The latest news and discussion on Royal Mail Shares.Please note the advise given in this forum is unofficial, please use the links we have for a more detailed response or see an independent financial adviser. All news and discussion on Daniel Kretinsky's full takeover of Royal Mail.
BELIAL wrote: Fair point, and one that can be supported by the facts. Question is though Belle ,what are you going to do to change the state of affairs?
You don't like the terms of the deal, me neither and what's more I don't like the underhand way in which the dirty deed was done. Pulling out of the union just gives the people you despise a free hand ,in real terms it's just as good as a vote of confidence. Me ,I'd rather vote out the folks who let me down instead of throwing in the towel and shooting myself in the foot
i'm not that interested in how you protect or improve your terms and conditions B.
Well there my friend is where you, and 180,000 postal workers part company
Seems to be in tune with the national negotiators though.
Thats the point Belial...i would and have happily went on strike to defend our T&C they haven't been defended though. We go on strike then the leaders of our union tell us it would be best to settle on RM's terms. and they manage to convince enough people to vote to accept.
Whats the point.
Fair point, and one that can be supported by the facts. Question is though Belle ,what are you going to do to change the state of affairs?
You don't like the terms of the deal, me neither and what's more I don't like the underhand way in which the dirty deed was done. Pulling out of the union just gives the people you despise a free hand ,in real terms it's just as good as a vote of confidence. Me ,I'd rather vote out the folks who let me down instead of throwing in the towel and shooting myself in the foot
best be on the inside shouting the odds than stuck on the outside .
"why should it just be the bankers, politicians and the idle rich who get all the best things ? we demand a standard of living for our members that enables them to share in the fine wines and times that the likes of Cameron and his Eton buddies take for granted " - the late great Bob Crow RIP.
I think what would be interesting is people thoughts on RM's modernisation plan and how we could of changed it during negotiations.
It was RM's ball and they,within reason have the right to play what game they wanted to.
There is no doubt that they have not taken the workforce 'with them' as they claim they wanted to.
What do people think should of been done different,where could we of got more concessions from?
I Wrote-During Covid-Which is still relevant now
It's good to get these types of threads, the ridiculous my manager said bollox, so we can reassure ourselves that while the world is falling apart, Royal Mail managers are still being the low-life C***S they have always been. My BFF Clash The daily grind of having to argue your case with an intellectual pigmy of a line manager is physically and emotionally draining.
Thing is everyone has to realise that,well at least in my opinion, the 2010 Agreement was not designed to improve our T&Cs, or even keep them as they were. The reasons behind the agreement as presented to the Union members was to both help Royal Mail survive and the CWU as an organisation/business, I cannot fault either side for this but as they were the only people negotiating their focus would naturally have been different to Joe Blogs who does the sorting and delivering.
Could the agreement have been changed substantially or our T&Cs protected, TBH I doubt it very much. But I certainly believe that the agreement would have been more workable, and there would have been more safeguards to defend/protect the members in their daily work.
The problems caused by EA have not gone away they are still there, they were not addressed by the agreement only the fact the RM were implementing EA was. RM Management have just become more covert about how they get their agenda through.
All post by me in Green are Admin Posts. Any post in any other colour is my own responsibility. If you like a news story I posted please click the link to show support Any news stories you can't post - PM me with a link My sharing of news articles should not be interpreted as an endorsement or condemnation of any particular viewpoint or the issues presented. I share them solely for informational purposes.
Ok, I'll start us off then:
1) Remove the ambiguity!!!
2) Include safeguards against Managers failing to comply with the agreement. And include reductions in their bonus, in the event of them breaching it.
3) Include a break during the longer delivery spans. To allow Posties to use the toilet, and have a brew. Rather than keeping going for 4.5 hrs+, without a break.
4) Reduce the number of MC closures.
I have more suggestions. But that should be enough to get the discussion started.
Don't knock Insanity
it's just another outlook on Reality!
TrueBlueTerrier wrote:Thing is everyone has to realise that,well at least in my opinion, the 2010 Agreement was not designed to improve our T&Cs, or even keep them as they were. The reasons behind the agreement as presented to the Union members was to both help Royal Mail survive and the CWU as an organisation/business, I cannot fault either side for this.
I CAN !
The whole purpose of a union is to negotiate T&C on our behalf. not barter our T&C away for their survival.
I appreaciate that in reality we would have had to accept some tough changes like delivery spans, i didn't want to see them increased i would have grudgingly accepted 4hrs but A f***ing 'ENABELER' thats taking the piss.
I wanted an agreement on pegasus and IWT thats why we were on strike. We agree to use them but the performance parameters left out of the agreement again taking the piss.
Bearing in mind that we were doing a 2hr30min as recently as 2003. have any of our 'negotiators' NEC or divisions reps done 3hr30min pegasus walks ..........
i doubt it. they certainly wont be doing 4hr30 or 5hr pegasus walks till they 65 but thats what they expect from us.
BELIAL wrote: Fair point, and one that can be supported by the facts. Question is though Belle ,what are you going to do to change the state of affairs?
You don't like the terms of the deal, me neither and what's more I don't like the underhand way in which the dirty deed was done. Pulling out of the union just gives the people you despise a free hand ,in real terms it's just as good as a vote of confidence. Me ,I'd rather vote out the folks who let me down instead of throwing in the towel and shooting myself in the foot
I haven't left the union Belial.
Sorry Belle, never suggested you had . It was more of a general comment about folks who complain a lot and often with good reason , but who then draw the ludicrous conclusion that they are somehow better served by giving up what voice they have . I guess some people enjoy being victims
BELIAL wrote: Fair point, and one that can be supported by the facts. Question is though Belle ,what are you going to do to change the state of affairs?
You don't like the terms of the deal, me neither and what's more I don't like the underhand way in which the dirty deed was done. Pulling out of the union just gives the people you despise a free hand ,in real terms it's just as good as a vote of confidence. Me ,I'd rather vote out the folks who let me down instead of throwing in the towel and shooting myself in the foot
I haven't left the union Belial.
Sorry Belle, never suggested you had . It was more of a general comment about folks who complain a lot and often with good reason , but who then draw the ludicrous conclusion that they are somehow better served by giving up what voice they have . I guess some people enjoy being victims
Well some of us see the victims as the ones who are still in the CWU.
BELIAL wrote:
Sorry Belle, never suggested you had . It was more of a general comment about folks who complain a lot and often with good reason , but who then draw the ludicrous conclusion that they are somehow better served by giving up what voice they have . I guess some people enjoy being victims
These members are leaving the union precisely because they feel that they don't have a voice BELIAL...calling them victims or arguing that it is ludicrous is a pointless waste of time because they are....gone.
It would be better to spend some time thinking about WHY they feel like that and it's not just because of a crappy deal...we've had those before.....
TrueBlueTerrier wrote:Thing is everyone has to realise that,well at least in my opinion, the 2010 Agreement was not designed to improve our T&Cs, or even keep them as they were. The reasons behind the agreement as presented to the Union members was to both help Royal Mail survive and the CWU as an organisation/business, I cannot fault either side for this.
I CAN !
The whole purpose of a union is to negotiate T&C on our behalf. not barter our T&C away for their survival.
I appreaciate that in reality we would have had to accept some tough changes like delivery spans, i didn't want to see them increased i would have grudgingly accepted 4hrs but A f***ing 'ENABELER' thats taking the piss.
I wanted an agreement on pegasus and IWT thats why we were on strike. We agree to use them but the performance parameters left out of the agreement again taking the piss.
Bearing in mind that we were doing a 2hr30min as recently as 2003. have any of our 'negotiators' NEC or divisions reps done 3hr30min pegasus walks ..........
i doubt it. they certainly wont be doing 4hr30 or 5hr pegasus walks till they 65 but thats what they expect from us.
I agree - however the bit in my post that I thought made that clear you didn't quote.
All post by me in Green are Admin Posts. Any post in any other colour is my own responsibility. If you like a news story I posted please click the link to show support Any news stories you can't post - PM me with a link My sharing of news articles should not be interpreted as an endorsement or condemnation of any particular viewpoint or the issues presented. I share them solely for informational purposes.
TrueBlueTerrier wrote:I agree - however the bit in my post that I thought made that clear you didn't quote.
sorry teebs.
Wasn't actually having a go at you.
The problems caused by EA have not gone away they are still there, they were not addressed by the agreement only the fact the RM were implementing EA was. RM Management have just become more covert about how they get their agenda through.
EA was never the issue. RM refusing to negotiate a national agreement on pegasus and IWT were.
EA was applied because local reps followed the national policy and refused to go along with pegasus revisions.
Having agreed to pegasus and IWT without having the performance parameters agreed. The senior union bods came up retrospectivly with the line with we've got rid of EA.
They don't have to be covert now we will all be using pegasus and IWT and they may have tweaked the parameters but on a swings and roundabouts basis what we gain from slightly slower walk speeds we lose by not having attendance calls.
BELIAL wrote: Sorry Belle, never suggested you had . It was more of a general comment about folks who complain a lot and often with good reason , but who then draw the ludicrous conclusion that they are somehow better served by giving up what voice they have . I guess some people enjoy being victims
No i know you didn't and i'm not suggesting that people do, but i'm certainly not arguing with people in my office who are. i would have done in the past.
Belial you say you want to vote out those responsable, fine. in the meantime if they ballot us again for a stike, do you trust them?
Trust doesn't come in to it. You vote for what is right. If people misuse that vote then you know what to do. But I certainly would not give them tacit backing by pulling out and doing nothing, I think you agree
BELIAL wrote:Trust doesn't come in to it. You vote for what is right. If people misuse that vote then you know what to do. But I certainly would not give them tacit backing by pulling out and doing nothing, I think you agree
I don't think i do Belial.
when you say "If people misuse that vote then you know what to do" eh...i don't it seems to me that we are damed if we do and damed if we don't
and they manage to convince enough people to vote to accept. 
and i'm not suggesting that people do, but i'm certainly not arguing with people in my office who are. i would have done in the past.