PART PRIVATISATION WOULD YOU STRIKE OR NOT

[Big Daz]

It is ilegal to strike over privitisation. However it is possible to get around this by balloting over Royal Mails plans for the industry.

Big Daz it could be that stike action could also weaken the government resolve as well as the back benches who have signed the early day motion will question why Royal Mail are introducing their modernisation plans without talking to the CWU.

Look the campaign is going well politically and the Government is a lame duck. MPs are going to now be thinking how best to safeguard their own seats so any pressure is worthwhile.

The lords especially Mandy have no worries about keeping seats especially as the chance of a tory government bringing a wholly elected 2nd chamber is very small.

My concern is we are not doing enough to expose Royal Mail`s modernsiation plans as this will be equally damaging to jobs and terms and conditons.

Which is why we must use our brain more and use it smarter and faster

[Thorby Bislam]

Before I vote for a strike or not, I want to see our objectives set out clearly. I want to see what our plan of action is and I want to see what we would consider a victory or a defeat set out beforehand. I dont want to experience what happened at the end of last years strike again. If we are going to take the pain, we deserve that much.

[BELIAL]

It is ilegal to strike over privitisation. However it is possible to get around this by balloting over Royal Mails plans for the industry.

Big Daz it could be that stike action could also weaken the government resolve as well as the back benches who have signed the early day motion will question why Royal Mail are introducing their modernisation plans without talking to the CWU.

Look the campaign is going well politically and the Government is a lame duck. MPs are going to now be thinking how best to safeguard their own seats so any pressure is worthwhile.

My concern is we are not doing enough to expose Royal Mail`s modernsiation plans as this will be equally damaging to jobs and terms and conditons.

Who says, Play by their rules and it will soon be ILLegal to have a pension

[Carnoustie]

Before I vote for a strike or not, I want to see our objectives set out clearly. I want to see what our plan of action is and I want to see what we would consider a victory or a defeat set out beforehand. I dont want to experience what happened at the end of last years strike again. If we are going to take the pain, we deserve that much.

Well said

If we were ballotted AFTER the part-privatisation had already gone though, I would vote NO to strike action. Seriously, what on earth could we hope to achieve striking after the legislation had been passed ? Apart from the loss of earnings ? I'd maybe vote for a token one-day strike to show our displeasure, but seriously, what would our objective be in a sustained campaign of strike action ? To reverse the legislation ? No government, Labour or Tory, is ever going change policy because of union pressure. They'd argue it would be political suicide and The Sun would trot out the headlines of 'union barons holding the country to ransom' etc etc. Let's face it, the CWU has been paying into Labour coffers with our funds, has 'had the ear of the government', and fat lot of good that has done. Quite the opposite, in fact And just how many one-day strikes would we have to take part in before HQ realised what is already obvious to me, that the legislation would never be reversed ? The longer the strikes (or continuous all-out strike) continued, the more people would drift back to work, creating animosity, division and, ultimately, a union that would be totally lacking in any strength. I can see TNT already licking their lips, buying in to a Royal Mail where the union has a membership that are all at each other's throats and won't fight any of their attacks on our existing terms and conditions !

[Radio]

I would ballet 'No' to a strike action but if the members vote for it, I would not go in on principal of the matter. Strike-action at this stage would be a political suicide. We have strong backing in the parliament and should use this political clout to avoid privatisation of any kind. If the CWU were really serious about averting Mandelson's plans, they would lobby the general public and be more reasonable and informative . They are still stuck in the 1960s style confrontational politics which the general public abhor and deem outdated. We should be more politically aware and active. Strike-action would only loose us our most effective weapon: public support. Nobody would support you if their cheap knickers that they bought off eBay for £2.00 (inc p&P) are stuck in the mail because posties are on strike. Times have changed and we don't only carry bills and council tax demand notices to the public. We carry items that people have paid for and people don't want these items to be held back for ANY reason. With the unemployment going into millions, nobody would like to see someone with a decent job refusing to work for ANY reason. The bottom-line is that this battle can only be won using political means and public support. Confrontational politics would loose us both. I am sure that those who really do want part-privatisation (and that does not include only Mandelson and Crozier!) would love to see us on the picket line as it would only facilitate their foul aims.

[DGP1]

I would ballet 'No' to a strike action but if the members vote for it, I would not go in on principal of the matter. Strike-action at this stage would be a political suicide. We have strong backing in the parliament and should use this political clout to avoid privatisation of any kind. If the CWU were really serious about averting Mandelson's plans, they would lobby the general public and be more reasonable and informative . They are still stuck in the 1960s style confrontational politics which the general public abhor and deem outdated. We should be more politically aware and active. Strike-action would only loose us our most effective weapon: public support. Nobody would support you if their cheap knickers that they bought off eBay for £2.00 (inc p&P) are stuck in the mail because posties are on strike. Times have changed and we don't only carry bills and council tax demand notices to the public. We carry items that people have paid for and people don't want these items to be held back for ANY reason. With the unemployment going into millions, nobody would like to see someone with a decent job refusing to work for ANY reason. The bottom-line is that this battle can only be won using political means and public support. Confrontational politics would loose us both. I am sure that those who really do want part-privatisation (and that does not include only Mandelson and Crozier!) would love to see us on the picket line as it would only facilitate their foul aims.

The fact that you have to remember is 'We can't strike for political reasons' (Big Daz quote from above) so all we're doing is showing our frustration and willingness to fight this issue by any means we have available.

[baldrick]

Although we would be prevented from striking against privatisation bt the Anti-Union legislation,
we could be ballotted for strikes to obtain guarantees on our pay and conditions, and employment security.

[andy2007]

And in my opinion, that's exactly what we SHOULD do.

[norbert]

i voted no.After 24 years as a delivery postman I have had enough.I have a 100% strike rate .I went out in the late 80's for a couple of weeks just after my fifst mortgage.I was on strike in the mid. 80's on the day before I got married.Loads of others and everything just seemas to be brought in anyway.I would probably not go in but I would not vote for it .As far as I am concerned the ones in my office who are at the bottom with regards seniority can do one.They made up most of the strike breakers last time and would do again .they must think the rest of us complete mugs.

Thanks for your honesty mate. Its refreshing.

there used to be the scourge of Postmen with a Dracula / :lfo avatar on the 2007 dispute forum on Hellmail that used to play the " I was on strike during the 80's card & it got us nowhere " , apparently he was a DUM but also mentioned being involved in high level negotiations and allegedly was very partial to sausage , chips and beans during that period .


Came on here once as a " Totally against this action " thread starter before the hack . Just making a point so please don't jump down my throat . It has to be considered there had been a massive recession earlier in the 80's and Thatcher had taken every union on , it's thought she lost her effectiveness after she started running out of "dragons" to slay .

As for the strike - breakers , maybe there has to be consideration as to why the CWU were not able to take these " Thatcher's children " with them , you have to consider what sort of culture they came from , what sort of cr** they were fed with , have RM put these people in to play divide and rule and / or dilute the unionized culture / influence ?

I'm only playing Devil's advocate as you've got to look at the other side's strengths and weaknesses . RM are known for playing the starve them back to work card too and the media propaganda machine would work overtime .

[Night Tonic]

Thats not limited to RM either Norb. Its indemic these days. Striking won't help much and I'm not downing those in favour of such action but can't see it achieving much except reduced money at a time when we need it most. Don't hold out much hope for the Lincoln boys either. Too much vagueness in the modernisation agreement and wildcat strikes carry a lot of risks as we know.

[norbert]

Thats not limited to RM either Norb. Its indemic these days. Striking won't help much and I'm not downing those in favour of such action but can't see it achieving much except reduced money at a time when we need it most. Don't hold out much hope for the Lincoln boys either. Too much vagueness in the modernisation agreement and wildcat strikes carry a lot of risks as we know.

Lincoln was well out of order & very underhand on RM's part , the van bit was being trailed , but the DUM's lightbulbs went off in the single brain cells when they thought it could save money ; but it also meant there was all the badly thought out stuff and all the problems that came with it when it was imposed .

Also it had already been binned by Liverpool and RM thought Lincoln would be a soft touch .

I agree that the modernization agreement is deliberately vaguely worded , RM are certainly not going by the spirit of the agreement , no surprise there .

I agree the Union has to stand up to RM otherwise ! , but more guile with less loss of earnings is needed .

[Night Tonic]

The union is doing what it does. Theres an open-top bus going round London stations tomorrow. Good luck on that one but their efforts barely make the press these days.

[ghostgirl]

I personally would vote "yes" to strike action...although I don't know if it would do us any good, what would be a better idea would be to ask the public themselves what their veiws to privatisation are, the government could do this the same way that they did with the congestion charge by sending out voting forms..yes I know we would have to deliver them but wouldn't it be worth it in the end.

[andy2007]

They recently did a Public Consultation on the Post Office closures. But they didn't advertise it at all. It was only near the end, that word started to get out, and they started to get a decent response.

If they were to send out voting forms, everyone would know about it, as it would arrive on their doorstep. So instead of only getting 135 posts on the busiest of the three topics in the Post Office consultation: http://forums.parliament.uk/post-office ... hp?index,1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Which they can easily claim isn't representitive of Public Opinion (if they wanted to), as it's such a tiny proportion. They would have a large enough response, to stop their plans.

It's all just spin, and PR. So they can claim that they tried to consult us, and we weren't interested enough to reply.

[dvbuk55]

It is ilegal to strike over privitisation. However it is possible to get around this by balloting over Royal Mails plans for the industry.

Big Daz it could be that stike action could also weaken the government resolve as well as the back benches who have signed the early day motion will question why Royal Mail are introducing their modernisation plans without talking to the CWU.

Look the campaign is going well politically and the Government is a lame duck. MPs are going to now be thinking how best to safeguard their own seats so any pressure is worthwhile.

My concern is we are not doing enough to expose Royal Mail`s modernsiation plans as this will be equally damaging to jobs and terms and conditons.

Royal Mails modernisation is a concept and not a plan. A plan is a systematic itemisation of methods, routines and commitments to arrive at a desired point - what we have is savings, savings and mechanisation. There is no structured plan which details exactly how we are going to arrive at the new model Royal Mail - either with or without privatisation. Privatisation is yet another holy grail - someone is going to invest x amount of money for x number of shares and do precisely what? Does anyone know? If they do no-one is spelling it out. On the one hand we have the government saying it is essential and on the other the CWU saying it isn't. Personally I don't believe we need a third party involved providing the government underwrites the pension and they say they will only do that IF a third party invests. Do they want the money from the third party and the money from the pension fund to prop themselves up? It makes you wonder and wish you could put the clock back a few years.