Thursday, May 25, 2006

CWU threatens postal strike

The following is a CWU press release.

"Today CWU restored democracy back to the Post Office” was the message from Billy Hayes, General Secretary, after the announcement that over 90,000 postal workers back the union’s vision for the future of Royal Mail.

Billy Hayes, General Secretary, said: “We live in a democracy and our ballot result is a blow to Royal Mail’s style of management by diktat and imposition.

“Allan Leighton believes in one person one vote - so long as he’s the person with the vote!

“By carrying out this ballot the union has done what Royal Mail was afraid to do – give people a choice over their future.”

After the consultation result an Emergency Motion recommending a ballot on strike action was unanimously passed by the postal conference. The adopted position gives Royal Mail four weeks to reopen pay negotiations with the union and make progress in other areas including resolving monies owed through efficiency savings.

Deputy General Secretary Dave Ward told delegates: “It’s not a sign of strength to impose a pay deal on our members - it’s a sign of weakness.

“Royal Mail needs to understand how serious we are about the imposition of pay. If they don’t return to negotiations they will be faced with the prospect of a national strike ballot.”

Ballot papers were sent to all members working in Royal Mail letters – around 136,000 in total.

91,478 ballot papers were returned – 67.3% in total.

Of those, a massive 98.5% - 90,103 members – voted yes in support of the CWU vision.

Only 1,375 – 1.5% - voted against.

The Telephone Poll:
Separately, to reinforce the consultative ballot, CWU engaged an independent company, The Campaign Company, to carry out a professional telephone poll.

They contacted 1,000 CWU members working in Royal Mail Letters.
Note: the size of this sample means that the result of the poll is statistically valid.

- Of those polled, 949 supported the CWU vision. Only 51 didn’t.
- Significantly, a further 67.9% of those polled said that they were either angry or very angry over the imposition of pay.


Post a Comment

<< Home