Royal Mail Dispute

custardy

MacMickster wrote: »

Well then the posties need to change their way of thinking or else Royal Mail and all of your jobs will go down the pan.

You are forced to deliver letters and make a loss doing that. That part of your operation needs to be scaled back.

Easy to say. The reality is 'scaling back' has happened for years.
The letters operation is already lower priority.
RM isnt a parcel company and unitl is letters responsibility is removed it can't be. Thats what Parcelforce was created for.
The USO will be removed,it was always going to be removed,more so once privitisation hit.
Without the USO tens of thousands of jobs will go.
However we are jumping the gun a bit. RM made an agreement with the union,its shareholders and/or staff.
A year? (im not up on the dates 100%) later it walked away from that agreement.

Thats where this dispute emanates from.
What changed in that year to render and agreement null and void?
If from what I've seen its down to not 'making savings' then what has RM as a company done to achieve these savings. Has it followed the plan laid out in the agreement?

BoGoF

And Royal Mail wins the case.

Oh dear, how much did the ballot and court action cost the union.

Pollycat

BoGoF wrote: »

And Royal Mail wins the case.

Oh dear, how much did the ballot and court action cost the union.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50409317

'Breaking ballot rules'

This included, the company said, union members "being encouraged to open their ballot papers on site, mark them as 'yes', with their colleagues present and filming or photographing them doing so, before posting their ballots together at their workplace postboxes".


Royal Mail said this amounted to a "de facto workplace ballot", contrary to rules on industrial action, to maximise the turnout and the "yes" vote.
Royal Mail's procedures state that employees cannot open their mail at delivery offices without the prior authorisation of their manager.


But CWU lawyers argued there was no evidence of interference with the ballot and that "legitimate partisan campaigning" by the union in favour of a "yes" vote did not violate the rules.


In the High Court, Mr Justice Swift said in his judgement: "This was an interference that was accurately described as improper. Strike ballots should be postal ballots. Each voter should receive a voting paper at home.
"What CWU did was a form of subversion of the ballot process. It was an interference with voting."

Is anyone surprised at the judgement?

The CWU will have to work out whether it needs to launch a new ballot of members or whether it can appeal against the decision.

BoGoF

Pollycat wrote: »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50409317


Is anyone surprised at the judgement?

The Union seem surprised.......which surprises me.

tomdickharry

not read the full story yet, as due to excessive mail & parcels it took us 90 minutes longer to do our duties today,
i'm not at all surprised by the courts ruling, but we will fight on next year,
to answer custardy's comments about the previous deal which was broken, it was broken when RMG sacked most of the board after Moya Greene left and the new board decided it wasn't for them,
this is what the dispute is about
so now we've lost this battle, and we continue to work an hour per week for free,
rules & laws eh? only for the rich and powerful ;-)

custardy

tomdickharry wrote: »

not read the full story yet, as due to excessive mail & parcels it took us 90 minutes longer to do our duties today,
i'm not at all surprised by the courts ruling, but we will fight on next year,
to answer custardy's comments about the previous deal which was broken, it was broken when RMG sacked most of the board after Moya Greene left and the new board decided it wasn't for them,
this is what the dispute is about
so now we've lost this battle, and we continue to work an hour per week for free,
rules & laws eh? only for the rich and powerful ;-)

I wonder how this fares for Christmas?
For those not experienced in RM. Most staff do a lot of extra hours and its tough at Christmas.

tomdickharry

and to add insult to injury I've read the judge also factored in the upcoming general election,
now if that's true, that is a disgrace on his part seeing as our albeit cocked up yes vote was voted in weeks before any elections were called,
never mind which union you belong to this smacks the workers rights well and truly in the knackers

tomdickharry

custardy wrote: »

I wonder how this fares for Christmas?
For those not experienced in RM. Most staff do a lot of extra hours and its tough at Christmas.

yes you should know what xmas pressure is like, it now officially starts on cyber monday, most can't cope with that alone

Altarf

tomdickharry wrote: »

and to add insult to injury I've read the judge also factored in the upcoming general election,
now if that's true, that is a disgrace on his part seeing as our albeit cocked up yes vote was voted in weeks before any elections were called,
never mind which union you belong to this smacks the workers rights well and truly in the knackers

Try re-reading what Mr Justice Swift said in relation to the improper ballot which meant the result should be ignored - "In this case, in respect of the conduct of the general election and the part played in that election by postal votes, there is a relevant wider public interest that is material to my conclusion that an injunction should be granted."

tomdickharry

Altarf wrote: »

Try re-reading what Mr Justice Swift said in relation to the improper ballot which meant the result should be ignored - "In this case, in respect of the conduct of the general election and the part played in that election by postal votes, there is a relevant wider public interest that is material to my conclusion that an injunction should be granted."

why even mention the general election?
it is absolutely 100% totally irrelevant to the case heard over the last two days
i've already said that i think the nature of the ballot was legally wrong, but i abhor anyone who thinks it morally wrong,
but for a top judge to even mention a forthcoming forced general election just goes to show the contempt on the average UK worker who wants to stand up and fight for their futures.

if he'd have just said to the cwu reps there "you have cocked up big style" and not mentioned a GE i would have accepted his outcome without questioning