be the case, whenever you hear the word messaging; “we have to get the messaging right”.

Or in my words, we have to get these dumb f**ks to think the way we need them to think.

People think “mind control” is too off the wall, but when you think about it, all forms of adverts etc are about controlling how the human mind think about a certain thing.

So is “messaging”.

The redundancies are to worry people back to work. I wouldn’t be surprised at all to discover the redundancy application thing was made specifically for this purpose, so that we think they’re real about it.

Edit: oh, and I assume you meant psychological, heh