Dear colleagues


It is with regret I must write the following report. For the last 18 years the local Christmas agreement has included the suspension of the EuropeanWorking Time Directive (EWTD) for seasonal workload purposes and all pre-scheduled overtime paid at scheduled attendance (SA) rate of pay for the four weeks of Christmas pressure. The EWTD has been suspended for those members of staff who wish to work more than 70 hours per week without the weekly rest breaks with previous agreements allowing 72, 72, 80 and 80 across the four weeks of Christmas pressure. The pre-scheduled overtime paid at SA rate has been a reward to staff for their commitment and hard work during the busiest time of year and to avoid the task of negotiating, advertising and allocating temporary SAs for thepressure period.


This year Royal Mail have told us they do not want to pay pre-scheduled overtime at SA rate, and they want to enforce the EWTD across the four weeks of Christmas pressure. The CWU could not agree to this and quickly progressed the disagreement through stages 1&2 of the Industrial Relations Framework (IRF) locally to the stage 3 meeting which was held last week at the Mail Centre. At themeeting several compromises were put forward as potential temporary measures. However, we could not agree on a final compromise withoutdisadvantaging various groups of members of staff. Therefore, the process was progressed to aFlashpoint meeting. This meeting was held yesterday, and we still could not get an agreement and therefore the process has been progressed to a National Intervention Stage 4 meeting.


The Royal Mail/CWU National Industrial Relations Framework Agreement states:


Whilst at disagreement the “Status Quo” will apply which is, the company and its managers will continue to apply all national/local agreements or whatever practice which has been in place for at least one working week prior to entering the disagreement process. This is a contractual legal requirement of the legally binding contract between Royal Mail and the CWU.


The CWUs views are the status quo in this instance is last years Christmas agreement which paid all pre-scheduled overtime at SA rate and the suspension of the EWTD for the four weeks of Christmas pressure. We should go into Christmasthis year following the guidelines of the 2018/19 agreement. 


Royal Mails view is, whilst we are at disagreement,they will not pay SA rate for any pre-scheduled overtime and will enforce the EWTD on all employees during the Christmas pressure period.


The CWU believe Royal Mail will be breaking thelegally binding Joint National IRF Agreement by taking this executive action.

It is our hope that the National Intervention Stage 4 meeting will take place in time for this year’sChristmas pressure period. However, if this is not the case, we would hope it will take place after Christmas and if successful we would seek retrospective payments for our members who had not been paid at SA rate.


There was a time when Royal Mail staff were recognised and appreciated for the extra hard work and commitment, they gave to provide the service at the busy Christmas time. Sadly, this now seems to be a thing of the past and this issue reflects what is going on Nationally.




EJ Orviss/L Smith

Area/Sub Area Processing Representative



Date 19/11/19

CWU Young Workers Conference – Tuesday 21 January 2020

CWU Young Workers Conference – Tuesday 21st January 2020

As previously advised in LTB 622/19, the CWU Young Workers Conference will be held on Tuesday 21stJanuary 2020 at the Marriott City Centre Hotel, 2, Lower Castle Street, Old Market, Bristol, BS1 3AD

Branches are reminded that the closing date for motions to be returned is midnight on Tuesday 10thDecember 2019.   Motions should be submitted electronically to conferences@cwu.org using the template attached.    All sections of the form must be completed.   Motions will only be accepted if sent to the above email address.

Each Regional Young Workers Sub Committee will be entitled to submit ONE motion to the Conference Agenda.

Each Branch will be entitled to submit ONE motion to the Conference Agenda.

The Young Workers Committee will be entitled to submit THREE motions to the Conference Agenda.

Branches, Regions and the Young Workers Committee are reminded that the Standing Orders Committee will not alter or amend any of the motions submitted therefore it is important that motions are checked before they are submitted.

Branches are reminded that registration for this event will be done using the online registration system.   Once the online site is ready an LTB will be issued with further details.

Yours sincerely,



A P Kearns

Senior Deputy General Secretary


Young Workers Motion Form 20

Young Workers Guidance 20

Election spending and campaigning 

Election spending and campaigning 

The purpose of this LTB is to give branches a guide to spending and campaigning in the general election, following on from the information provided at the national briefing on 8th November.

Attached to this LTB are guides from the Electoral Commission on campaigning and spending that set out the rules in greater detail, but the following is a summary of rules branches should be aware of. To be clear, these relate to spending on campaigning/activities that the union is carrying out. Where a Branch or Region has donated money to a local Labour Party the party has separate rules relating to its expenditure that it must comply with.

It is also important to stress that we want branches and regions to be undertaking as much campaigning as possible between now and 12th December and the purpose of this information is to ensure we do so in the right way.

1. Reporting expenditure

After the general election, we will need to report all of our campaigning expenditure by 12th March 2020. This will cover everything that branches, regions and the union nationally has spent between 12th December 2018 and 12th December 2019 on political campaigning.

The test for this is whether spending is on an activity that could “reasonably be regarded as intended to influence voters to vote for or against a political party, or categories of candidates, including campaigns on policies or issues closely associated with a particular party or category of candidates.”

We will be asking branches to provide a full breakdown of expenditure after the election date on 12th December – branches must therefore keep a comprehensive record of this, with receipts and invoices, throughout the election.

2. Spending limits

It is important that branches talk to regions about any campaigning activity they are undertaking in advance to ensure this falls within the relevant spending limits. The most important spending limits for branches and regions to be aware of are as follows:

  • firstly, there is a maximum spending limit of just £700 for any activity we undertake/material we produce that is specifically about a particular candidate or a particular constituency (e.g. leaflets saying ‘vote for candidate X, in constituency Y’) – this includes any communications to our own members; and
  • secondly, there is a maximum spending limit of £9,750 for campaign activity within any one constituency with a generic non-constituency/non-candidate message (e.g. leaflets saying ‘Vote Labour’ without specifying the candidate or the constituency).

Branches should speak to their Regional Secretary about campaigning activities and any expenditure they are planning in advance. This is particularly important where the candidate is a CWU member.

3. Door-knocking and canvassing

We want members to be out door-knocking, canvassing and campaigning as much as possible in support of local Labour Party candidates. It is important that where they are doing so, they do this in their own time and are not accruing expenses (on travel or release). Any expenditure on this would be a donation in kind to the local party and would need to be agreed by them in advance to ensure they do not breach spending limits.

4. Imprints

Any campaign material must include an imprint specifying the name and address of the printer and the promoter. Any CWU campaign material printed by a branch should state on it: Promoted by Dave Ward General Secretary, CWU, 150 the Broadway, Wimbledon, SW19 1RX; Printed by [the relevant CWU branch and its address / the name and address of any external company doing the printing for us].

If a branch or region is printing material for a local Labour party/candidate, the imprint will need to specify that it is printed by the CWU and promoted by the candidate’s agent (or whoever they specify) – the details should be confirmed with the local Labour party.

Finally, for social media graphics or videos, an imprint should be included but if it would not be legible, branches or regions should make sure the union’s logo is visible so it is identifiable as coming from the CWU.

5. Joint campaigning

There are specific rules about how expenditure is declared where there are joint campaign activities. For instance, if we do a joint leaflet or rally with another union and split the costs for it, we would still need to declare the total costs of the leaflet or rally as part of our expenditure (even though we would only have actually paid part of the costs).

Where there are any joint campaign activities branches should talk to their regional secretary about these in advance to check how this needs to be dealt with.

6. Invoices

Where we are paying an external supplier/organisation for services (e.g. printing material) we must ensure that they invoice us within 30 days and that all invoices are paid within 60 days after the general election on 12th December. Where neither of these things happen branches or regions must notify CWU headquarters at the earliest opportunity.


As set out above, we want branches to be as active as possible in the general election and there is a huge amount at stake for our industries and our members. This note is not intended to stop branches campaigning, but to ensure we comply with relevant requirements when doing so – if in doubt branches should speak to their Regional Secretary.

Any queries on the contents of this LTB should be address to gsoffice@cwu.org copying in the relevant Regional Secretary.

Yours sincerely,


Dave Ward

General Secretary

19LTB671 – Election spending and campaigning



BT PERSONNEL – CWU Representatives and Officers Mental Ill Health Survey

BT PERSONNEL – CWU Representatives and Officers Mental Ill Health Survey

Attached, for the information of the BT Committee, are the outputs of a Mental Ill Health Survey of Branch Representatives and Officers. The purpose of the survey was to understand what mental ill health awareness, guidance or training the representatives have and what they may need to deal with mental ill health issues raised with them from members and other representatives.

The motivation for the survey was Motions 35, 71, and 76 carried at this year’s Conference and the concerns raised by Branches. In order to deal with the issue the team believed we needed to understand how well equipped representatives are to deal with the increasing workload related to mental ill health.

The outputs give valuable insights into the number of representatives who have, or have not, had awareness guidance and training. 128 people responded in total which is approximately 25% of the total number of representatives.

Below is a brief summary of the outputs from the questions.

1. Have you had any form of mental health awareness guidance or training?

All those completing the survey answered the question. 56.7% said YES and 43.3% answered NO.

2. What was the training/guidance you received?

72 people answered this question with 62.5% having undertaken Mental First Aid courses and 37.5% attended other types of courses.

3. Was the training/guidance provided through the CWU, your employer or another party?

Again 72 people answered this question with 61.1% undertaking training with the CWU, 8.0% employer, 9.7% both employer and CWU and 20.8% other.

4. Do you feel that you need mental health awareness guidance/training?

126 people answered this question; 81% of people feel they need guidance and training with 19% not needing further training.

5. What level of training do you feel that you need?

102 people answered the question with 41.2% needing introductory training, 39.2% needing advanced training and 19.6% needing refresher training.

6. Do you think the CWU should provide mental health awareness guidance/training to its representatives?

126 people responded to this question with 98.8% giving a YES response and 3.2% a NO response.

7. Do you think the CWU should be calling on your employer to provide you with mental health awareness guidance/training?

127 seven people responded with 92.1% with a YES response and 7.9% with a NO response.

8. Are there any particular areas of mental health awareness guidance/ training you feel would be helpful to you? (Tick all that apply)

All the five sub questions received high scores with ‘signposting members to get the support they need’ receiving the highest score of 92.7%.

9. What proportion of your time is taken up with mental health issues raised by members?

The answers to this question received percentage scores from 1% to 23% of time taken up dealing with mental ill health issues.

10. Please add any further comments related to your experiences or training needs.

The responses from this question were really useful in helping us determine what representatives need in the way of guidance, awareness and training but also some concerning comments from Branch Officers about their own mental health.

There were 130 comments made with reference to an increasing workload on this issue and a realistic point that Branch Officers need to guide members to experts rather than try to deal with the issue themselves. There is also reference to young people being more likely to raise mental ill health problems.

Most respondents felt that awareness, guidance and training is a help in dealing with the issue, and if the response rate is reflective of our representative base then we have at least 50% of Branch representatives having some form of mental ill health awareness.
In conclusion, this survey has been a valuable exercise. The Personnel Team will respond to the needs of our Branch officials and to make the membership aware that a significant number of their representatives have the awareness to guide them to the help they need. Some of this work has already started.

Yours sincerely



Dave Jukes
Assistant Secretary

20.11.19 – LTB 670 – BT PERSONNEL – CWU Representatives and Officers Mental Ill Health Survey




Further to LTBs 234/19 dated 12th April and 292/19 dated 14th May. Branches will be aware of a Group Litigation Action against the Post Office by 557 mainly former Postmasters in relation to alleged errors with the Horizon computer system. 

This matter goes back over a period of more than 10 years and was finally brought to trial after the Justice for SubPostmasters Alliance (JFSA) spent many years campaigning for justice. In January 2016 Alan Bates from the JFSA secured the financial funding (through Therium Group, a specialist litigation funder) to take the Post Office to the High Court. Litigation specialists such as Therium cover the costs of a case in return for a proportion of any damages awarded.

It should be noted that these Postmasters needed to find a source of support as the National Federation of SubPostmasters (NFSP), the only organisation recognised by the Post Office for representing Postmasters, did not meaningfully support the claimants through the various stages of their ordeals (even though a significant number of the 557 have been NFSP members at some point). The NFSP, which was formerly a Trade Union but is now a Trade Association (as it was struck off by the Certification Officer in 2013), has previously been cited by the lead Judge in the Horizon cases as not being independent of the Post Office. This was highlighted in Judge Fraser’s ruling of 15th March 2019 when he stated: 

“It is obvious, in my judgment, that the NFSP is not remotely independent of the Post Office, nor does it appear to put its members’ interests above its own separate commercial interests.”

“The Post Office effectively controls the NFSP”.

Currently there are at least four trials planned in relation to this complex case. A brief synopsis of the trials and decisions so far is as follows:

1. The First Trial – the “Common Issues” Trial – Judge Rules Against the Post Office

The “Common Issues” trial concerning the legal construction of the contract between the Post Office and Postmasters took place in November/December 2018. On 15th March 2019, the Honourable Mr Justice Fraser ruled in favour of the claimants. 

2. Post Office Application for Recusal of the Judge – Mr Justice Fraser

Following the Judge’s ruling against the Post Office and in favour of the claimants in the “Common Issues” trial, on 21st March, the Post Office made an application for the sitting Judge to be recused (remove himself from future trials). The recusal hearing took place on 3rd April and the 77 page judgment was handed down on 9th April. Mr Justice Fraser made the decision NOT to recuse himself from the second trial and indeed the third and fourth trials. The Post Office’s QC asked the Judge for permission to appeal which was not granted. Therefore the Post Office went directly to the Court of Appeal to ask for permission to appeal. 

3. Court of Appeal Refuses Post Office’s Appeal

On 10th May, without a formal hearing, at the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Coulson made the decision to refuse the Post Office’s appeal in regard to the recusal of Judge Fraser.

4. Post Office Appeals the decision of the First Judgment in The “Common Issues” Trial

Judge Fraser also refused the Post Office permission to appeal the “Common Issues” trial judgment. The Post Office therefore applied to appeal directly via the Court of Appeal. However this application was initially rejected by the Court of Appeal due to its length. A shorter application was submitted in June 2019. The Court of Appeal’s decision is expected to be handed down any day now (see 6.a. below). 

5. The Second trial – the “Horizon” Trial Recommences

Following the Court of Appeal’s decision to reject Justice Fraser’s recusal, the second trial, known as the “Horizon” trial recommenced on 4th June (it had been temporarily suspended following the Post Office’s application to recuse the Judge), with the Managing Judge, Mr Fraser residing. This trial finished on 2nd July and a decision is awaited. 

6. Two Decisions/Outcomes Awaited

a. Lord Justice Coulson’s decision on the Post Office’s application to appeal the first trial judgment is anticipated by Friday 22nd November. 

b. The judgment from the Second Trial – the “Horizon Trial” is due any time now.

7. In the Meantime, Mediation is Due to Commence 27th November

Judge Fraser also ordered that the parties should “consider” mediation. During week beginning 14th October, Freeths, the Postmasters’ solicitors, issued claimants a communication stating: 

“an independent and neutral expert is being appointed who has experience in helping to resolve very significant disputes. There will be a mediation meeting with the Mediator in November and we are obviously working very closely with your Steering Committee to plan for that and to decide whether it could offer you, the Claimants, a final resolution that would be in your best interests.”

Some Postmaster claimants may understandably be sceptical in regards to mediation as the Post Office set up a complaint and mediation scheme in 2013 which collapsed within 18 months. In parliament, James Arbuthnot MP (now Lord), who was particularly instrumental in raising this matter in Westminster, described the scheme as a “sham”. However, the parties have now agreed to go ahead with fresh mediation and it is scheduled to commence from 27th November. Freeths noted the following in a statement to the claimants: 

“Progress will be made only if the Post Office demonstrate a significant change in mind set and approach. If mediation gives the Claimants an opportunity to achieve final closure on acceptable financial terms, then that is to be welcomed – if that does not happen, then the litigation obviously continues. Either way, we will not allow the litigation to be held up while mediation happens.”

8. Third Trial Scheduled for 2nd March 2020

The third trial, referred to as the “Quantum” trial is scheduled to commence from 2nd March 2020. This trial will be in relation to how much the Post Office should pay the claimants if they lose. 

Depending on how the mediation talks go, there could well be between four and six trials in total in this case.

9. Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) – cases “Stayed”

Separate to the Group Litigation, the Criminal Cases Review Commission is investigating around 30 Postmaster prosecutions by the Post Office where it is claimed there is a miscarriage of justice. These relate to former Postmasters who have previously been criminally prosecuted and in some cases even imprisoned due to Horizon issues. This investigation began in April 2015 and the cases were “stayed” until after the outcome of the technical aspects of the litigation.

Legal Costs

The Post Office Report & Accounts for the year ending 31st March 2019, published on 15th October, showed legal costs for the 2018/19 financial year were £20m compared with just £3m the previous year. Clearly, the impact of the Horizon cases means the legal costs will have an even greater impact on the current year’s results. In this regard, attached to this LTB is a report (blog) from Nick Wallis, journalist, who has been covering the Horizon Trials from the very beginning. Nick attended a “Costs Hearing” at the Royal Courts of Justice on October 23rd. At this hearing, it transpired that combined costs of the two legal teams were at least £36.3m up to September 3rd this year. This figure is relevant as the Post Office has up until now, had to pay 90% of the claimants’ legal costs as a consequence of losing the cases thus far. Crucially, these figures don’t include the money spent by both parties in preparation for the Court of Appeal hearing. Nick Wallis estimates that the current costs are more likely to be in excess of £42m by now and rising.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

Nick Wallis has also reported that at the Costs Hearing, the Judge directed both parties to enter into formal mediation (see point 7. above) via a process called “Alternative Dispute Resolution”. Essentially this is a structured method for resolving matters outside of the court room. The following quote from the Post Office’s Barrister to Justice Fraser is revealing:

“There’s no shying away, my Lord, from the fact that Post Office has spent and proposes to spend a great deal of money seeking to settle the litigation at this stage. It’s seeking to devote resource proportionate to what it’s spending on fighting the case trying to settle it, trying to resolve it by compromise. If one puts the costs of settlement in the context of the total costs of the proceedings, whilst very substantial, they are not out of line.”

Evidently the Horizon litigation has thus far not gone the way the Post Office would have liked and should this direction of travel continue the costs and compensation to the claimants could be colossal. Whatever the end position regarding this matter, what is clear is that public (taxpayers’) monies have been put in jeopardy as a consequence of the actions of the Post Office.

My interpretation of the above is that the Post Office is budgeting to pay in excess of £100m in compensation payments to the 550+ members of the Group litigation claim. It is though highly conceivable this figure will end up being an underestimate of what it will cost the Post Office eventually.

Media Coverage

With regards to media coverage on this matter, it has been fairly quiet recently due to the obvious media focus on Brexit and the General Election, although the story has featured heavily and regularly in Computer Weekly. However, we anticipate there will be a fair amount of coverage following the announcements of the two decisions outlined above, which we expect to be by the end of this month.

Further Details on the Horizon Trials

I would like to remind Branches of the useful website set up by the journalist Nick Wallis who has been following the case closely. Nick provides a concise and clear summary of the events so far. The link to the website is as follows (note parts of the website are free and some sections you have to subscribe to):



I am certain at some point, probably once litigation has concluded, there will have to be some very serious Parliamentary scrutiny and examination of what has actually transpired here and in particular what were the Post Office policies and governance arrangements (bearing in mind that the Post Office is Government owned via BEIS) that have led to these significant legal claims.

Somebody ultimately has to be accountable to these events that have had such a devastating impact on so many people and their families. These Postmasters were ordinary people who were just trying to earn a living whilst providing such an important public service to society. The traumatic impact on so many indicates a gross injustice on a scale that is nothing short of a national scandal.

Further developments will be reported.

Yours sincerely

Andy Furey

Assistant Secretary

19LTB669 Post Office – Horizon Trials – Bates & Others vs Post Office Ltd – Further Update

Attachment 1 to 19LTB669



Colleagues will recall that as an integral part of the 2007 Professional Drivers Agreement, Bank Holidays effectively became normal working days for Network LGV Drivers and while we have long had an understanding with the business that where possible attendance would be on a voluntary basis, in reality our members can be compelled to attend on those days where sufficient numbers fail to volunteer. In line with the PDA, all staff who attend are credited with a lieu day.

Branches and representatives will be aware that in addition to the generic Christmas Arrangements Agreement the department has in previous years reached agreement with Royal Mail Logistics on specific guidelines covering the resourcing of Network LGV duties across the Christmas and New Year Bank Holidays.

In line with previous arrangements discussions have therefore taken place with the business and the attached Joint Statement has been concluded and endorsed by the Postal Executive.

The Joint Statement reaffirms the following commitments:

 Advance planning 

 A wholly voluntary approach to any attendance on Christmas Day 

 The use of the full range of resourcing options to reduce the burden on our members 

 A commitment to only run essential services on Bank Holidays 

 A commitment to minimise any mandatory attendance – no driver asked to attend on both the Boxing Day and New Year Bank Holidays 

Much like in previous years the department believes that the attached clarification provided in relation to the arrangements for 2019/20 will be welcomed by representatives and members.

Any enquiries in relation to this LTB should be addressed to Davie Robertson, Assistant Secretary, email: shayman@cwu.org quoting reference number: 206A.13.

Yours sincerely

Davie Robertson
Assistant Secretary


Attachment 1 – JS Christmas Resourcing for Network Drivers 20.11.19

Christmas Arrangements 2019/20

Christmas Arrangements 2019/20

Further to LTB 635/19 Branches and representatives are informed that discussions have now taken place with the business in relation to Christmas Arrangements 2019/20.

Attached for your information is a copy of the agreement that has been concluded with Royal Mail, which has also been endorsed by the Postal Executive.

Branches and representatives will note that the document broadly mirrors previous agreements and reaffirms that variations of contract for the Christmas Pressure period for Part Time or 35 hour Full Time staff can be to 38 hours where the workload supports the increase.

Colleagues should however also note that the document does not address the ongoing issue in relation to Working Time Limits. Discussions between the business and the CWU on this issue have as yet not produced an agreed outcome. Branches will recall that the last agreed position allowed our members to extend attendance to 80 hours per week on two weeks of the Christmas Pressure period, however this was unilaterally reduced by the business in 2017. For clarity, therefore the Working Time Directive issue remains a National Point of Principle and is subject to further discussion. Therefore In the absence of any current resolution to the Working Time Limits the status quo from 2016 should be applied, with issues being progressed via the IR Framework where necessary.

Please note that in recent years arrangements for Network Drivers have been concluded in a specific agreement and this has remained the case for the 2019/20 arrangements. Branches should note that a separate Letter to Branches will be issued by the relevant department in due course to communicate the arrangements for Network Drivers.

Any enquiries in relation to this LTB should be addressed to the relevant department:

Processing/Logistics: Davie Robertson, Assistant Secretary, email: kgray@cwu.org quoting reference 706A.10.


Delivery: Mark Baulch, Assistant Secretary, email: outdoorsecretary@cwu.org quoting reference 170.


Yours sincerely


Davie Robertson                 Mark Baulch
Assistant Secretary            Assistant Secretary


Att LTB667



Branches and representatives will be aware that in previous years agreement has been reached with Parcelforce Worldwide in relation to incentives for volunteers to attend on the Saturdays and Sundays in the run up to Christmas.

In line with this tradition attached for your information is the Agreement between CWU & Parcelforce Worldwide on 2019 Autumn Pressure and Christmas Remuneration Proposals for all CWU Grade Depot Employees, which has been endorsed by the Postal Executive. In respect of hourly incentive payments for attendance over the stated period, the agreement mirrors arrangements achieved in previous years. For 2019 the advance commitment to attend for two or more of the four Saturdays/Sundays has been increased from £37 to £38.

In respect to the Seasonal Traffic Recirculation, the additional payment for drivers who agree to follow the work has also increased to £38 from £36.

In addition to the above progress has also been made in relation to Annual Conference 2019, Motion 112 reproduced below:

The Autumn Pressure remuneration agreement for Parcelforce members provides industry leading enhanced payments for additional attendances during the pressure period up to Christmas; this has provided welcome incentives to employees making an advanced commitment.

While the payment is dependent on fulfilling all of the commitments stated: The agreement wording should reflect that cases of non-attendance should be reviewed and any reduction of the enhanced rate to standard rate should be against a backdrop of an examination of the specific circumstances involving the employee failing to make the commitment.

The Postal Executive is instructed accordingly.

The attached agreement now includes the following words which will enable joint review of any exceptional circumstances associated to failure to fulfil a commitment to attend, rather than an automatic removal of the enhanced rate of pay: 

On a discretionary basis any exceptional circumstances causing an individual to fail the commitments they have undertaken can be jointly reviewed by the Operations Manager and local CWU representative, whilst being mindful not to undermine the general principle of the commitment payment.

In line with the attached agreement engagement should now take place between local Parcelforce Representatives and Managers in order to ensure adequate cover for work and manpower requirements for the Autumn Pressure/Christmas period.

Any enquiries in relation to this LTB should be addressed to: Davie Robertson, Assistant Secretary, email: shayman@cwu.org, quoting reference 106A.10

Yours sincerely

Davie Robertson
Assistant Secretary


Attachment 1 – PFW Autumn Pressure & Christmas Remuneration Proposals





Dear Colleagues,

Further to LTB No. 637/2019, detailing the position regarding the Delivery of Election Material, the Postal Executive have now endorsed a nationally agreed position with the employer that has realised an immediate raise in the unit payments for delivery of election material.

Over a series of three meetings in recent weeks, including the day after the High Court case, the CWU made the strongest possible case to have an immediate increase in the rates and also to begin to redress the imbalance of rates that are manifested across the country at present.

Royal Mail, for their part, came to the discussions equally adamant that they did not believe that the case for an increase was one that had sufficient merit and was outside of the annual pay round talks. In addition, they went on to further state that essentially, they could not understand that election material is not part of normal workload and therefore also not subject to unit payment for their delivery, which of course, we did not accept.

The discussions were obviously influenced by the High Court judgement last week, given the advent of the General Election upon our members. That said, the employer proposed an increase of 3% on all unit payments across the board. The negotiating team immediately rejected that offer in the room, explaining that it did not meet with what we saw as an acceptable increase, nor did it address the disparity of payments in any way, shape or form.

The union invited the company to adjourn and reflect on that position and to come back with an increased offer without delay, given that poll cards are in the offices as we speak and candidate materials are imminent. We met the employer again on Monday the 18th November and received an improved offer, which is summarised as follows:

  • An immediate increase to all unit payments of 5% in global overall paybill terms for the delivery of election material.
  • An incremental effect on the increase that means greater increases percentage wise for the lower ranges of the unit payments, in line with our policy – meaning 7% for the lower end of the scale and 3% for the higher earners.
  • A re-affirmation that whilst pressure overtime cannot be booked for election material, members can still accrue overtime for excesses in normal workload that means that completion cannot be effected on that day, in line with normal national agreements.
  • A joint National review on the product and payments method during 2020.

The Postal Executive believe that after some years without an increase in the unit payment, this agreement, detailed in the attached letter from Kevin Thompson, National Delivery Director, gives our members a rise in the payments and also begins to address the position on differing unit payments levels.

The Postal Executive believe that this is the best agreement that could have been reached through negotiations with Royal Mail, given where we currently are on a National basis with the employer.

Any enquiries in relation to this LTB should be addressed to email: outdoorsecretary@cwu.org quoting reference number: 535.09.

Yours sincerely,

Mark Baulch
Assistant Secretary

LTB 666.19 – Delivery of Election Material – National Agreement and Revised Unit Payment

Letter from Kevin Thompson 19_11_19

Delivery of Election Material National Agreement

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: