Leaving the CWU

[Woody Guthrie]

The point of needing an agreement to implement seasonal variations because of pay is simplistic.

If you based your legal argument on pay fluctuations Royal Mail could simply offer you the choice of being paid 39hrs during the winter and 35hrs in the summer or a flat 37hrs all year.

The vast majority would choose the latter, the legal box would be ticked and the seasonal variations would go ahead as planned.

These guys have proper lawyers.

[postslippete]

CWU admin didn't agree it...it was the top officers. I haven't seen any statements from either side saying "subject to yes vote". It's been written up and communicated as an agreement.

So what you're saying is that because the CWU leadership and the PECs have an agreement with Royal Mail on our behalf through collective bargaining that legally its a done deal??


And there was me thinking that we were having a ballot to decide whether to accept all the changes in this deal. How wrong can I be!

[Woody Guthrie]

The agreement is a negotiators agreement not a collective agreement.
It is subject to membership ratification.

[freespeech]

CWU admin didn't agree it...it was the top officers. I haven't seen any statements from either side saying "subject to yes vote". It's been written up and communicated as an agreement.

So what you're saying is that because the CWU leadership and the PECs have an agreement with Royal Mail on our behalf through collective bargaining that legally its a done deal??


And there was me thinking that we were having a ballot to decide whether to accept all the changes in this deal. How wrong can I be!

From a LEGAL perspective, yes, that's my take. Not saying it's right or how messy a no vote will be but no way am I seeing RM returning to the table.

[guardianangel]

I'll be leaving i couldn't possibly be a member of a union who thinks its ok to tear up t's and c's,might be cutting my nose off but i've gone past caring.

Without these changes, you would be a member of a union who thinks it is ok to have redundancies so they couldn’t win in your eyes either way.

Hearsay and rhetoric.

[postslippete]

The point of needing an agreement to implement seasonal variations because of pay is simplistic.

If you based your legal argument on pay fluctuations Royal Mail could simply offer you the choice of being paid 39hrs during the winter and 35hrs in the summer or a flat 37hrs all year.

The vast majority would choose the latter, the legal box would be ticked and the seasonal variations would go ahead as planned.

These guys have proper lawyers.

Shame the Union don't have them. If they did then they might not have made such a cock-up of everything from a no strings pay ballot to calling off strikes. They have definitely led us halfway up the mountain and left us standing there freezing our b***ocks off while they sit pretty in their Wimbledon offices dreaming up stupid mantra's that mean absolutely nothing.

This dispute and this deal which has emerged should be a moment of deep reflection for the CWU. Both Royal Mail and BT who are shredding jobs and cutting wages has long been a ticking time bomb. When RM announced heavy losses and BT with cuts of 55,000 jobs due to AI, that bomb just went off. If this Union does not somehow organise itself properly and/or diversify, it will die.

This agreement is a reflection of that reality

[Woody Guthrie]

I said at the very start of this dispute that the national officers were underestimating Simon Thompson and this dispute would not be like all the others where we pretended to fall out, banged the table a few times and we all shook hands and moved on.

I don't believe that the national officers or anyone lined up to replace them have the tools to deal with a private sector employer in 2023. I think they're woefully out of their depth.

That's why I'm voting Yes.
Before they do any more damage.

[guardianangel]

CWU admin didn't agree it...it was the top officers. I haven't seen any statements from either side saying "subject to yes vote". It's been written up and communicated as an agreement.

So what you're saying is that because the CWU leadership and the PECs have an agreement with Royal Mail on our behalf through collective bargaining that legally its a done deal??


And there was me thinking that we were having a ballot to decide whether to accept all the changes in this deal. How wrong can I be!

From a LEGAL perspective, yes, that's my take. Not saying it's right or how messy a no vote will be but no way am I seeing RM returning to the table.

If its a yes vote it will be almost impossible to challenge it on your own ,but a NO vote still leaves it open to being challenged in a court of law with a better outcome,especially the seasonal hours they would be in breach of contract you could take them to a tribunal to be paid the hours you work and not wait 8 months,you can't stop the seasonal hours but you can the pay,a NO vote also allows better outcomes on change of hours due to the 2010 equality act and that exact act can protect older guys on the pda actuals and threats and bullying to go faster to keep up with the younger one's. There is so many if's buts and maybe's but a yes vote will probably waiver any right you have, a NO vote still leaves you options for anyone that finds themselves out in the cold and left behind. Remember the old union motto,"no one is left behind" well those days are gone its every man for himself now.

[LouBarlow]

I'll be leaving i couldn't possibly be a member of a union who thinks its ok to tear up t's and c's,might be cutting my nose off but i've gone past caring.

Without these changes, you would be a member of a union who thinks it is ok to have redundancies so they couldn’t win in your eyes either way.

Hearsay and rhetoric.

Not really. The union and RM have both said that these changes were needed to ensure no enforced redundancies. No union is going to look to strike a deal that makes the workers they represent, less secure in their employment. Hence, this deal. You wouldn’t have been happy either way.

[postslippete]

Not really. The union and RM have both said that these changes were needed to ensure no enforced redundancies. No union is going to look to strike a deal that makes the workers they represent, less secure in their employment. Hence, this deal. You wouldn’t have been happy either way.

After the VR exercise Royal Mail did there were many people in our company who would gladly take redundancy. The pay rises for this deal would cost the company £350 million and they have just found nearly £200 million in a pension escrow down the back of the sofa. Show us the money!!

[Wullie10]

There's the door mate. Close it after you. I'd be glad to give my ears a rest if a few more followed. Of course you won't as you can't do anything else.

[postslippete]

There's the door mate. Close it after you. I'd be glad to give my ears a rest if a few more followed. Of course you won't as you can't do anything else.

I'm in the same boat as you then?

[HiVizFashionIcon]

If the deal goes through, it just shows Royal Mail that all they have to do is string things along for a year at most before the union leaders and most of its members fold. With that knowledge, why wouldn't they come back for the remainder of the 3 hour change to start/finishes, or Sunday working or any of the other stuff people claim the union has saved us from? I would if I were in their shoes.

[Woody Guthrie]

If I were Royal Mail I would do all that the minute there's a no vote.

Divided membership.
Chaotic leadership.
Invalid/almost exhausted strike ballot.
The deal you believe is as far as you can go rejected.

Not much to lose, might as well go for it.
I would if I were in their shoes.

[HiVizFashionIcon]

If I were Royal Mail I would do all that the minute there's a no vote.

Divided membership.
Chaotic leadership.
Invalid/almost exhausted strike ballot.
The deal you believe is as far as you can go rejected.

Not much to lose, might as well go for it.
I would if I were in their shoes.

If they could do all of this without a deal agreed by the union leadership and its members, why didn't they do it ages ago and save themselves the £900 bung?