Strike dates?

[LouBarlow]

I think we've come too far to get 9% over 18 months.

That is not acceptable.

The unemployed got a 10.1% rise.

I think they can go further.

What have the unemployed got to do with us? They are funded by the government, for starters, and if you think they have an easy ride you are deluded. Quit your job if it is that easy not having one.

[milly]

I think we've come too far to get 9% over 18 months.

That is not acceptable.

The unemployed got a 10.1% rise.

I think they can go further.

What have the unemployed got to do with us? They are funded by the government, for starters, and if you think they have an easy ride you are deluded. Quit your job if it is that easy not having one.

The Unemployed are funded by us the Taxpayer who in turn are receiving lower payrises than the unemployed.
Also the Workers are going to pay more tax to pay for the unemployed as our Tax allowance is frozen until 2028.
This is economic madness, no wonder they can't get people off benefits.

[Binsey]

Universal Basic Income?

[LouBarlow]

I think we've come too far to get 9% over 18 months.

That is not acceptable.

The unemployed got a 10.1% rise.

I think they can go further.

What have the unemployed got to do with us? They are funded by the government, for starters, and if you think they have an easy ride you are deluded. Quit your job if it is that easy not having one.

The Unemployed are funded by us the Taxpayer who in turn are receiving lower payrises than the unemployed.
Also the Workers are going to pay more tax to pay for the unemployed as our Tax allowance is frozen until 2028.
This is economic madness, no wonder they can't get people off benefits.

As I said, if it is as lavish a lifestyle as you seem to think, fill your boots.

[milly]

I think we've come too far to get 9% over 18 months.

That is not acceptable.

The unemployed got a 10.1% rise.

I think they can go further.

What have the unemployed got to do with us? They are funded by the government, for starters, and if you think they have an easy ride you are deluded. Quit your job if it is that easy not having one.

The Unemployed are funded by us the Taxpayer who in turn are receiving lower payrises than the unemployed.
Also the Workers are going to pay more tax to pay for the unemployed as our Tax allowance is frozen until 2028.
This is economic madness, no wonder they can't get people off benefits.

As I said, if it is as lavish a lifestyle as you seem to think, fill your boots.

I didn't say it was lavish, just preferable to working.
Is it viable to give the unemployed/benefit recipients higher percentage rises than people who work?
I look forward to your reply.

[arsenalbob]

I think we've come too far to get 9% over 18 months.

That is not acceptable.

The unemployed got a 10.1% rise.

I think they can go further.

What have the unemployed got to do with us? They are funded by the government, for starters, and if you think they have an easy ride you are deluded. Quit your job if it is that easy not having one.

The Unemployed are funded by us the Taxpayer who in turn are receiving lower payrises than the unemployed.
Also the Workers are going to pay more tax to pay for the unemployed as our Tax allowance is frozen until 2028.
This is economic madness, no wonder they can't get people off benefits.

As I said, if it is as lavish a lifestyle as you seem to think, fill your boots.

I didn't say it was lavish, just preferable to working.
Is it viable to give the unemployed/benefit recipients higher percentage rises than people who work?
I look forward to your reply.

People are on benefits for a reason. Either physical Ill health or mental ill health. They live on a pittance way below the breadline and, believe me, it is not preferable to working. Please don’t use the 10.1% increase they will get as a comparison to what we should be getting.

[milly]

I think we've come too far to get 9% over 18 months.

That is not acceptable.

The unemployed got a 10.1% rise.

I think they can go further.

What have the unemployed got to do with us? They are funded by the government, for starters, and if you think they have an easy ride you are deluded. Quit your job if it is that easy not having one.

The Unemployed are funded by us the Taxpayer who in turn are receiving lower payrises than the unemployed.
Also the Workers are going to pay more tax to pay for the unemployed as our Tax allowance is frozen until 2028.
This is economic madness, no wonder they can't get people off benefits.

As I said, if it is as lavish a lifestyle as you seem to think, fill your boots.

I didn't say it was lavish, just preferable to working.
Is it viable to give the unemployed/benefit recipients higher percentage rises than people who work?
I look forward to your reply.

People are on benefits for a reason. Either physical Ill health or mental ill health. They live on a pittance way below the breadline and, believe me, it is not preferable to working. Please don’t use the 10.1% increase they will get as a comparison to what we should be getting.

Like I said how is it viable to pay people on benefits a higher percentage than someone who works for a living.
The Tax receipts don't cover the cost of paying out these benefits,the Government is borrowing extra Billions every month to pay for it.

[Schiff]

Back on topic. If the PEC were meeting yesterday then why the complete lack of communication from the CWU?

Either we have now been made a much improved offer that they consider worth putting to the members (highly unlikely) or, on the back of a massive vote for continuing industrial action, they must announce the next series of strike dates in order to hold the feet of the RM negotiators to the fire in order to eventually achieve that acceptable offer.

The deafening silence makes it look like the CWU leadership haven't got a f****ng clue, which I have long suspected.

[goneaway]

Back on topic. If the PEC were meeting yesterday then why the complete lack of communication from the CWU?

Either we have now been made a much improved offer that they consider worth putting to the members (highly unlikely) or, on the back of a massive vote for continuing industrial action, they must announce the next series of strike dates in order to hold the feet of the RM negotiators to the fire in order to eventually achieve that acceptable offer.

The deafening silence makes it look like the CWU leadership haven't got a f****ng clue, which I have long suspected.

CWU have just done a long one hour update on YouTube and Facebook Live. Play back here: https://www.youtube.com/live/S78jWdZjNSg?feature=share

[Schiff]

Back on topic. If the PEC were meeting yesterday then why the complete lack of communication from the CWU?

Either we have now been made a much improved offer that they consider worth putting to the members (highly unlikely) or, on the back of a massive vote for continuing industrial action, they must announce the next series of strike dates in order to hold the feet of the RM negotiators to the fire in order to eventually achieve that acceptable offer.

The deafening silence makes it look like the CWU leadership haven't got a f****ng clue, which I have long suspected.

CWU have just done a long one hour update on YouTube and Facebook Live. Play back here: https://www.youtube.com/live/S78jWdZjNSg?feature=share

Cheers for the link. I've watched the first 15 minutes of waffle and it seems that there will be 3 weeks of talks. Well announce a full week of strike action now for the last week in March, which will be called off if there is an acceptable offer achieved within those 3 weeks to put to members. Announcing it now will allow members to start saving money each week to get them through the strikes if they are needed.

[LouBarlow]

I think we've come too far to get 9% over 18 months.

That is not acceptable.

The unemployed got a 10.1% rise.

I think they can go further.

What have the unemployed got to do with us? They are funded by the government, for starters, and if you think they have an easy ride you are deluded. Quit your job if it is that easy not having one.

The Unemployed are funded by us the Taxpayer who in turn are receiving lower payrises than the unemployed.
Also the Workers are going to pay more tax to pay for the unemployed as our Tax allowance is frozen until 2028.
This is economic madness, no wonder they can't get people off benefits.

As I said, if it is as lavish a lifestyle as you seem to think, fill your boots.

I didn't say it was lavish, just preferable to working.
Is it viable to give the unemployed/benefit recipients higher percentage rises than people who work?
I look forward to your reply.

How much do you think people receive in benefits? Don’t just rely on the daily mail for the answer to this question. Ask someone who is unemployed or disabled and claiming benefits. Then work out exactly how much that rise in benefits that offends you so much equates to. And unlike ghouls like yourself, I would rather people not working are able to afford to feed themselves and their family, or heat their homes, so I care less about the few extra £s a week they are receiving, and far f***ing more about the billions wasted by this corrupt government you support.

How much of your tax money is going on MP wage increases this year? I can’t wait for your reply.

[milly]

I think we've come too far to get 9% over 18 months.

That is not acceptable.

The unemployed got a 10.1% rise.

I think they can go further.

What have the unemployed got to do with us? They are funded by the government, for starters, and if you think they have an easy ride you are deluded. Quit your job if it is that easy not having one.

The Unemployed are funded by us the Taxpayer who in turn are receiving lower payrises than the unemployed.
Also the Workers are going to pay more tax to pay for the unemployed as our Tax allowance is frozen until 2028.
This is economic madness, no wonder they can't get people off benefits.

As I said, if it is as lavish a lifestyle as you seem to think, fill your boots.

I didn't say it was lavish, just preferable to working.
Is it viable to give the unemployed/benefit recipients higher percentage rises than people who work?
I look forward to your reply.

How much do you think people receive in benefits? Don’t just rely on the daily mail for the answer to this question. Ask someone who is unemployed or disabled and claiming benefits. Then work out exactly how much that rise in benefits that offends you so much equates to. And unlike ghouls like yourself, I would rather people not working are able to afford to feed themselves and their family, or heat their homes, so I care less about the few extra £s a week they are receiving, and far f***ing more about the billions wasted by this corrupt government you support.

How much of your tax money is going on MP wage increases this year? I can’t wait for your reply.

Didn't think you could answer the question of how an economy that consumes far more wealth than it creates can be resolved.
Abuse does nothing to fortify your argument either.

[LouBarlow]

I think we've come too far to get 9% over 18 months.

That is not acceptable.

The unemployed got a 10.1% rise.

I think they can go further.

What have the unemployed got to do with us? They are funded by the government, for starters, and if you think they have an easy ride you are deluded. Quit your job if it is that easy not having one.

The Unemployed are funded by us the Taxpayer who in turn are receiving lower payrises than the unemployed.
Also the Workers are going to pay more tax to pay for the unemployed as our Tax allowance is frozen until 2028.
This is economic madness, no wonder they can't get people off benefits.

As I said, if it is as lavish a lifestyle as you seem to think, fill your boots.

I didn't say it was lavish, just preferable to working.
Is it viable to give the unemployed/benefit recipients higher percentage rises than people who work?
I look forward to your reply.

How much do you think people receive in benefits? Don’t just rely on the daily mail for the answer to this question. Ask someone who is unemployed or disabled and claiming benefits. Then work out exactly how much that rise in benefits that offends you so much equates to. And unlike ghouls like yourself, I would rather people not working are able to afford to feed themselves and their family, or heat their homes, so I care less about the few extra £s a week they are receiving, and far f***ing more about the billions wasted by this corrupt government you support.

How much of your tax money is going on MP wage increases this year? I can’t wait for your reply.

Didn't think you could answer the question of how an economy that consumes far more wealth than it creates can be resolved.
Abuse does nothing to fortify your argument either.

No, neither does avoiding the question. If you think that the unemployed are the main consumers in society, you aren’t even worth debating.

[milly]

I think we've come too far to get 9% over 18 months.

That is not acceptable.

The unemployed got a 10.1% rise.

I think they can go further.

What have the unemployed got to do with us? They are funded by the government, for starters, and if you think they have an easy ride you are deluded. Quit your job if it is that easy not having one.

The Unemployed are funded by us the Taxpayer who in turn are receiving lower payrises than the unemployed.
Also the Workers are going to pay more tax to pay for the unemployed as our Tax allowance is frozen until 2028.
This is economic madness, no wonder they can't get people off benefits.

As I said, if it is as lavish a lifestyle as you seem to think, fill your boots.

I didn't say it was lavish, just preferable to working.
Is it viable to give the unemployed/benefit recipients higher percentage rises than people who work?
I look forward to your reply.

How much do you think people receive in benefits? Don’t just rely on the daily mail for the answer to this question. Ask someone who is unemployed or disabled and claiming benefits. Then work out exactly how much that rise in benefits that offends you so much equates to. And unlike ghouls like yourself, I would rather people not working are able to afford to feed themselves and their family, or heat their homes, so I care less about the few extra £s a week they are receiving, and far f***ing more about the billions wasted by this corrupt government you support.

How much of your tax money is going on MP wage increases this year? I can’t wait for your reply.

Didn't think you could answer the question of how an economy that consumes far more wealth than it creates can be resolved.
Abuse does nothing to fortify your argument either.

No, neither does avoiding the question. If you think that the unemployed are the main consumers in society, you aren’t even worth debating.

Civil Service and Government workers also cost the Tax payer a fortune.
I will ask again how does an economy that consumes more wealth than it creates continue to pay these non productive people?
It's easier getting a straight answer from Simon Thompson than it is from you.

[toonshola]

Well just watched the latest “update” from Dave and his gang. Once again more intense talks(wtf were the other talks? Casual? Jovial? Piss take?). Three weeks this will all be concluded with a deal according to good old Dave. Problem is he has cried wolf several times over the last 8 months saying talks are going well we can sense a change in the negotiation room blah blah blah. There isn’t going to be a deal made, not one that could be acceptable for us to vote through anyway. Royal Mail are just taking the mick out of the union and have done for over a year, when will Dave wake up to this reality? I fully expect to be balloted again in August of all the same crap it’s never going to stop.