shares are back

[Martin Walsh]

Phase 3 talks including the replacement to colleague share start next week. The talks will take place following a prenstation from the business on the financial postion of Royal Mail following the EU state aid , the progress of the Business Transformation Agreement and the wider picture.

The second day will start the Negotations on the various strands.

[fishtank]

Hell of a way to start a negotiation process...
Here is why we want you to see things our way,let's call it the opening position...compiled,edited and presented by Royal Mail of course....now take a seat boys...what was it you wanted to discuss?
Does anybody ever stand up and say...I've seen this movie before..I know how it ends.

[Martin Walsh]

Fish you can look at this the other way , the EU state aid has resolved the pension deficit meaning that Royal Mail have a few million to spare. Eqaully how many people on here have been calling for a true update on the current agreement , revisons , ratio of full time to part time s etc.

[dvbuk55]

I sincerely hope the talkers are looking for a payment and not some sort of work now pay later scheme that we've had in the past, well having said that we've had the work just not the money. What we would like is a pay now for the work already done scheme.

Should we need to ask for an update from Royal Mail? As the union negotiated BT2010 with the inclusion of 75/25 FT/PT do you not think that there should have been a check and balance by the union

[Martin Walsh]

Well Dvbuk the fact that lots of offices introduced a revison without a signed agreement makes it very differcult to track from a union point. Whereas Royal Mail have two clear records one is who is paid and the other is what is known as the ARK process. Even when Bob Gbison sent out the model agreement which had to be filled offices have introduced revisons without adhering to this. Royal Mail are too blame as well.

Now why it is important to understand the finances is that the managers have recently been paid a bonus , perhaps it would be worthwhile to have some bonus linked to what they are paid on. The other aspect may be linked to various office targets. of course any bonus scheme should be index linked and have the ability to be consolidated into basic pay.

[POSTMAN]

So where are the area reps and Div reps in this sham then?
Actually,this deserves a thread on it's own...
http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/communit ... 42&t=46508" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[dvbuk55]

So where are the area reps and Div reps in this sham then?
Actually,this deserves a thread on it's own...
http://www.royalmailchat.co.uk/communit ... 42&t=46508" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Dingo falls back on the old "blame the membership" routine.

That is a good point you raise because if DivAr/ea Reps aren't taking a lead in local negotiations and aren't making any effort to rectify errors, ensure the agreements are adhered to, making sure that equipment is being used that cars aren't being used then what exactly is the point of them being there.

It's all very well making agreements but what the union are failing to do is ensuring that they are adhered to.

Bob Gibson was a little bit late with the model - we'd already gone in to revision six months before - with advice from the union to go ahead using the "Durham model"

[Martin Walsh]

Dvbuk there is an agreed process for dealing with local agreements and the six step process and it is first done at local rep , only if there is an issue is it raised to the area rep and if it cant be agreed then to the Divisonal Rep.

So its alright for you to blame everyone but not the fact that a local rep has not ensured their is an agreement on the revison. How would anyone know if the revision is working unless there is an agreed revison document. Now I also blame the area rep and Branch if they have not ensured that the rep does this. However it is janet and john stuff that if you agree a revision you have an agreement. If you have not got a written agreement then in my view you have not got an agreement. I would never agree to introduce a revison without an agreed set of words.

[dvbuk55]

How long has the six step procedure been in place? We had our revision two years ago and as I recall there was a huffing and puffing getting the wording agreed only to find that two years later the agreement is still being discussed with over two thirds of DOs not yet in revision. WCM on the horizon with no prospect of payment for implementing any and every change that comes under that scheme which has no agreed procedure.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Eqaully how many people on here have been calling for a true update on the current agreement , revisons , ratio of full time to part time s etc.

excellent - is that update going to all members or will it be an LTB.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

So its alright for you to blame everyone but not the fact that a local rep has not ensured their is an agreement on the revison. How would anyone know if the revision is working unless there is an agreed revison document. Now I also blame the area rep and Branch if they have not ensured that the rep does this. However it is janet and john stuff that if you agree a revision you have an agreement. If you have not got a written agreement then in my view you have not got an agreement. I would never agree to introduce a revison without an agreed set of words.

Actually if I may be so bold, I think in the scenario you paint the local rep is the one that should have the least (if any at all) blame put on their shoulders. Unit reps have to fight for release, tend to do a lot of work on a voluntary basis and either at home, and certainly on their own computer, they also have to face members directly on a day-to-day basis, and they also have the added pressure of having to do their duty/or as said before fight for release and training, it's not surprising that they get it wrong sometimes. I believe Branches should be a lot more involved at Unit level, and certainly shouldn't rely on a rep, in fact quite the opposite they should be supporting the local rep a lot more than it seems they are the moment. Having said that out own ADR (albeit he is our ex Unit Rep) seems to playing a blinder and has been on site for a lot of the last few weeks.

[dvbuk55]

So its alright for you to blame everyone but not the fact that a local rep has not ensured their is an agreement on the revison. How would anyone know if the revision is working unless there is an agreed revison document. Now I also blame the area rep and Branch if they have not ensured that the rep does this. However it is janet and john stuff that if you agree a revision you have an agreement. If you have not got a written agreement then in my view you have not got an agreement. I would never agree to introduce a revison without an agreed set of words.

Actually if I may be so bold, I think in the scenario you paint the local rep is the one that should have the least (if any at all) blame put on their shoulders. Unit reps have to fight for release, tend to do a lot of work on a voluntary basis and either at home, and certainly on their own computer, they also have to face members directly on a day-to-day basis, and they also have the added pressure of having to do their duty/or as said before fight for release and training, it's not surprising that they get it wrong sometimes. I believe Branches should be a lot more involved at Unit level, and certainly shouldn't rely on a rep, in fact quite the opposite they should be supporting the local rep a lot more than it seems they are the moment. Having said that out own ADR (albeit he is our ex Unit Rep) seems to playing a blinder and has been on site for a lot of the last few weeks.

A far cry from the prawn and salmon and cucumber set tbt.

[fishtank]

Eqaully how many people on here have been calling for a true update on the current agreement , revisons , ratio of full time to part time s etc.

How true is this true update?
The union's own control measures are a shambles so we are left relying on the information provided by our employer.
Information that obviously comes with an agenda is not reliable information especially if you have nothing to counter it with,to believe that this true update will not be tweaked to put forward the best negotiation position for Royal Mail and the worst for the CWU is naive at best.
So you are left sitting through a presentation that has absolutely no validity other than as a propaganda exercise.....why?

[suz67]

Just noticed on dingo's avatar his location is NEVERLAND!!! seems about right,

[Martin Walsh]

Dvbuk I am concerned with your last post the six step process is a fundremental part of the revison process within the National Business Transformation Agreement and includes the words that " the following phases will take place with full and systematic involvement , including the sharing of all revevant information with the CWU Rep at each step of the process.

It also states " to ensure ongoing and full involvement in the process, the local manager and local CWU rep will meet weekly as part of the planning ,implementation and review the process. Each meeting will be diaried at the start of the revision process, information shared with the CWU Reps and manager in advance of the meeting. Outputs , actions and relvant information will be shared with the colleagues in the delivery unit and displayed on a weekly basis.

It also states also appropriate release will be given to allow CWU reps to fulfil their role in the process and consult with the members.

It also states on phase 4 titled agree the office duties "reach local agreement in line with the IR framework on new duty proposals.

Now TBT i have no problems with stating that local rep do a thankless task , believe me being a union official nowadays is thankless task at all levels. However whilst I believe local reps should get more support from branch`s , area reps and field officials and CWU HQs the reality is that no one forces a local rep to do the job. They are a volunter , and once they accept the role they should ensure they read the agreement and if they cannot get release in line with the agreement they flag it up. What is not acceptable is that literal dozens of offices have introduced revisions without any paperwork agreed by the rep or branch. Of course how can anyone understand if the revison is working unless we have the base data on what the revision was agreed on.

Look I would blame myself if i agreed something which effected everyone in a unit but I did not show what I agreed to the members and I never had a document saying what I agreed. Look we all like to protect local reps and I do but there is no excuse for any revison being agreed in a unit without a detailed agreement.