Postal Strike

[careba2010]

Hello dear Sinners
Whats your opinion on the Postal Strike. Do you think its a good idea? Do you find it annoying? Do you support royal mail?
I personally find it annoying as hell, namely because I have a load of cheques which I received for my birthday and because I bank with HSBC I have to send them home to be paid in as for some reason "The worlds local bank" only has three branches in Scotland. At the moment I dont dare post them incase they get lost and I never see them again.

I also think that the Posties need to realise that their business isnt the only one suffering at the moment. I know loads of people who are on the minimum wage who have not had payrises this year (and many of them are working extra hours to help their companies survive as well for no extra money!) and they havent gone on strike. But now especially as it is the end of the month these businesses are probably going to be left short of cash as payments are stuck in a postal log jam (As internet payments are not an option for everyone!)

What do you think?

[Delts]

CWU: Oh, here's a foot, let's shoot it... OWW! It was our own!

To be honest though, the government is in part to blame. The restrictions put on the royal mail concerning the amount they could charge for stamps, and how much they could charge the other mail companies for delivering the mail has been absurd.

The government has been ruining the business since the market was opened up, but it's the CWU who have really put the boot in just now.

[Duggeh]

Back in the day strikes used to be big. Now, they're simply an inconvenience which costs a bit of money and time.

The country is bankrupt, the postmen should be fucking glad they've not all been fired.

[Power Metal Dom]

I don't know the ins and outs of the problem but it's mighty tempting to stay ignorant so I can sustain my outrage when things like this feck stuff up. It's a selfish position but I've had far too many problems with incompetent post men and bin men before to feel much sympathy. The gits constantly fail to provide adequate service but I've thankfully not had any important post affected by this strike so I suppose I mustn't grumble.

As for HSBC btw, I have an account with them and wanting to do something as simple as bank a cheque was a nightmare. I was sure there used to be one in Dundee but I might be wrong. I rang up telling them where I was and asked where the world's local bank was local to me and she said in all seriousness "Aberdeen".

[Karl Marx]

Back in the day strikes used to be big. Now, they're simply an inconvenience which costs a bit of money and time.

The country is bankrupt, the postmen should be fucking glad they've not all been fired.

HOW DARE YOU TREAT THE PEOPLE LIKE THIS?! THEY HOLD THE POWER, AND WILL MAKE YOU FALL TO YOUR KNEES!

[Jono]

I don't trust the management as far as I could throw them. But I'm uncharacteristically with them on this one. Yeah, modernization probably does translate into job losses and hour/wage cuts, and the secret correspondence, if true, is a bit stupid. But sorry pal, the Private sector's been bearing the brunt of the recession for the last two years. Private firms have had to cut jobs, cut wages, and tighten their belts. The Public sector in contrast, with its powerful unions, and their corrupt funding of the Labour government, has avoided any real cost-cutting measures in the face of growing taxpayer outrage. With millions of capable people queuing up in job centres up and down the country, I've got no sympathy for a union which seems to be protecting a cushy job from legitimate reform!

[RedCelt69]

powerful unions, and their corrupt funding of the Labour government

Corrupt? Interesting choice of words.

[wild_quinine]

The Public sector ... has avoided any real cost-cutting measures in the face of growing taxpayer outrage. With millions of capable people queuing up in job centres up and down the country, I've got no sympathy for a union which seems to be protecting a cushy job from legitimate reform!

Two important points.

1) Public spending on essential services can lead a country out of recession. It does not necessarily make sense to assume that belt-tightening on public services saves any money in the long run. If the Royal Mail was worth a god damn any more, increased spending could be an important catalyst for recovery. Less so perhaps than education - that's the big one, for that kind of example - but we shouldn't play down the fact that, if it wasn't already rotten to the core and pretty close to irrelevant, the Royal Mail might be in a position to do a lot for the country's economic health.

2) Unions are not there to adjust to a reasonable business model, to maximise profits, or even to improve the essential function of the day to day business.

They are there to protect their staff. That is their sole purpose. This can be handled well, or it can be handled badly, but what you need to remember is that at no point are they functionally trying to compromise. They are 100% there to represent their members.

Maybe this doesn't seem like a sensible thing, but experience has taught me that it is necessary. As an analogy, ask yourself, as the accused, if you would like your lawyer to try to compromise with the prosecution for expediency or the greater good, or whether, in fact, you would prefer an advocate. It's a bit like that.

Now this situation has been handled badly because, like so many unions, they are incapable of thinking about what is best for their members in anything but the most half-brained, simplified, black and white ways, and - it would be impressive, if it weren't so predictable - they've picked the wrong shade of black.

If they were doing a better job, they would be looking to improve the business model, but not to economise it. They'd be looking for ways to keep staff, that would also increase the value of those staff to the country, so that management are making two mistakes, not just one, by getting rid.

But a strike is stupid, because there are a lot of choices other than the Royal Mail these days and, crucially, the reason most people haven't switched is because they haven't needed to do so. Forcing us to go out and actively investigate the competition is the worst thing they could be doing. This genuinely is a case in which the union's interests are directly synced to increasing the value of their service, and they've chosen to dick it all in.

Hell, maybe they're right between a rock and a hard place. Maybe they've run out of options. Sooner or later, nobody has to listen to a union, and not showing up is about all they've got left. But it seems bloody stupid from the outside.

In summary: Workers need advocates, it's just a same so many of them are myopic mouth-breathers.

[careba2010]

Another week another postal strike, and another nail in Royal Mails coffin.

[munchingfoo]

CWU: Oh, here's a foot, let's shoot it... OWW! It was our own!

Lot's of people have been saying this recently but I can't really say I understand exactly what they mean. What do you mean by it, assuming that your not just jumping on the "they're shooting themselves in the foot" bandwagon.

The nature of the open market with unions and laws governing them makes it such that if you mistreat your employees they have the right and the ability to protest in a number of ways. On of these ways is to strike.

Now, many people have been likening this strike to the postal workers shooting themselves in the foot. Are they though? If the Royal Mail lose business then, sure, the mail workers will suffer in the short term, but do you think the competitors who gain this market share will just carry on working using the same number of staff? No, of course not, they'll be looking to recruit experienced postal workers from the Royal Mail (of course, some staff are unskilled, but then, what does it matter where they work?). The labour market is also a free, open, market.

No company should be in a position to mistreat their employees because strike action is never an option (obvious exceptions being government organisations which could affect the lives of the population or national security of this country, but people who join these know what they're letting themselves in for).

Out of interest, why is it that you believe the postal workers are shooting themselves in the foot any more than anyone else who strikes? If there is a reason, or are you just against striking in general. That'd be a feasible stance I suppose, but I'd disagree with it.

Having said all of, no group of people should be able to cripple a company for their own personal greed. That's where things like agency staff come in, where if the expense of the strike gets too much then the jobs will just be shifted on to new staff.

I've just notice that my argument is a bit rambling... Erm. I'm eating dinner and I can't be bother re-working it. I hope you get the gist. :p

[Haunted]

As I understand it, the market for labour is declining because of the increase in new sorting machines and other innovations (as well as the 'internet effect' and such). The problem up until now is that the CWU has been fighting tooth and claw to slow down this technological progression within Royal Mail (because otherwise the CWU's membership would decrease). The problem now is that private sector is able to run an efficient service and as such Royal Mail cannot afford to compete because of it's slow uptake of the latest technology.
The term 'luddite' originated from just such a situation.

What the members of the CWU fail to grasp is that (even without including the current economic climate) this situation is unsustainable. By bringing Royal Mail to their knees they are hastening the end of their own jobs. Whereas Royal Mail could be phasing in new technology at a rate that lets the posties retire happily, they are now a dire financial difficulty and if they do not fold altogether they will have to hasten the change to cut running costs (or outsourcing) resulting in a said posties having no jobs.

A lot of them may be able to find employment in the private sector assuming that it rises to fill the gap left. But since such companies are modern, efficient operations they will need far less staff proportionally than Royal Mail does/did.

[Delts]

You mention several times about the workers being mistreated, if that was the case then yes, a strike is fine. However this isn't a strike about mistreatment. It's the CWU not liking cuts in staff and modernisation. I know more than most (and most of which I can't mention) since several of my relatives (including my father) are Royal Mail employee's, so I can assure I'm definitely not jumping on the bandwagon.

The Royal Mail has been struggling for many years now and any strike that stops the service being as efficient as possible will turn people to alternatives. Post is a dying business thanks to e-mail and other electronic technologies. The Royal Mail is in an extremely precarious position and these strikes could well be a turning point. The issue isn't so much that the strike will lose custom rather than if the Royal Mail give in to the CWU then the reforms that are needed won't be implemented.

[edit] Haunted posted as I was writing and makes some excellent points that I was inferring to, badly [/edit]

[munchingfoo]

You mention several times about the workers being mistreated, if that was the case then yes, a strike is fine.

No I don't. Not once in fact. I took no stance either way on the strike, or talk in specifics about it. My point was about what you mean by "shooting themselves in the foot".

However this isn't a strike about mistreatment. It's the CWU not liking cuts in staff and modernisation.

Mistreatment can take many forms, but as I said, I made no comment either way.

I know more than most (and most of which I can't mention) since several of my relatives (including my father) are Royal Mail employee's, so I can assure I'm definitely not jumping on the bandwagon.

This does not follow. Again, my point is about the "shooting in the foot" bandwagon that everyone seems to have slid onto, not whether or not the strike is justified, something I would agree you'd be in a good position to decide upon.

[edit] Haunted posted as I was writing and makes some excellent points that I was inferring to, badly [/edit]

Yes, those are good points and might make me understand the shooting of the foot a bit better.

[wild_quinine]

I was forwarded a link to an interesting letter in the LRB today, by a member of a group I work with. (Incidentally the expression 'for my sins' has never meant quite so much to me as it does in that group).

I'm sure that this is played up a bit, but I can attest to the fact that this is how shit often goes down.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n21/letters

[RedCelt69]

I was forwarded a link to an interesting letter in the LRB today, by a member of a group I work with. (Incidentally the expression 'for my sins' has never meant quite so much to me as it does in that group).

I'm sure that this is played up a bit, but I can attest to the fact that this is how shit often goes down.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n21/letters

Fascinating read. I hadn't been following the story, so didn't know the details - especially not from the Royal Mail workers' perspective. Interesting to see what the final solution will be.

[Josherick3]

Indeed! Here's the earlier article which "Pat Stamp" is responding to: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n18/roy-mayall/diary . I think this side of the dispute needs to be emphasised a lot more than it currently is in the news.

[Power Metal Dom]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8345423.stm

"The postal strikes have been called off until at least the New Year to allow for fresh talks between Royal Mail and the Communication Workers Union."