Vote of no confidence in CWU leadership.

[postslippete]

I agree that the handling and communications around the 'pilots' or 'trials' has been poor and there has been mixed messages about whether they are on board with the wholesale deployment of the method change or not.
It is still unclear what there position is on this and they need some clear communications out to members.
Are we waiting to see if they trails work and ofcom rubber stamp the changes or are all offices to implement regardless and deal with the issues as they arise in each unit.
They are stuck between a rock and hard place I feel though.
Any pay rise or equalisation of contracts will be linked directly to the savings from USO reform, personally I think they need to get it right in each unit before steamrolling it through but I understand their predicament.
in terms of of the workings of the unions allot of the time people don't want to step on others toes.
Many will be friends for years and even if they may be better suited for a role they wouldn't challenge.
There will be a progression through a number of years.
Is that always best for members, maybe not but it's not a closed shop as many think.

Thanks for the detailed post, you’ve made some fair points.

The “rock and a hard place” is largely of the CWU’s own making because we have had delays, vague comms and little sign of a clear strategy. If pay and equalisation depend on savings from USO reform then why allow pilots to go ahead before any deal is finalised? That’s backwards. You don’t give up your main bargaining chip without securing anything in return. Yes, RM can technically roll out its own internal changes - but if the CWU refused to cooperate with them or pulled reps from the planning process then that would create real pressure, especially when RM are trying to convince Ofcom and EP Group that the ODM is efficient and deliverable.

As for the Union's internal structure - long service and personal relationships may explain why the same people stay in post but when that creates a culture where change becomes impossible, it's a closed shop in all but name! Ward and Walsh have been at the top for over a decade and it's clear that trust from the membership is slipping. While many reps on the shop floor are doing great work, it's our leadership that needs renewal. We need visible, energetic voices who can communicate with conviction - not vague slogans like "expanding the role of the postal worker" without a real plan or pressure on RM to deliver anything tangible.

I have no hard proof but I can't shake the feeling that backroom deals have shaped how we have ended up here and if that's the case then Ward and Walsh should seriously consider stepping aside. We have lost too many good posties already and the CWU can't afford to keep losing its members confidence too.

[Mickeybrowneyes]

I agree that the handling and communications around the 'pilots' or 'trials' has been poor and there has been mixed messages about whether they are on board with the wholesale deployment of the method change or not.
It is still unclear what there position is on this and they need some clear communications out to members.
Are we waiting to see if they trails work and ofcom rubber stamp the changes or are all offices to implement regardless and deal with the issues as they arise in each unit.
They are stuck between a rock and hard place I feel though.
Any pay rise or equalisation of contracts will be linked directly to the savings from USO reform, personally I think they need to get it right in each unit before steamrolling it through but I understand their predicament.
in terms of of the workings of the unions allot of the time people don't want to step on others toes.
Many will be friends for years and even if they may be better suited for a role they wouldn't challenge.
There will be a progression through a number of years.
Is that always best for members, maybe not but it's not a closed shop as many think.

Thanks for the detailed post, you’ve made some fair points.

The “rock and a hard place” is largely of the CWU’s own making because we have had delays, vague comms and little sign of a clear strategy. If pay and equalisation depend on savings from USO reform then why allow pilots to go ahead before any deal is finalised? That’s backwards. You don’t give up your main bargaining chip without securing anything in return. Yes, RM can technically roll out its own internal changes - but if the CWU refused to cooperate with them or pulled reps from the planning process then that would create real pressure, especially when RM are trying to convince Ofcom and EP Group that the ODM is efficient and deliverable.

As for the Union's internal structure - long service and personal relationships may explain why the same people stay in post but when that creates a culture where change becomes impossible, it's a closed shop in all but name! Ward and Walsh have been at the top for over a decade and it's clear that trust from the membership is slipping. While many reps on the shop floor are doing great work, it's our leadership that needs renewal. We need visible, energetic voices who can communicate with conviction - not vague slogans like "expanding the role of the postal worker" without a real plan or pressure on RM to deliver anything tangible.

I have no hard proof but I can't shake the feeling that backroom deals have shaped how we have ended up here and if that's the case then Ward and Walsh should seriously consider stepping aside. We have lost too many good posties already and the CWU can't afford to keep losing its members confidence too.

Those who get to the top positions of the union do get there on merit.
Most of them would have carried a reputation all the way from unit rep so they will be the strongest and shrewdest operators in their field.
It's just the timeline for progression is slow at times and reps may wait for positions to come up naturally rather than challenge.
Personally I think Martin Walsh and Dave Ward are the best two to lead us through these tough times.
Martin has bundles of experience all the way up from unit rep and Dave is hugely respected in the whole trade union movement.
It was always going to be a very hard position to hold since privatisation.
There are many variables that make the negotiating standpoint harder now than in the past.
We are now competing in a market where delivering a parcel doesn't create the revenue it should due to companies that use staff as and when they need. (Amazon flex... E.t c.)
Lots of the companies that operate in our field don't have the same financial restraints of sick pay and holiday pay that the union have rightly fought to keep for years.
On top of that we have seen the evident decline in letters leading to a USO that isn't financially viable anymore.
None of this is Dave or Martin's fault.
The USO pilots needed to happen so OFCOM could rubber stamp the changes.
The model of delivering 2nd class on alternate days and no 2nd class on Saturdays saved the most money for the company with the least job losses amongst staff. It can work it just has to be done properly.
It's not a one size fits all, many areas have too high a tracked traffic average for someone to deliver tracked and first class on one CDV. Also the issues with fatigue.
The union are aware of the need for a pay rise that's what makes these negotiations so tricky, if they completely pull away from the pilots and planning it may take allot longer to strike the deal. That's how I see it anyway.
They need clear communications around the USO reform and how much reps should be working with planners at local level if they are not one of the pilot offices.

[postslippete]

The USO pilots needed to happen so OFCOM could rubber stamp the changes.
.....if they completely pull away from the pilots and planning it may take allot longer to strike the deal. That's how I see it anyway.
They need clear communications around the USO reform and how much reps should be working with planners at local level if they are not one of the pilot offices.

Yeah, I don't disagree with competition, the gig economy or the decline in letter volumes. But Ofcom does not require pilot schemes before making a decision; thats RM strategic choice to show its feasibility. The CWU's decisions to stay involved may have kept them in the room but doing so before securing a firm deal has weakened their leverage. Pilots are supposed to test viability but instead has ended up creating momentum towards rollout in other offices which RM can now point to as "proof" that it works.

These reforms are inevitable but the timing is crucial. So while I respect your view, I do see it differently and rather than it speeding up a deal, what it has done instead is allow RM to push ahead unchecked and come back later with a diluted offer knowing that the union has just played its strongest card.

[hans solo]

I agree that the handling and communications around the 'pilots' or 'trials' has been poor and there has been mixed messages about whether they are on board with the wholesale deployment of the method change or not.
It is still unclear what there position is on this and they need some clear communications out to members.
Are we waiting to see if they trails work and ofcom rubber stamp the changes or are all offices to implement regardless and deal with the issues as they arise in each unit.
They are stuck between a rock and hard place I feel though.
Any pay rise or equalisation of contracts will be linked directly to the savings from USO reform, personally I think they need to get it right in each unit before steamrolling it through but I understand their predicament.
in terms of of the workings of the unions allot of the time people don't want to step on others toes.
Many will be friends for years and even if they may be better suited for a role they wouldn't challenge.
There will be a progression through a number of years.
Is that always best for members, maybe not but it's not a closed shop as many think.

Thanks for the detailed post, you’ve made some fair points.

The “rock and a hard place” is largely of the CWU’s own making because we have had delays, vague comms and little sign of a clear strategy. If pay and equalisation depend on savings from USO reform then why allow pilots to go ahead before any deal is finalised? That’s backwards. You don’t give up your main bargaining chip without securing anything in return. Yes, RM can technically roll out its own internal changes - but if the CWU refused to cooperate with them or pulled reps from the planning process then that would create real pressure, especially when RM are trying to convince Ofcom and EP Group that the ODM is efficient and deliverable.

As for the Union's internal structure - long service and personal relationships may explain why the same people stay in post but when that creates a culture where change becomes impossible, it's a closed shop in all but name! Ward and Walsh have been at the top for over a decade and it's clear that trust from the membership is slipping. While many reps on the shop floor are doing great work, it's our leadership that needs renewal. We need visible, energetic voices who can communicate with conviction - not vague slogans like "expanding the role of the postal worker" without a real plan or pressure on RM to deliver anything tangible.

I have no hard proof but I can't shake the feeling that backroom deals have shaped how we have ended up here and if that's the case then Ward and Walsh should seriously consider stepping aside. We have lost too many good posties already and the CWU can't afford to keep losing its members confidence too.

Those who get to the top positions of the union do get there on merit.
Most of them would have carried a reputation all the way from unit rep so they will be the strongest and shrewdest operators in their field.
It's just the timeline for progression is slow at times and reps may wait for positions to come up naturally rather than challenge.
Personally I think Martin Walsh and Dave Ward are the best two to lead us through these tough times.
Martin has bundles of experience all the way up from unit rep and Dave is hugely respected in the whole trade union movement.
It was always going to be a very hard position to hold since privatisation.
There are many variables that make the negotiating standpoint harder now than in the past.
We are now competing in a market where delivering a parcel doesn't create the revenue it should due to companies that use staff as and when they need. (Amazon flex... E.t c.)
Lots of the companies that operate in our field don't have the same financial restraints of sick pay and holiday pay that the union have rightly fought to keep for years.
On top of that we have seen the evident decline in letters leading to a USO that isn't financially viable anymore.
None of this is Dave or Martin's fault.
The USO pilots needed to happen so OFCOM could rubber stamp the changes.
The model of delivering 2nd class on alternate days and no 2nd class on Saturdays saved the most money for the company with the least job losses amongst staff. It can work it just has to be done properly.
It's not a one size fits all, many areas have too high a tracked traffic average for someone to deliver tracked and first class on one CDV. Also the issues with fatigue.
The union are aware of the need for a pay rise that's what makes these negotiations so tricky, if they completely pull away from the pilots and planning it may take allot longer to strike the deal. That's how I see it anyway.
They need clear communications around the USO reform and how much reps should be working with planners at local level if they are not one of the pilot offices.

Obviously not on delivery mate
As double mail every day is not achievable

[HarrySutton111]

Absolutely correct Hans

[Hyrrokkin]

I agree that the handling and communications around the 'pilots' or 'trials' has been poor and there has been mixed messages about whether they are on board with the wholesale deployment of the method change or not.
It is still unclear what there position is on this and they need some clear communications out to members.
Are we waiting to see if they trails work and ofcom rubber stamp the changes or are all offices to implement regardless and deal with the issues as they arise in each unit.
They are stuck between a rock and hard place I feel though.
Any pay rise or equalisation of contracts will be linked directly to the savings from USO reform, personally I think they need to get it right in each unit before steamrolling it through but I understand their predicament.
in terms of of the workings of the unions allot of the time people don't want to step on others toes.
Many will be friends for years and even if they may be better suited for a role they wouldn't challenge.
There will be a progression through a number of years.
Is that always best for members, maybe not but it's not a closed shop as many think.

Thanks for the detailed post, you’ve made some fair points.

The “rock and a hard place” is largely of the CWU’s own making because we have had delays, vague comms and little sign of a clear strategy. If pay and equalisation depend on savings from USO reform then why allow pilots to go ahead before any deal is finalised? That’s backwards. You don’t give up your main bargaining chip without securing anything in return. Yes, RM can technically roll out its own internal changes - but if the CWU refused to cooperate with them or pulled reps from the planning process then that would create real pressure, especially when RM are trying to convince Ofcom and EP Group that the ODM is efficient and deliverable.

As for the Union's internal structure - long service and personal relationships may explain why the same people stay in post but when that creates a culture where change becomes impossible, it's a closed shop in all but name! Ward and Walsh have been at the top for over a decade and it's clear that trust from the membership is slipping. While many reps on the shop floor are doing great work, it's our leadership that needs renewal. We need visible, energetic voices who can communicate with conviction - not vague slogans like "expanding the role of the postal worker" without a real plan or pressure on RM to deliver anything tangible.

I have no hard proof but I can't shake the feeling that backroom deals have shaped how we have ended up here and if that's the case then Ward and Walsh should seriously consider stepping aside. We have lost too many good posties already and the CWU can't afford to keep losing its members confidence too.

Yet again another great post hitting the nail on the head
CWU cannot or will not read the room - many members are disillusioned and are just trying to keep their heads down while we go through another upheaval mess of RM & CWU's making.
CWU are utterly desperate to have a seat at the table no matter what - guess what we will be the ones that pay for it as usual.

[Tman]

If they had any ounce of self respect and credibility they should be.

What a truly bizarre correlation.
You might just as well have said union members don't like Mars bars, or have ginger hair.
No connection at all.

[Ren Hoëk]

If they had any ounce of self respect and credibility they should be.

What a truly bizarre correlation.
You might just as well have said union members don't like Mars bars, or have ginger hair.
No connection at all.

Tosh. No gods, No masters. The entire idea of a monarchy should be an utterly perverse idea to any self respecting socialist, Self respecting democrat, free man.

[GRS]

I agree that the handling and communications around the 'pilots' or 'trials' has been poor and there has been mixed messages about whether they are on board with the wholesale deployment of the method change or not.
It is still unclear what there position is on this and they need some clear communications out to members.
Are we waiting to see if they trails work and ofcom rubber stamp the changes or are all offices to implement regardless and deal with the issues as they arise in each unit.
They are stuck between a rock and hard place I feel though.
Any pay rise or equalisation of contracts will be linked directly to the savings from USO reform, personally I think they need to get it right in each unit before steamrolling it through but I understand their predicament.
in terms of of the workings of the unions allot of the time people don't want to step on others toes.
Many will be friends for years and even if they may be better suited for a role they wouldn't challenge.
There will be a progression through a number of years.
Is that always best for members, maybe not but it's not a closed shop as many think.

Thanks for the detailed post, you’ve made some fair points.

The “rock and a hard place” is largely of the CWU’s own making because we have had delays, vague comms and little sign of a clear strategy. If pay and equalisation depend on savings from USO reform then why allow pilots to go ahead before any deal is finalised? That’s backwards. You don’t give up your main bargaining chip without securing anything in return. Yes, RM can technically roll out its own internal changes - but if the CWU refused to cooperate with them or pulled reps from the planning process then that would create real pressure, especially when RM are trying to convince Ofcom and EP Group that the ODM is efficient and deliverable.

As for the Union's internal structure - long service and personal relationships may explain why the same people stay in post but when that creates a culture where change becomes impossible, it's a closed shop in all but name! Ward and Walsh have been at the top for over a decade and it's clear that trust from the membership is slipping. While many reps on the shop floor are doing great work, it's our leadership that needs renewal. We need visible, energetic voices who can communicate with conviction - not vague slogans like "expanding the role of the postal worker" without a real plan or pressure on RM to deliver anything tangible.

I have no hard proof but I can't shake the feeling that backroom deals have shaped how we have ended up here and if that's the case then Ward and Walsh should seriously consider stepping aside. We have lost too many good posties already and the CWU can't afford to keep losing its members confidence too.

Those who get to the top positions of the union do get there on merit.
Most of them would have carried a reputation all the way from unit rep so they will be the strongest and shrewdest operators in their field.
It's just the timeline for progression is slow at times and reps may wait for positions to come up naturally rather than challenge.
Personally I think Martin Walsh and Dave Ward are the best two to lead us through these tough times.
Martin has bundles of experience all the way up from unit rep and Dave is hugely respected in the whole trade union movement.
It was always going to be a very hard position to hold since privatisation.
There are many variables that make the negotiating standpoint harder now than in the past.
We are now competing in a market where delivering a parcel doesn't create the revenue it should due to companies that use staff as and when they need. (Amazon flex... E.t c.)
Lots of the companies that operate in our field don't have the same financial restraints of sick pay and holiday pay that the union have rightly fought to keep for years.
On top of that we have seen the evident decline in letters leading to a USO that isn't financially viable anymore.
None of this is Dave or Martin's fault.
The USO pilots needed to happen so OFCOM could rubber stamp the changes.
The model of delivering 2nd class on alternate days and no 2nd class on Saturdays saved the most money for the company with the least job losses amongst staff. It can work it just has to be done properly.
It's not a one size fits all, many areas have too high a tracked traffic average for someone to deliver tracked and first class on one CDV. Also the issues with fatigue.
The union are aware of the need for a pay rise that's what makes these negotiations so tricky, if they completely pull away from the pilots and planning it may take allot longer to strike the deal. That's how I see it anyway.
They need clear communications around the USO reform and how much reps should be working with planners at local level if they are not one of the pilot offices.

Obviously not on delivery mate
As double mail every day is not achievable

Seems to be that everyone NOT involved in Delivery are the ones pushing for ODM.

Eg: Rm Board, Ofcom, CWU leadership, everyone on here in MCs etc etc.

Yet the ones who actually have to do the graft in the company are told “oh there’s no choice, the company is on it knees, we’ve got to change blah blah blah”.

Why is it that it’s only Delivery that have to change and cripple themselves for their old age?

How about some of you other CNUTS start pulling your beer bellies in and start pulling your weight!!!!!

[Mickeybrowneyes]

The USO pilots needed to happen so OFCOM could rubber stamp the changes.
.....if they completely pull away from the pilots and planning it may take allot longer to strike the deal. That's how I see it anyway.
They need clear communications around the USO reform and how much reps should be working with planners at local level if they are not one of the pilot offices.

Yeah, I don't disagree with competition, the gig economy or the decline in letter volumes. But Ofcom does not require pilot schemes before making a decision; thats RM strategic choice to show its feasibility. The CWU's decisions to stay involved may have kept them in the room but doing so before securing a firm deal has weakened their leverage. Pilots are supposed to test viability but instead has ended up creating momentum towards rollout in other offices which RM can now point to as "proof" that it works.

These reforms are inevitable but the timing is crucial. So while I respect your view, I do see it differently and rather than it speeding up a deal, what it has done instead is allow RM to push ahead unchecked and come back later with a diluted offer knowing that the union has just played its strongest card.

They are trying to balance improving our terms and conditions without causing lots of job losses in the process.
No OFCOM do not need permission but will want to see if the trials produce the quality of service targets that they have set before they cement the change.
The other options that were put forward before will create allot more job losses.
If the CWU are not actively involved in the proposed changes now there could potentially be more job losses in the future.
To the other posters after you I am on delivery every day and our delivery spans are already over five hours at the minute, but I do also have a beer belly.
We were delivering double the amount of mail we are now ten or so years ago and it was achievable then it's just the nature of our workload has changed and rounds have been made longer because of the call rate decreasing.
In reality for the method change to work some duties may have to be put back in.
If everyone in units are full time in the future and the the automated sorting of letters and packets improve it will reduce our indoor hours giving you longer on delivery.
Obviously that leads to fatigue to which is an issue.

[BELIAL]

GIVING YOU LONGER on delivery.
Thank you m’lord.
I see where you are coming from.

[Tman]

Facebook][/Facebook]

Tosh. No gods, No masters. The entire idea of a monarchy should be an utterly perverse idea to any self respecting socialist, Self respecting democrat, free man.

You're making a lot of claims for trades unionists. Most would say they're Average Working Joes banding together for their common good rather than all that presumptive nonsense listed above.

[postslippete]

They are trying to balance improving our terms and conditions without causing lots of job losses in the process.

Yeah, we all know the job today looks nothing like it did a decade or two ago, and no one wants to see mass redundancies. But the CWU leadership has got the sequencing all wrong in these negotiations.

See, if the Union's involvement in these pilots is supposed to protect jobs; then securing basic guarantees on pay, equalisation and conditions surely needed to be locked in first? You don't hand the company its biggest reforms and then cross your fingers hoping that they will reward you for it later. Being in the room without a deal simply means helping RM deliver its strategy rather than shaping it. And that is how we ended up with the last watered down deal.

Honestly? It feels deliberate. The union leaders have no fight in their bellies anymore allowing RM is getting exactly what it wants. But let's face it - it's always been their business to run. Even with an explosion in parcel volumes, rising postage prices, cheaper labour from new starters on worse terms, slashed sick pay and IHR and trimmed VR costs - RM will still say claim there's no money in the post while bosses collect their bonuses and demand even more.

I could go on but maybe I shouldn't. All I know is I've got double mail and probably well over 100 tracked items across two duties tomorrow - and if RM aren't already making savings under this setup, then seriously, where the f*** is the money going??

[Mickeybrowneyes]

They are trying to balance improving our terms and conditions without causing lots of job losses in the process.

Yeah, we all know the job today looks nothing like it did a decade or two ago, and no one wants to see mass redundancies. But the CWU leadership has got the sequencing all wrong in these negotiations.

See, if the Union's involvement in these pilots is supposed to protect jobs; then securing basic guarantees on pay, equalisation and conditions surely needed to be locked in first? You don't hand the company its biggest reforms and then cross your fingers hoping that they will reward you for it later. Being in the room without a deal simply means helping RM deliver its strategy rather than shaping it. And that is how we ended up with the last watered down deal.

Honestly? It feels deliberate. The union leaders have no fight in their bellies anymore allowing RM is getting exactly what it wants. But let's face it - it's always been their business to run. Even with an explosion in parcel volumes, rising postage prices, cheaper labour from new starters on worse terms, slashed sick pay and IHR and trimmed VR costs - RM will still say claim there's no money in the post while bosses collect their bonuses and demand even more.

I could go on but maybe I shouldn't. All I know is I've got double mail and probably well over 100 tracked items across two duties tomorrow - and if RM aren't already making savings under this setup, then seriously, where the f*** is the money going??

I feel your frustration and you probably speak for how many feel at the minute when they see their workload increase and not their wages while probably being told by management that you should be working harder.
The money they project to save from the reduction in labour costs for the rest of this year by implementing the method change and next year will fund the pay deal and equalising on terms.
Not sure you can have one before the other as it is asking the new owner to dig deep into pockets without a guarantee the USO will reform anytime soon.
Maybe that's what he should do.
If these joint trails are a success and hit delivery targets it makes negotiations easier and more likely OFCOM sign it off.
Reduction in delivering 1st class will need to be passed through parliament which could take months.
If it goes down that road there will be many more job losses in the future.
That's the rock and the hard place.

[Ren Hoëk]

Facebook][/Facebook]

Tosh. No gods, No masters. The entire idea of a monarchy should be an utterly perverse idea to any self respecting socialist, Self respecting democrat, free man.

You're making a lot of claims for trades unionists. Most would say they're Average Working Joes banding together for their common good rather than all that presumptive nonsense listed above.

Thats exactly what rejecting the aristocracy is. Banding together for the common good.