JOINT STATEMENT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AND DEPLOYMENT OF ROUTE EXCELLENCE

Dear Colleagues

Branches and representatives will recall that, Appendix B, the Parcelforce Worldwide section of the Agreement between Royal Mail Group and the Communication Workers Union Regarding Guiding Principles of Employment Security and a Mutual Interest Approach to Future Challenges and Opportunities, determined that the achievement of the first hour reduction in the Working Week was linked to the Route Excellence (REX) process being fully deployed. Discussions and activity have been taking place with the business to ensure that this key element of the agreement can be delivered

Extensive activity has taken place since 2015 in relation to the REX system to ensure that the product is fit for purpose, which has been overseen by the Table of Success REX Working Group (LTB 336/17 refers).

The Working Group has now recommended to the National Steering Group that the process is ready to be introduced on a phased basis to all depots. Therefore discussions have taken place with the business to conclude a further Joint Statement – Future Development & Deployment of Route Excellence to facilitate the activity. This Joint Statement to enable the deployment activity to commence has now been concluded and endorsed by the Postal Executive. A copy is attached for your information.

Branches and representatives are requested to ensure that our PFW members are made aware of the contents of this LTB and the commencement of the REX deployment activity.

Any enquiries in relation to this LTB should be addressed to Davie Robertson, Assistant Secretary, e-mail: dwyatt@cwu.org or shayman@cwu.org quoting reference number: 132.07

Yours sincerely

 

Davie Robertson

Assistant Secretary

LTB 340-18 – JS – Route Excellence 11.06.18

Attachment 1 – JS REX Deployment – 11.06.18

Men’s Health Week 11-17 June 2018: Diabetes – Diabetes is Decimating Men

To: All Branches

Dear Colleagues,

A diabetes crisis is unfolding in the UK and men are the worst affected. One man in 10 now has diabetes and in middle-aged men the disease is expected to increase sharply in frequency over the next 20 years.

Men’s Health Week 2018 coincides with Diabetes Week and the Men’s Health Forum is highlighting how men are affected – and it’s not a pretty picture. Men are more likely to get diabetes than women, more likely to experience complications like leg amputation and more likely to die from the condition.

One man in ten already has diabetes and thousands more either don’t know they have it or are at serious risk of it. Are you one of them?

Martin Tod, Chief Executive of the Men’s Health Forum said:

“The Men’s Health Forum wants to see a serious programme of research and investment to ensure men get the support and care they need to prevent and manage diabetes. The toxic combination of ever more men being overweight, men getting diabetes at a lower BMI and health services that don’t work well enough for working age men is leading to a crisis. We need urgent action. Our plan for this week is to raise awareness amongst men and amongst professionals of the challenge many men face.”

The Men’s Health Forum’s report One In Ten: The Male Diabetes Crisis shows:

• Men are 26% more likely to develop Type 2 diabetes than women – with Public Health England estimates showing that 9.6% of men have type 1 or type 2 diabetes vs. 7.6% of women. One man in 10 now has diabetes.

• Men are more likely to be overweight (BMI 25+) and to develop diabetes at a lower BMI (body mass index) than women. However, they are less likely to be aware that they are overweight or to participate in weight management programmes.

• Men are more likely to suffer from diabetic retinopathy, foot ulcers and to have a foot amputation. 69.6% of those presenting with a foot ulcer are men. Men are more than twice as likely to have a major amputation. Studies also show that the incidence of diabetic retinopathy is significantly higher amongst men.

• Men are more likely to die, and to die prematurely, as a result of diabetes. The age-standardised mortality rate for men with an underlying cause of death as diabetes mellitus is 40% higher than it is for women.

The report highlights how the sex inequalities have not been highlighted by health policy makers and practitioners and calls for better engagement of men in: NHS Health Checks, routine eye tests, weight management programmes and diabetes education programmes.

Follow this link to the Men’s Health Forum website for further information, posters, toolbox talks and booklets to raise awareness of this event in your Branches:

https://www.menshealthforum.org.uk/mens-health-week-2018-diabetes

A copy of the Men’s Health Forum Report is attached.

Yours sincerely

Dave Joyce
National Health, Safety & Environment Officer

18LTB348 Men’s Health Week 11-17 June 2018 Diabetes – Diabetes is Decimating Men

diabetes_1in10_nov2017

mhw2018_posters_kills

View Online

General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) –v- HSAW Act 1974 & SRSC Regs 1977:

To: All Branches

Dear Colleagues,

The impact of GDPR on Health and Safety was raised with Royal Mail Group prior to the introduction date and we were assured that “minimal disruption” was expected which was welcomed.

However since then the Health, Safety & Environment Department has been receiving increasing numbers of queries and complaints from Royal Mail Group based CWU Safety Reps on a number of things as managers around the country are starting to react to the GDPR with a lack of understanding and common sense and we are clearly going through the same loop again as we did with the original Data Protection Act 1998, only worse.

My department is receiving communications from ASRs on a variety of issues where GDPR is cropping up e.g.

• Accident on Duty notifications and reports,

• RTC information,

• ZAP Reports,

• Sharepoint Weekly Safety Dashboard,

• First Aiders,

• Fire Wardens,

• Safety Committees,

• SMATS,

• Inspections,

• H&S Audits,

• Training Records,

• Vehicle Licence Checks,

• ERICAs.

According to guidance issued by the TUC and HSE, there isn’t anything in the GDPR which indicates specifically from a workplace health and safety perspective that there will be any new restrictions on giving Safety Representatives the information necessary to enable them to fulfil their role and functions or change the general duties and obligations on employers regarding consultation with and involvement of Trade Union Safety Representatives as set out in the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, the Safety Representatives and Safety Committees Regulations 1977, the Health and Safety (Consultation with Employees) Regulations 1996 and other specific Health and Safety Regulations.

The HSE has made it clear in the past that Trade Union Health and Safety Reps must be ‘proactively’ involved and consulted in line with Health and Safety Legislation and that data protection regulations must not stop Union Health and Safety Representatives getting information they are legally entitled to.

Few people can be unaware of the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR), if only because of the emails that we are all getting from organisations we have never heard of asking us to agree that they can keep emailing us.

However, the above quoted list of examples are worrying developments and the matter has been raised with Royal Mail Group’s Head of Safety, Health and Environment Standards and Reporting.

We have requested that Managers must be told not to use the GDPR Regulations to try to stop Union Health and Safety Representatives from getting access to information they are legally entitled to.

The 1977 Safety Reps and Safety Committee (SRSC) Regulations are very clear about what Safety Reps are entitled to. Regulation 7 basically states that employers “have to make available to safety representatives the information necessary to enable them to fulfil their functions.”

The HSE Code of Practice to the Regulations lists what information is covered, and it is pretty comprehensive, including information on accidents and safety audits etc.

Since its introduction, local Safety Reps are finding that some managers are saying that the GDPR restricts what information they can supply. Examples of this include refusing to hand over information from accident report forms, instead saying that they will in future only give periodic statistics reports, and health and safety auditors are being instructed to stop sharing their Safety Audits with CWU Safety Representatives on the grounds they contain some personal data etc. We have made it clear that this is nonsense and is not acceptable to the CWU.

This seems to be a deliberate attempt by some managers to try to stop Union Health and Safety Representatives getting the information they need and are entitled to. Just giving general information with no detail makes the information utterly useless in some cases,‎ as Health and Safety Representative can’t properly investigate incidents, accidents, near misses and complaints unless they know which members are involved.

The TUC and HSE advice is that the GDPR does not change the information that can be given to Union Health and Safety Representatives in the least. Both the SRSC Regulations and the 1998 Data Protection Act already restricted certain personal information being given out generally but providing information to Safety Representatives is covered by Health and Safety Legislation.

When it was reported to the Health, Safety & Environment Department what some managers were doing, the HSE were contacted in order to check their view and the HSE confirmed that the “Government Legal Department advise is that the implementation of the EU General Data Protection Regulation should not adversely impact Trade Union Safety Representatives carrying out their functions within the Safety Representatives and Safety Committees Regulations. Employers are required to provide documents and information requested by Safety Representatives under Regulation 7 as before.” In other words, if an employer or managers are now refusing to give over information they are misusing the GDPR or using it as an excuse not to comply with Health and Safety Law.

So the fact is that Trade Union Health and Safety Representatives can still get all the information that they need. Information on any accidents, injuries, near misses or occupational diseases, audits, safety training etc., can still be given to Safety Representatives, as can any audit or other reports or the results of investigations etc.

If managers think that the GDP Regulations somehow trumps the SRSC Regulations then the question is “where in the GDPR does it say that the employer should not provide the information covered in Regulation 7 of the SRSC Regulations?”

Of course, that does not mean that GDPR will not affect Safety Representatives. When handling personal data, including membership information, or details of any cases or issues that they are handling, the information needs to be treated accordingly and kept securely.

For electronic information, many representatives use the employer’s system and they usually will continue to follow the security standards operated by the employer, but if Reps are keeping information on their own computer, GDPR doesn’t state Safety Reps can’t have it, it states that they should make sure that they are following the requirements of the new Regulations.

The CWU SDGS has published advice on behalf of the CWU to Branch Representatives on GDPR in LTBs 227 and 310 which Reps should follow in maintaining data privacy.

The same applies to paper information. Regulation 5(3) of the SRSC Regulations requires employers to give “such facilities as the safety representative may reasonably require” for safety inspections. Regulation 4A2 of the SRSC Regulations gives safety reps considerable powers to demand facilities to enable them to carry out their functions effectively. That means that, at the very least, health and safety representatives can demand lockable secure facilities to keep data secure and private.

To maintain our productive joint working arrangements and commitments, this GDPR mess that’s developing in Royal Mail Group needs addressing urgently.

The TUC Education Department did a webinar explaining the implications of GDPR for unions in March which is available on YouTube at the following Link:-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wd2GNBhxhkI

Further reports will be made in due course. ASRs should use the RMG/CWU nationally agreed Health and Safety Disputes Escalation Procedure as necessary.

Yours sincerely

Dave Joyce
National Health, Safety & Environment Officer

18LTB347 General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) –v- HSAW Act 1974 & SRSC Regs 1977

View Online

RM/CWU Dog Awareness Week 25th – 30th June 2018

To: All Branches

Dear Colleagues,

• To raise awareness and encourage responsible dog ownership, the Union and Royal Mail will jointly launch their sixth annual Dog Awareness Week on Monday 25 June 2018.

• The number of dog attacks is still too high and every dog attack is one attack too many. The official number of dog attacks in the UK on postmen and women last year is 2,275 but unreported minor attacks take that up to 3,000 in our estimation.

• The number of dog attacks on postmen and women increases during summer holidays, when children and parents are at home and dogs are more likely to be out in the garden with the family.

• Royal Mail Dog Awareness Week is supported by the Communications Workers Union and a wide range of organisations and animal charities including Battersea Dogs & Cats Home, Dogs Trust, PDSA the National Police Chief’s Council, and the National Dog Wardens Association.

• A special Dog Awareness Week postmark will be applied to all stamped items from Monday 25 June until Friday 29 June 2018.

• 3,000 Postmen and Women were attacked by Dogs in the UK last year, that’s 44 a week or 7 a day.

• ASRs, Regional Health and Safety Forums, Branches and Regions are asked to fully support the week and work locally with Royal Mail and supporting organisations on the campaign.

The Following Press Statement Has Been Issued by Dave Joyce CWU National Health, Safety and Environment Officer:

CWU National Health, Safety and Environment Officer Dave Joyce said “The failure of Dog Owners to control their animals remains a major concern for postal workers and the public. The number of attacks has risen, with yearly hospital admissions for dog bites increasing by 76% between 2006-2016. Seven postal workers are attacked by dogs every working day of the year which is unacceptable and the whole idea of Dog Awareness Week is to highlight the problem and the repercussions for dog owners and the victims, many of whom are seriously injured. 82% of dog attacks on postal workers happened at the front door or in the front garden and that number is increasing as we deliver more online purchased parcels. We are appealing to all customers who are dog owners to work with us and think TWICE when the postman calls. Put the dog away in a secure room before opening the door to collect and sign for your delivery. The vast majority of our customers and their dogs aren’t a problem but irresponsible and reckless dog owners are. Customers are always pleased to see the postman or postwoman arrive as they’re eager to take delivery of the goods they’ve ordered and paid for on the internet but thousands of them unfortunately don’t give a second thought to the postal worker’s safety by putting the dog in a safe, secure place. There are tough court penalties and a criminal record for irresponsible dog owners including prison and unlimited fines so it’s in their best interest in more ways than one to make sure the dog doesn’t bite the postman/woman. One owner from Romford, Essex paid fines and costs of nearly £9,000 after his dog injured a postwoman’s fingers as she put letters through the door. Another owner from Oxford was handed a 16-month suspended prison sentence and banned from owning dogs for life after his dog badly injured a postman’s hand. Dog owners need to fully understand that their actions usually are the cause of a dog being dangerous and simple precautions can prevent the pain for everyone concerned. No matter what breed of dog is involved, the dog can present a substantial danger to postal workers. Worryingly there’s been some very serious Dog attacks this last year in Boston, Newquay and Wrexham which could easily have ended in fatalities if it wasn’t for the intervention of the owners and good Samaritans”.

The Following Engagements have been arranged for Dave Joyce CWU National Health, Safety and Environment Officer during Dog Awareness Week:

On 25th June – Dave Joyce will be giving Radio and TV interviews on Dog Awareness Week.

On 26th June – Dave Joyce will meet with the Scottish Minister for Community Safety and Legal Affairs, Annabelle Ewing, to discuss dog attacks on postal workers following the recent debate in the Scottish Parliament on 8th May to discuss the post legislative review of the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Act 2010 plus Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal and Police enforcement and law interpretation issues.

On 27th June – Dave Joyce will be at the House of Commons, Palace of Westminster, to give oral evidence to a The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Parliamentary Select Committee’s Inquiry into Dangerous Dogs Legislation. (The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 as amended by the Anti-Social Behaviour Crime & Policing Act 2014) after the NHS reported that the number of dog attacks have risen, with yearly hospital admissions for dog bites increasing by 76% between 2006-2016.
(This will be televised at 9:30am on the Parliament TV Channel).

Further LTBs, Dog Awareness Week materials and information will be issued in due course.

Yours sincerely

Dave Joyce

National Health, Safety & Environment Officer

18LTB346 RMCWU Dog Awareness Week 25th – 30th June 2018

View Online

Grenfell Panel Event (Cancellation) & Silent Walk – 14th June 2018

Due to the very low numbers that have confirmed for the Grenfell daytime panel event on Thursday 14th June at 2pm, we have unfortunately made the 18LTB335 – Grenfell Daytime Panel Event (Cancellation) Silent Walk – 14th June 2018sion to cancel this part of the event. Please note, however, that a CWU presence at the Silent Walk in the evening will still be going ahead.

There has been a slight change to the meeting point in relation to the Silent Walk. CWU representatives intending to attend should meet at the ‘Wall of Truth’ next to Maxilla Hall Social Club Ltd, 2 Maxilla Walk, Ladbroke Grove, W10 6NQ.

Given it’s the first anniversary since the tragedy; the organisers are expecting a very large turnout. We would ask that you arrive at the meeting point by 6.30pm at the very latest. Please let the department know if you are able to bring your branch banner.

As we are in the middle of Ramadan and given the demographic of the local community, a number of people will be fasting. It is important that we are sensitive to this point. The organisers are intending to hold the Iftar (breaking of fast) in a park nearby at the end of the walk. Just to make you aware speeches will start after the Iftar at about 9.30pm.

Any enquiries on the content of this LTB should be addressed to dnoel@cwu.org in the Equal Opportunities Department.

Yours sincerely

Dave Ward

General Secretary

18LTB335 – Grenfell Daytime Panel Event (Cancellation) Silent Walk – 14th June 2018

View Online

REDESIGN – BRANCH CONSULTATION – SPECIAL CONFERENCE 3RD AND 4TH NOVEMBER 2018

The purpose of this LTB is to provide Branches with some initial findings of the Branch Consultation and explain our current approach to the Redesign Special Conference in November 2018.

Initial findings of the Branch Redesign Consultation

The Branch Consultation on Redesign of CWU Structures closed on 11 May 2018 and we would like to thank each Branch who took the time to consider these issues and submit responses.

The overall response rate has been encouraging with 83% of Branches making a submission. This has provided us with a very large amount of data, which is now being analysed in detail.

However, some early work has been carried out on the responses to the questions which simply required a straightforward “YES/NO” answer. This was shared with the NEC when it met on the 31st May and in the interests of transparency we have attached these results for Branches.

Please note that these are only initial findings and we are not viewing this as a referendum on the questions posed. Instead, these are indicative results of where there may be support for certain changes to our structure, albeit subject to a number of caveats and reassurances that some Branches have put forward. We are now in the process of undertaking further detailed work to ensure that a comprehensive and objective assessment is made on all the information gathered.

Once the detailed analysis is complete it will be shared with the NEC, alongside a series of future policy papers with appropriate recommendations.

The NEC has agreed to make available the complete submissions to any Branch who wishes to view them and in due course we will advise Branches on how they can access this information.

The Publication of Future Policy Papers

The process outlined above and the output of the consultation will help the NEC produce a series of proactive policy papers, that taken together, will shape key elements of the Redesign Project and will enable Branches to have a clear understanding of what the union could look like in the future. These papers will be published to Branches in advance of the Special Conference in November and will cover the following areas.

• NEC structures

• Regions

• Branches

• Conferences

• Equality

• Training, Education and Learning. With regard to the Industrial Executives, further discussions will continue.

Special Conference 3rd and 4th November

Branches will be aware that the date and venue of the Special Conference was published in LTB 321/18. However, in terms of how the Conference will operate including its structure, format and delegation strengths etc., this is work in progress and discussions on this are continuing with the Standing Orders Committee and further information on this will be published in due course. Finally, for you information, we have also attached a list of those Branches who responded to the Redesign Consultation.Any enquiries on the Branch Consultation Exercise should be addressed to the General Secretary’s Office c/o Trish Lavelle at the following email address re-design@cwu.org. Any enquiries on the Special Conference should be addressed to the SDGS Department sdgs@cwu.org.

Yours sincerely

Dave Ward

General Secretary  

 

Redesign Branch Consultation Early Findings

 

As at 22/5/2018 108 Branches had responded to the consultation. An 83% response rate is extremely high in research terms and is very useful in terms of the quality and reliability of the data provided.

 

These initial findings set out the early quantitative findings of the consultation. These results are limited at this point to questions where there was a clear Yes/No response option. We also include the number of Branches who completed the consultation but did not provide any response to a given Yes/No question and the number of comments that these questions elicited.

 

Further analysis of the comments provided will produce a qualitative assessment of the views of Branches.

 

 

Number of branches

Number of responses

%

Overall

130

108

83

Postal

88

78

89

Telecoms, Financial Services

42

30

71

 

Do you agree that we should move from an annual to biennial General Conference?

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

45

58%

17

57%

62

57%

No

30

38%

13

43%

43

40%

No response

3

4%

0

0%

3

3%

Comments

75

96%

30

100%

105

97%

 

Do you believe conference should be about setting long term strategic goals and policies?

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

65

83%

24

80%

89

82%

No

6

8%

0

0%

6

6%

No response

7

9%

6

20%

13

12%

Comments

64

82%

21

70%

85

79%

 

 

 

Is a motion-based conference the best way of developing policy?

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

57

73%

20

67%

77

71%

No

11

14%

5

17%

16

15%

No response

10

13%

5

17%

15

14%

Comments

63

81%

24

80%

87

81%

 

Should all existing equality conferences be replaced with a single conference and how do we ensure polices on equality issues are debated by the whole union?

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

54

69%

17

57%

71

66%

No

17

22%

11

37%

28

26%

No response

7

9%

2

6%

9

8%

Comments

74

95%

28

93%

102

94%

 

Should we review the way in which motions are tabled for debate within the conference agenda pad? 

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

51

65%

16

53%

67

62%

No

20

26%

9

30%

29

27%

No response

7

9%

5

17%

12

11%

Comments

68

87%

27

90%

95

88%

 

Considering the Branch structure as a whole and not just your own Branch, is our current Branch structure fit for purpose in terms of the ability of all Branches to adequately organise and represent our members now and in the future? 

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

36

46%

10

33%

46

43%

No

30

38%

11

37%

41

38%

No response

12

15%

9

30%

21

19%

Comments

71

91%

26

87%

97

90%

 

Do you agree with the 14 measures of success for an effective Branch set out on pages 11 and 12 of the Branch Section of the document?

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

62

79%

19

63%

81

75%

No

11

14%

5

17%

16

15%

No response

5

6%

6

20%

11

10%

Comments

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

 

 

Should we encourage Branches to lease rather than purchase premises?

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

25

32%

11

37%

36

33%

No

36

46%

10

33%

46

43%

No response

17

22%

9

30%

26

24%

Comments

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Note: low response rate. As there was no place to comment lot of branches responses have been added to the “General comments” section

 

Should we encourage Branches and Regions to better share and pool resources such as premises and office facilities?

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

52

67%

14

47%

66

61%

No

8

10%

1

3%

9

8%

No response

18

23%

15

50%

33

31%

Comments

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Note: low response rate

 

Would there be savings and benefits for Branches in moving to a more centralised purchasing system for some resources and services that we currently purchase, lease and contract.

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

58

74%

18

60%

76

70%

No

14

18%

6

20%

20

19%

No response

6

8%

6

20%

12

11%

Comments

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

 

Would a single online system for storing all data relating to case work be beneficial to Branches in terms of consistency and the legal obligations that we have to comply with data protection legislation?

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

62

79%

20

67%

82

76%

No

10

13%

7

23%

17

16%

No response

6

8%

3

10%

9

8%

Comments

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

 

As there was no place to comment lot of branches responses have been added to the “General comments” section

 

 

Is the current Regional structure fit for purpose?

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

50

64%

10

33%

60

56%

No

19

24%

7

23%

26

24%

No response

9

12%

13

43%

22

20%

Comments

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

 

With regard to the role and status of the Regional Secretary, should it be appointed or elected?

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Appointed

3

4%

3

10%

6

6%

Elected

72

92%

20

67%

92

85%

No response

3

4%

7

23%

10

9%

Comments

Na

Na

Na

Na

Na

Na

 

The document sets out plans to reduce the number of Regional Sub-Committees. In your view do these plans provide adequate and appropriate structures for the Regions?

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

38

49%

11

37%

49

45%

No

27

35%

7

23%

34

31%

No response

13

17%

12

40%

25

23%

Comments

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

 

Is there any benefit to the union that the principle of decisions by consensus continues in the Regions?

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

25

32%

13

43%

38

35%

No

41

53%

10

33%

51

47%

No response

12

15%

7

23%

19

18%

Comments

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

 

Should the Regional Secretary be responsible for carrying out a regular health check on Branches to ensure consistency and adherence to rules, and policies?

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

63

81%

15

50%

78

72%

No

10

13%

9

30%

19

18%

No response

5

6%

6

20%

11

10%

Comments

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

 

 

In line with the union policy on proportionality, do you believe the current structure of the NEC is reflective of our membership?

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

29

37%

8

27%

37

34%

No

42

54%

16

53%

58

54%

No response

7

9%

6

20%

13

12%

Comments

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

 

Should the CWU now review the roles of the Advisory Committees (including composition, structure and objectives)?

 

 

Postal (78)

T&FS (30)

Overall (108)

Yes

59

76%

21

70%

80

74%

No

7

9%

3

10%

10

9%

No response

12

15%

6

20%

18

17%

Comments

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

 

Branch Responses

 

NAME OF BRANCHES

01001 ESSEX AMAL BRANCH

01002 COLCHESTER & DISTRICT BRANCH

01003 EASTERN NO 3 BRANCH

01004 EASTERN NO 4 BRANCH

01005 EASTERN NO 5 BRANCH

01006 EASTERN NO 6 BRANCH

01008 SUFFOLK AMAL BRANCH

01009 SOUTH CENTRAL POSTAL BRANCH

02001 BIRMINGHAM DIST AMAL BRANCH

02002 SOUTH MIDLANDS POSTAL BRANCH

02003 LEICESTERSHIRE BRANCH

02005 WOLVERHAMPTON & DIST AMAL BRANCH

02006 DERBYSHIRE BRANCH

02007 MIDLAND NO 7 BRANCH

02008 NOTTINGHAM & DIST AMAL BRANCH

03001 DONCASTER & DISTRICT AMAL BRANCH

03002 SOUTH YORKSHIRE & DISTRICT AMAL BRANCH

03003 BRADFORD & DISTRICT AMAL BRANCH

03005 LEEDS NO 1 AMAL BRANCH

03006 YORK & DISTRICT AMAL BRANCH

03007 HULL/EAST RIDINGS AMAL BRANCH

03008 NEWCASTLE AMAL BRANCH

03009 DARLINGTON AMAL BRANCH

03010 CLEVELAND AMAL BRANCH

03011 DURHAM COUNTY BRANCH

04001 NORTHERN IRELAND COMBINED BRANCH

04003 NORTHERN IRELAND WEST BRANCH

05003 CHESHIRE NO 1 AMAL BRANCH

05004 NORTH WEST CENTRAL AMAL BRANCH

05006 GREATER MANCHESTER BRANCH

05007 NORTH WEST NO 1 BRANCH

05010 EAST LANCS AMAL BRANCH

05011 NORTH LANCS & CUMBRIA BRANCH

05012 DARWEN CAPITA BRANCH

05013 WARRINGTON MAIL CENTRE BRANCH

06001 GLASGOW DIST AMAL BRANCH

06002 SCOTLAND NO 2 BRANCH

06003 GRAMPIAN/SHETLAND AMAL BRANCH

06005 SCOTLAND NO 5 BRANCH

06006 CLYDE VALLEY AMAL BRANCH

06008 HIGHLAND AMAL BRANCH

07002 PORTSMOUTH & DISTRICT POSTAL BRANCH

07004 KENT INVICTA BRANCH

07005 SOUTH EAST NO 5 BRANCH

08001 WESTERN COUNTIES BRANCH

08002 PLYMOUTH/EAST CORNWALL AMAL BRANCH

08003 BOURNEMOUTH & DORSET AMAL BRANCH

08004 WESSEX SOUTH CENTRAL BRANCH

08005 BRISTOL & DIST AMAL BRANCH

08006 GLOUCESTERSHIRE AMAL BRANCH

08007 SOUTH WEST NO 7 BRANCH

08009 JERSEY BRANCH

08010 GUERNSEY BRANCH

08011 WORCESTER & HEREFORD AMAL BRANCH

08012 CORNWALL AMAL BRANCH

09001 NORTH WALES & MARCHES BRANCH

09003 SOUTH EAST WALES AMAL BRANCH

09004 SOUTH WEST WALES AMAL BRANCH

09005 GWENT AMAL BRANCH

10002 MOUNT PLEASANT BRANCH

10004 LONDON PHOENIX BRANCH

10009 NHC POSTAL BRANCH

10011 LONDON PARCELS & STATION AMAL BRANCH

10012 NORTHERN/NORTH WEST LONDON BRANCH

10013 EAST LONDON POSTAL BRANCH

10016 SOUTH EAST LDN PTL & CTR BRANCH

10017 LONDON SOUTH WEST BRANCH

10018 KINGSTON AREA BRANCH

10020 HARROW & DISTRICT BRANCH

10021 SOUTH & EAST THAMES AMAL BRANCH

10022 CROYDON & SUTTON AMAL BRANCH

10023 S W MIDDLESEX AMAL BRANCH

21006 SOUTH CENTRAL MT BRANCH

21819 CENTRAL COUNTIES & THAMES VALLEY BRANCH

21827 SOUTH EAST ANGLIA BRANCH

21831 NORTH ANGLIA BRANCH

22032 MIDLAND NO 1 BRANCH

22238 LEICESTER & MIDSHIRES BRANCH

22239 MIDLANDS MT BRANCH

22601 ALGUS NATIONAL BRANCH

22803 EAST MIDLANDS BRANCH

22809 COVENTRY BRANCH

23404 SOUTH YORKSHIRE BRANCH

23669 TYNE & WEAR CLERICAL BRANCH

23727 BRADFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES BRANCH

23808 NORTH EAST BRANCH

23817 LINCOLNSHIRE & SOUTH YORKS BRANCH

23830 WEST YORKSHIRE BRANCH

24024 NORTHERN IRELAND TELECOMS BRANCH

25274 MANCHESTER COMBINED BRANCH

25730 BOOTLE FINANCIAL SERVICES BRANCH

25732 Northern and National Financial Services Branch

25821 LANCS AND CUMBRIA BRANCH

26156 GLASGOW & MOTHERWELL BRANCH

26157 SCOTLAND MT BRANCH

26825 EDINBURGH DUNDEE & BORDERS BRANCH

26829 SCOTLAND NO 1 BRANCH

27049 SOUTH EAST CENTRAL BRANCH

27353 PORTS W SUSSEX & I O W BRANCH

28459 SOMERSET DEVON & CORNWALL BRANCH

28828 GREAT WESTERN BRANCH

29807 MID WALES THE MARCHES & N STAFFS BRANCH

29823 SOUTH WALES BRANCH

30122 LDN REGIONAL MT BRANCH

30252 GREATER LONDON COMBINED BRANCH

30255 LONDON POSTAL ENG BRANCH

30811 LONDON AND WEST BRANCH

30834 SOUTH LDN SURREY & NORTH HAMPSHIRE BRANCH

45001 GREATER MERSEY & S W LANCS AMAL BRANCH

18LTB 343 Redesign Branch Consultation Special Conference 3rd and 4th November 2018

View Online

 

Election of National Delegations 2018

• Labour Party Conference – 2018

• TUC Conference – 2018

Further to LTB 303/18, dated 21st May 2018, please see below ballot results for the National Delegations which closed on the 8th June 2018.

Please note that due to technical problems relating to CWU HQ IT systems, it has not been possible before now to send this LTB to Branches.

LABOUR PARTY – Postal Constituency

Lay Members (5 Members to be elected)

Paul Braithwaite

North Lancs & Cumbria60,648 Kye Dudd

Bristol & District Amal72,760*ElectedPeter Firmin

London Phoenix33,566 Keith Hamilton

South Central Postal61,009*ElectedSajid Shaikh

Birmingham District Amal73,634*ElectedAlan Tate

London Regional MT85,900*ElectedMark Walsh

Greater Mersey & South West Lancs66,801*Elected

LABOUR PARTY – Telecom & Financial Services Constituency  

Lay Members (5 Members to be elected)

Craig Anderson

Scotland No 133,056*ElectedGraham Colk

South Wales29,317*ElectedKate Hankey

Capital35,009*ElectedBrian Kenny

Mersey37,634*ElectedJoyce Stevenson

Scotland No 136,520*ElectedAngela Teeling

Greater Mersey & South West Lancs22,374

TUC – Postal Constituency

Lay Members (5 Members to be elected)

Jim Mckechnie

Glasgow & District Amal74,678*ElectedTony Pedel

York & District Amal24,661 Sajid Shaikh

Birmingham District Amal56,555*ElectedAmarjite Singh

South East Wales Amal101,289*ElectedMark Walsh

Greater Mersey & South West Lancs61,170*ElectedRichard Wilkins

South Central Postal55,249 Mark Williams

South West Wales Amal47,929 Rob Wotherspoon

Bristol & District Amal87,092*Elected

TUC – TFS Constituency

Lay Members (5 Members to be elected)

Jonathan Bellshaw

Lincolnshire & South Yorks36,593*ElectedEugene Caparros

South Wales35,719*ElectedFiona Curtis

Northern Ireland Telecom29,302*ElectedDavid Kennedy

Northern Ireland Telecom22,165 Jacky Morrey

Mid Wales The Marches & Nth Staffs40,864*ElectedAngela Teeling

Greater Mersey & South West Lancs23,487*ElectedJeffrey Till

Greater London Combined19,843 

Please find attached a branch analysis of the ballot results.

Any enquiries regarding this Letter to Branches should be addressed to the Senior Deputy General Secretary’s Department on telephone number 020 8971 7237, or email address sdgs@cwu.org.

Yours sincerely,

TONY KEARNS

SENIOR DEPUTY GENERAL SECRETARY

Ballot Result LTB

TFS TUC Returns

Postal Labour Party Returns

Postal TUC Returns

TFS Labour Party Returns

View Online

CWU/RM Joint Statement – Shorter Working Week Introduction October 2018 in Delivery Units

Dear Colleagues,

Branches and Representatives will be aware that contained within the 2018 Guiding Principles Agreement is reference to the reduction of the working week by one hour from October 2018, which for Delivery units was contained within both Sections 15.3 and 16.1.1. In order to ensure that the one hour reduction is introduced in Delivery Units we have now agreed a joint statement relating to this issue with Royal Mail which is attached.

In line with the above Royal Mail have used the data from IWT / PDA OA (Indoor Workload Tool / PDA Outdoor Actuals) nationally to provide centrally compiled data and to also ensure an element of joint control is in place ensuring that the one hour reduction is achieved in all units. As a result of the work relating to changes to start times for the enhanced LAT product the number of Delivery offices has been significantly mitigated, these Offices will also be able to use the introduction of the SWW to assist with the overall impact.

Where this is unable to be achieved, then both parties will agree the necessary actions required to ensure that the reduction in the working week is implemented.

As such, each Delivery Office has been placed into one of the three categories below using the centrally generated data showing how the one hour reduction should be achieved.

1. The Unit does not currently operate with Longs and Shorts within  the duty structure, as such the plan is for those units to remove on Monday by 15 minutes, Tuesday 30 minutes and Saturday 15 minutes.

2. The Unit currently has the opportunity to reduce indoor workload; as such the plan will be for units to remove 12 minutes a day which will be from the IPS/Prep plans.

3. The Unit does not fall into the above categories and will have a removal of 6 minutes from the Indoor plan and 6 minutes from the Outdoor plan per day.

We have agreed it should not be necessary for full scale revisions to ensure the reduction of the hour; however it is recognised that adjustments can be made based on local knowledge and through local variations to the working days across the week taking into account the variations in attendance patterns.

In the first instance, the centrally derived categorisation will be shared with RM Delivery Leader’s & CWU Divisional Representative’s. This data will then be jointly shared with the RM Operations Manager and CWU Area Delivery Reps in order to oversee the activity within their respective areas.

We have agreed that the process will commence as soon as possible and with a target completion date of Friday 29th June. The work needs to be concluded by this date in order to provide 3 months notice of any attendance time changes to individuals, which is in line with the National agreement in regards to the LAT product impact.

We have also agreed within the joint statement that there will be signed agreements in place for all units on what has been agreed and that these will be forwarded to the respective Operations Manager and Area Rep.

Where either party is unable to agree, the matter will be progressed and resolved by means of the IR Framework as soon as possible, as we want to ensure that all Units have plans in place to introduce the one hour reduction from October 2018 in order to achieve compliance with the Agreement, but more importantly we progress onto the wider discussions with Royal Mail on the New Delivery Agreement in line with section 19.3 of the Guiding Principles National Agreement including further reductions to the working week.

Any queries to the content of the above, please contact the Outdoor Department, reference 230.03, email address: outdoorsecretary@cwu.org.

Yours sincerely,

Mark Baulch
CWU Assistant Secretary

LTB 329 18 – CWU RM Joint Statement Shorter Working Week Introduction October 2018 MB (2)

RM_CWU Joint Statement_Shorter Working Week Introduction October 2018

BRANCH NAME CHANGE MIDLAND NO.7

Branches would wish to know that further to the statutory NEC meeting on 31st May 2018 it has been agreed that Midland No. 7 Branch change their name to North Staffordshire Postal Branch. The name change was agreed by the members of the branch at a General Meeting held on 20th December 2017.

The contact details for the Branch are now as follows:

Jason Cornwall

Branch Secretary

North Staffordshire Postal

CWU Union Room, Lindsay Street, Hanley, Stoke on Trent, ST1 4EP

Email: branch.secretary.mid7@gmail.com

Tel: 01782 285833

Any queries on the contents of this LTB should be sent to the General Secretary’s Office gsoffice@cwu.org.

Yours sincerely

Dave Ward

General Secretary

18LTB336 – BRANCH NAME CHANGE MIDLAND NO.7

View Online

Stand up to Racism/Unite Against Fascism counter demonstration – Saturday 9th June

On Saturday 9th June Stand up to Racism/Unite against Fascism are organising a counter demonstration to oppose the march organised in support of jailed former English Defence League (EDL) leader, Tommy Robinson.

There is growing concern that Robinson’s case is being used to build a new UK Far Right movement and the CWU, which is affiliated to Stand up to Racism, supports the counter demonstration.

Details of the counter demonstration can be found on the link below and we encourage branches where possible to attend and advertise our opposition to the Robinson March and to all Far Right groups who will be in attendance:

https://www.facebook.com/events/253178521918366/

Any queries on the contents of this LTB should be sent to the General Secretary’s Office gsoffice@cwu.org.

Yours sincerely

Dave Ward

General Secretary

18LTB333 Stand up to Racism – counter demonstration

View Online