Royal Mail in legal bid to block national Christmas strike : CWU response

k979aaa · Post by **k979aaa** » 10 Nov 2019, 21:09

ddtc wrote:I really don't see the difference of RM bombarding us with numerous RMTV videos saying vote no, courier, managers spouting nonsense, letters etc to us. Is that not trying to coerce us?

Exactly we have managers doing videos in our vans for RMTV and they delay us and they say they will pay us extra but what if we need to finish on time?

postslippete · Post by **postslippete** » 10 Nov 2019, 22:08

Royal Mail are desperately clutching at straws to stave off any sort of industrial action before Xmas. I think unlike the last time a strike was averted the Union have gone about it following the correct procedure.

I wouldn't mind betting that Royal Mail's case for prosecution will try and show that the CWU were pushing its members to vote YES for strike action based not only on intimidation/influence but also on misinformation.

Things like the 20,000 job losses. Did Royal Mail actually say that other than saying that they needed to transform the business at pace?
It only said that it would ensure its staff have good terms and conditions if they stayed with them.
The USO. Royal Mail might have brought it's review with OfCom forward but I can't remember them saying anything about getting rid of it or that it will lead to job losses?

datasaint · Post by **datasaint** » 10 Nov 2019, 23:16

The thing about the 20,000 job losses isn't misinformation though is it, it was based on the new proposed parcel strategy and absorbing 1 walk out of every six due to reduced workload.

work · Post by **work** » 11 Nov 2019, 11:38

ddtc wrote:I really don't see the difference of RM bombarding us with numerous RMTV videos saying vote no, courier, managers spouting nonsense, letters etc to us. Is that not trying to coerce us?

yep...in the workplace...worktime learning/training slots forsaken for one-sided propaganda...yep, paying us to listen to them telling us to NOT STRIKE...COERCION WITH FINANCIAL REWARD...NOT JUST ASKED TO QUEUE UP AND TAKE PART...ORDERED TO (MUST SIGN TO SAY YOU HAVE SEEN IT ETC.)Classic double standard; like the voters can't make up their own minds based on own experience(s) since the fatcat ignored our legal terms and conditions...we're talking months of decision making...not the tiny minded few whom possibly needed the facebook fraternity to persuade their X voting mark...it's just a load of stalling cobblers...as per...YAWN!

ddtc · Post by **ddtc** » 11 Nov 2019, 15:18

CWU just need to make sure they get it across to the judge that this has been going on since May. This was because of RM breaking the four pillars agreement and if I remember correctly one of the RMTV videos had a manager admitting to going ahead with their new plans without working with the union but we must now work together. Anyone else remember that video?

This was started because of RM, not the union or the workforce. This could and can of been avoided if RM actually started having dialogue with the union. Its just been constant no this no that, sorry its half term.

Judge surely must notice it is a blatent delaying tactic that is just wasting more time.

Surreypostie · Post by **Surreypostie** » 11 Nov 2019, 17:30

Schiff wrote:
daveyeff wrote:CWU can't be held responsible for members opening/intercepting ballot papers before they reached members homes. they were sent out by CWU to members homes.

Yes they can, we are the CWU, the CWU isn't just Sw19

Surreypostie · Post by **Surreypostie** » 11 Nov 2019, 17:33

ddtc wrote:CWU just need to make sure they get it across to the judge that this has been going on since May. This was because of RM breaking the four pillars agreement and if I remember correctly one of the RMTV videos had a manager admitting to going ahead with their new plans without working with the union but we must now work together. Anyone else remember that video?

This was started because of RM, not the union or the workforce. This could and can of been avoided if RM actually started having dialogue with the union. Its just been constant no this no that, sorry its half term.

Judge surely must notice it is a blatent delaying tactic that is just wasting more time.

Judges are only concerned with the law, if they think we broke the law regarding Industrial action ballots, they will find in Royal Mails favour. If they think otherwise they won't. They will not care if it is a delaying tactic or not. They are not there to have opinions on that.

twoloops · Post by **twoloops** » 11 Nov 2019, 17:55

Are we any nearer a date for the strike? Got things to book & places to go?

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 11 Nov 2019, 18:01

Surreypostie wrote:
ddtc wrote:CWU just need to make sure they get it across to the judge that this has been going on since May. This was because of RM breaking the four pillars agreement and if I remember correctly one of the RMTV videos had a manager admitting to going ahead with their new plans without working with the union but we must now work together. Anyone else remember that video?

This was started because of RM, not the union or the workforce. This could and can of been avoided if RM actually started having dialogue with the union. Its just been constant no this no that, sorry its half term.

Judge surely must notice it is a blatent delaying tactic that is just wasting more time.
Judges are only concerned with the law, if they think we broke the law regarding Industrial action ballots, they will find in Royal Mails favour. If they think otherwise they won't. They will not care if it is a delaying tactic or not. They are not there to have opinions on that.

in that case the judges should be in favour of the CWU as RM have broken a LEGAL agreement which is the 4 pillars.

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 11 Nov 2019, 18:04

Surreypostie wrote:
Schiff wrote:
daveyeff wrote:CWU can't be held responsible for members opening/intercepting ballot papers before they reached members homes. they were sent out by CWU to members homes.
Yes they can, we are the CWU, the CWU isn't just Sw19

I mean the cwu hierarchy. the ones responsible for sending out the ballot papers. members didn't send them out to themselves.

Surreypostie · Post by **Surreypostie** » 11 Nov 2019, 18:18

daveyeff wrote:
Surreypostie wrote:
ddtc wrote:CWU just need to make sure they get it across to the judge that this has been going on since May. This was because of RM breaking the four pillars agreement and if I remember correctly one of the RMTV videos had a manager admitting to going ahead with their new plans without working with the union but we must now work together. Anyone else remember that video?

This was started because of RM, not the union or the workforce. This could and can of been avoided if RM actually started having dialogue with the union. Its just been constant no this no that, sorry its half term.

Judge surely must notice it is a blatent delaying tactic that is just wasting more time.
Judges are only concerned with the law, if they think we broke the law regarding Industrial action ballots, they will find in Royal Mails favour. If they think otherwise they won't. They will not care if it is a delaying tactic or not. They are not there to have opinions on that.
in that case the judges should be in favour of the CWU as RM have broken a LEGAL agreement which is the 4 pillars.

Fair enough so now you are accusing the CWU of gross negligence, if the 4 pillars was legally binding, it was not, the CWU would have taken them to court and won and we would not be find ourselves in this situation now. Not only that but RM would be paying the CWU's legal bills. Trade union agreements are not legally binding unless written into the agreement, I am sure you can find that for me.

daveyeff · Post by **daveyeff** » 11 Nov 2019, 18:37

so you are saying they are not trying to break legally binding agreements.

Surreypostie · Post by **Surreypostie** » 11 Nov 2019, 18:46

daveyeff wrote:so you are saying they are not trying to break legally binding agreements.

Not at all, I am saying it was not legally binding, I was hoping you could show me the part of the agreement that states it is. If is is, then surely the CWU are aware of it as they signed it and would be in court. I am suggesting you are incorrect.

clashcityrocker · Post by **clashcityrocker** » 11 Nov 2019, 18:51

daveyeff wrote:so you are saying they are not trying to break legally binding agreements.

If you go to the CWU website under reps resources it has a copy of what was legally binding.
The 4 Pillows agreement is not a legally binding agreement as far as I know.

Surreypostie · Post by **Surreypostie** » 11 Nov 2019, 18:56

clashcityrocker wrote:
daveyeff wrote:so you are saying they are not trying to break legally binding agreements.
If you go to the CWU website under reps resources it has a copy of what was legally binding.
The 4 Pillows agreement is not a legally binding agreement as far as I know.

Correct, I believe there were some kind of legal protections for about 12 months which have now expired. It most certainly was not legally binding or the CWU would have had RM in court, there would have been no ballot and no disagreement.