Amazon & alt. providers during strikes (was:Royal Mail loses £25m Amazon contract)

[ymu]

Slightly better response from Amazon. They do seem to be rather unhappy about being dragged into this.

In addition to a wide selection of items, one of Amazon.co.uk’s aims is to provide a convenient and efficient service; in this case, we have fallen short. Please accept my sincere apologies.

We have not cancelled any long term contracts with Royal Mail. They continue to be one of a number of carriers that we use.

However, with the possibility of strike action in the near future, we have been working on contingency measures with our other carriers to ensure that we can continue to deliver to the high standards that our customers expect from us.

We take full responsibility for the delivery of our goods from start to finish and take complaints of this nature very seriously. We realise this incident reflects negatively upon Amazon.co.uk.

However, I have brought your feedback to the attention of the transport department for investigation. The transport department work directly with our couriers.

.... etc

 

[butchersapron]

Royal Mail in £19.5m contract win

In the face of continuing industrial action, Royal Mail has won a £19.5m contract with the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA).

The three-year contract will see the postal service collect 960,000 packages of unmarked scripts from 5,500 examination centres and deliver them to approximately 50,000 examiners and six scanning bureaus throughout England.

How very odd to find the Guardian not reporting this

 

[teuchter]

Here is the letter that the CWU sent to RM yesterday:

Dear Mark

I am writing to confirm that on Thursday 15th October 2009, the Union will serve the relevant notice in line with the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidated) Act 1992, announcing national strike action.

However, given the seriousness of the situation we are prepared to make a fresh offer that will avoid the planned strike action and assist in finding a resolution to this dispute.

The CWU offer comprises of the following:-

• That Royal Mail will reveal their business plan for the whole of the planned transformation programme. This will create an open environment that will allow Royal Mail and CWU to reach a 3 year agreement aimed at providing long term stability for the business, employees and our customers.

• That Royal Mail recommit to the key principle which underpinned the 2007 Pay and Modernisation Agreement i.e. that “change will be introduced by agreement”. This means Royal Mail will unequivocally agree planned 2010 change, including the rollout of new walk sequencing machines.

• That we agree, in principle, that improved Job Security arrangements and a new benefits package that rewards postal workers for delivering success for the business will form part of the final agreement.

• That Royal Mail agrees the principle that budgets should not drive staffing levels and that what constitutes a fair days workload will be based on transparent and agreed standards with the Union. We should jointly consider utilising independent experts in the field of work measurement to facilitate a resolution to all workload issues.

• That Royal Mail are prepared to step back from imposed change and resolve all current local disputes by agreement.

• That Royal Mail agrees to an independent enquiry into the bullying and harassment of postal workers and immediately ceases the use of unagreed HR procedures.

• That Royal Mail are prepared to jointly approach the Government on the urgent need to find a resolution to pensions and regulatory issues.

• That the national parties clear our diaries to allow for an intense period of negotiations to resolve all outstanding issues and conclude a comprehensive national agreement.

Your commitment to the aforementioned will enable us to restore customer confidence and provide a genuine opportunity to resolve this dispute without the need for any further strike action.

Separately and in addition to the above offer, the Union are proposing, without any preconditions, that the national parties jointly explore the possibility of third party mediation. As well as seeking third party mediation to resolve the dispute, the Union would also be prepared to engage third party assistance to help bring about a fundamental long term improvement to industrial and employee relations.

The Union is available for meaningful negotiations for the remainder of this week.

I look forward to your prompt response. If Royal Mail really is sincere about reaching an agreement with the Union that aligns the interests of our customers, employees and the company as a whole, then you will pick up this offer.

Yours sincerely



Dave Ward
Deputy General Secretary (P)

I think it is good that they are being open about this. Other unions should take note - maybe they'd enjoy a bit more public support if they took some time to explain what the disagreements actually are about.

 

[ddraig]

Here is the letter that the CWU sent to RM yesterday:



I think it is good that they are being open about this. Other unions should take note - maybe they'd enjoy a bit more public support if they took some time to explain what the disagreements actually are about.

very good letter and you make a good point.

any tories/scabs/naysayers have the guts to pick that letter apart?

 

[ymu]

I think it is good that they are being open about this. Other unions should take note - maybe they'd enjoy a bit more public support if they took some time to explain what the disagreements actually are about.

So it's the unions failing to get their point across, not the mainstream media refusing to report it fairly? Really?

 

[teuchter]

So it's the unions failing to get their point across, not the mainstream media refusing to report it fairly? Really?

?

Why does it have to be either/or?

 

[ymu]

?

Why does it have to be either/or?

Why don't you tell the other unions what they have been doing wrong all this time? I'm sure they'd appreciate the heads up, it having never occurred to some of them to to try and make their point clear to the general public and all...

 

[FridgeMagnet]

?

Why does it have to be either/or?

I think the unions have been pretty clear on it all the time, the information's been out there if anyone cared to research it. Like, say, a journalist researching a story to write an article about it. Not happened that often it seems.

On the other hand threads like this show how the papers are quite keen to actively distort things into anti-union rhetoric, in this case claiming that Amazon pulled out of the contract when they didn't (and said so definitively very quickly too).

 

[butchersapron]

Same 'neutral' trick teuchetr pulls each strike. I only want info! Honestly.

 

[teuchter]

Why don't you tell the other unions what they have been doing wrong all this time? I'm sure they'd appreciate the heads up, it having never occurred to some of them to to try and make their point clear to the general public and all...

In several strikes in the past I haven't had the impression that it's been a priority for the union representatives to put their side of the story clearly to the public. By which I mean revealing details of what the negotiations are and what is being offered by either side. That's their choice of course.

It has to be said that on these occasions the employers have been equally opaque. Again, that's their choice.

In this instance, the CWU have made public the letter I posted stating clearly what it is that they are offering in order to try and settle the dispute. This leaves the Royal Mail with the option of an equally open response. If they don't do this, then they are not going to look good and people will suspect that their demands are unreasonable. I will be one of those people.

I think the unions have been pretty clear on it all the time, the information's been out there if anyone cared to research it. Like, say, a journalist researching a story to write an article about it. Not happened that often it seems.

On the other hand threads like this show how the papers are quite keen to actively distort things into anti-union rhetoric, in this case claiming that Amazon pulled out of the contract when they didn't (and said so definitively very quickly too).

I'm certainly not going to defend lazy or inaccurate journalism.

Biased journalism makes it even more crucial that unions make an effort to get their point across effectively, surely.

I have to say I think it's kind of sad that people jump on me for welcoming that a union is making its point well. So over-defensive that everything has to be turned around into a negative. No wonder the stereotypes persist.

 

[EastEnder]

I think it is good that they are being open about this. Other unions should take note - maybe they'd enjoy a bit more public support if they took some time to explain what the disagreements actually are about.

I've usually found that most unions explain fully on their own websites the reasons behind any strike action. If you want to understand why industrial action is being taken, the first hand information provided by the unions themselves is doubtless rather more reliable than the second or third hand, potentially bias, reporting that appears in the press.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Actually they've been making those sort of releases all the time, and they've generally been ignored, as they continue to be.

After a while one has to consider that continuing to attempt to try to engage a clearly hostile PR machine is a bit of a waste of time, and one might as well just concentrate on exercising influence through members' control of their own labour. Strikes and that.

 

[butchersapron]

It's not even a case of having the option to engage with, say Guardian journalists, they've got their own agenda (one that reared it's head again today when the amazon bollocks got yet another airing). Where exactly is the neutral public space this info should be fed into? Ther isn't one, so their site adn their own networks have to suffice. It's not their fault if teucther is too lazy each strike to go there.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

If only they explained things better, we'd all know what was going on! Journalists are so easily confused but they're basically after the truth eh.

 

[teuchter]

The unions' own sites are exactly where I go when I want to try and find out more. Sometimes, as in this case, there is useful stuff there.

Often, there isn't, eg the RMT and tube strikes.

 

[butchersapron]

There always is. As you always have pointed out to you.

 

[teuchter]

If only they explained things better, we'd all know what was going on! Journalists are so easily confused but they're basically after the truth eh.

You say this as if I'm trying to make some sort of defence of bad journalism. Where do you get that from?

 

[FridgeMagnet]

I have to say I didn't find any problem getting information then either, directly from source. Some of the issues were quite complex, but they were pretty well explained.

 

[teuchter]

There always is. As you always have pointed out to you.

Nonsense.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

You say this as if I'm trying to make some sort of defence of bad journalism. Where do you get that from?

"I think it is good that they are being open about this. Other unions should take note - maybe they'd enjoy a bit more public support if they took some time to explain what the disagreements actually are about."

"Why does it have to be either/or?"

 

[EastEnder]

It's not even a case of having the option to engage with, say Guardian journalists, they've got their own agenda (one that reared it's head again today when the amazon bollocks got yet another airing). Where exactly is the neutral public space this info should be fed into? Ther isn't one, so their site adn their own networks have to suffice. It's not their fault if teucther is too lazy each strike to go there.

A prominent example of one-sided reporting that particularly annoys me is when there's industrial action on the tube. LUL are very quick to post their side of the argument on the TFL website - a site which, as far as I'm concerned, is for checking timetables and topping up Oyster cards. I wouldn't mind so much if LUL posted press releases on a corporate facing site, aimed squarely at the non-consumer audience. But to usurp a site that punters use every day to plan their journeys seems a blatant abuse of power for propaganda purposes.

 

[butchersapron]

Nonsense.

Check the guys track record.

 

[ymu]

"I think it is good that they are being open about this. Other unions should take note - maybe they'd enjoy a bit more public support if they took some time to explain what the disagreements actually are about."

"Why does it have to be either/or?"

Beat me to it.

 

[teuchter]

"I think it is good that they are being open about this. Other unions should take note - maybe they'd enjoy a bit more public support if they took some time to explain what the disagreements actually are about."

"Why does it have to be either/or?"

And?

Where the defence of bad journalism?

 

[FridgeMagnet]

And?

Where the defence of bad journalism?

That would be the suggestion that "they'd enjoy a bit more public support if they took some time to explain what the disagreements actually are about". As if that would make a difference and that the journalism was somehow neutral but just poorly informed.

 

[teuchter]

That would be the suggestion that "they'd enjoy a bit more public support if they took some time to explain what the disagreements actually are about". As if that would make a difference and that the journalism was somehow neutral but just poorly informed.

I'm talking about putting the information out there for people to find for themselves, if they are looking for it.

People like me, actually, who don't pay much attention to the papers on issues like this because the papers' coverage is usually pretty rubbish.

On this strike, at the moment, I think the union seems to have good reason.

Whereas on many tube strikes, I feel unable to come to an opinion either way, and on some I feel the RMT are probably not being reasonable.

I am telling you that this is because I feel that a clearer picture of the reasons for the postal strike has been conveyed to me than has been the case in most tube strikes.

None of that has got anything to do with me apologising for bad journalism.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

all I can suggest is that you must have had some sort of previous head malfunction

 

[butchersapron]

No, you don't feel unable to come to an opinion at all. As noted before, it's posed neutrality.

 

[teuchter]

No, you don't feel unable to come to an opinion at all. As noted before, it's posed neutrality.

Perhaps one day you can turn your pet theory into a bestselling book.

 

[butchersapron]

Perhaps one day you can turn your pet theory into a bestselling book.

Perhaps, one day, when you, gabi and cobbles meet together on one thread i'll not know why.