An Post workers have a Cushy Deal

Santa Claus · 04-11-2005 05:41PM

neacy69 wrote:

tbh i think it wouldnt be christmas without the An Post strike......:D

Yep, It's one of the good old reliables.

Personally i blame neither "de workers" or "de management"...it's de unions that usually cause the problems !

Slutmonkey57b · 04-11-2005 05:42PM

kearnsr wrote:

I worked in Tesco in Lucan years ago. Some one I knew who worked there got caught shop lifting. Red handed and on camera. The union kicked up a fuss saying the shouldnt sack him cause this was his first offence. It was Tesco policy to persue shoplifitng but the jammy git got let off.

Thats just not on

One of the reasons why I dont like unions.

The union was protecting its member from immediate dismissal.

Management made a decision to let him off

they did not have to. They chose to. So if you disagree with him getting let off, it is the manager responsible you should be angry with. I am sure that the management higher up the chain would not be impressed to hear someone backing down over a shoplifiting charge like that.

Santa Claus · 04-11-2005 05:49PM

Just out of curiousity Slutmonkey, are you a union rep by any chance ?

Slutmonkey57b · 04-11-2005 05:49PM

kearnsr wrote:

Since this seems to be aimed at me I'll try and defend my point.

I'm a engineer. Just say every day I desgin 5m long beams then the boss asks me to desgin a 10m one. From the union behind the DART potential strike was reprsenting me they'd ask for more money and I'd be shown the door.

a) we're not discussing the Dart
b) asking for more money should not result in anybody's dismissal.
c) being in a union would protect you from that sort of illegal and immoral behaviour.

It seems to be the norm these days for profesional jobs such as engineers accountants to no over time where as skilled labour such as electricans, plumbers etc get paid over time.
I dont have to do the over time. Its not forced but I do it anyway.

Is this because the nature of work is so different, or because professional employees are not represented by a union that might make sure they get paid overtime like manual labourers are? And according to your above point, clearly not "playing ball" with overtime etc would have you put in a bad light compared to your colleagues, right?

The simple fact is that the public sector isnt run like it is a going concern. Can you say An Post, Irish Rail, the county councils to name but a few give us value for money?

Do Vodafone and O2 give value for money? How about pubs? Or banks? Or landlords? Can you look around your own office and say to yourself "hey, this is the private sector. There's nobody here who just comes in for the paycheck and does no work at all."

Slutmonkey57b · 04-11-2005 05:52PM

Santa Claus wrote:

Just out of curiousity Slutmonkey, are you a union rep by any chance ?

No I'm actually a manager who has dealt with unionised staff. As I said, I'm not necessarily a fan of unions, but I am equally not a fan of employers. What I don't understand is the willingness of workers to throw away the protection and benefits a union can offer them just because employers and the media have programmed them to think that any and all problems of economics can be laid at the foot of the labour movement.

Siogfinsceal · 04-11-2005 05:59PM

they are whinging about not geting a bonus?? get over it lads I say I dont get any bonus and im working for a company who makes millions ;-(

godtabh · 04-11-2005 06:07PM

Slutmonkey57b wrote:

Do Vodafone and O2 give value for money? How about pubs? Or banks? Or landlords? Can you look around your own office and say to yourself "hey, this is the private sector. There's nobody here who just comes in for the paycheck and does no work at all."

The public dont own vodafone or o2. There shareholders do. Shareholders get value for money.

In my job if you werent pullying your weight some one else would be brought in that would pull there weight so I cant see any one just turning up and doing the min to get their pay at the end of the month.

Slutmonkey57b wrote:

a) we're not discussing the Dart
b) asking for more money should not result in anybody's dismissal.
c) being in a union would protect you from that sort of illegal and immoral behaviour.

A) NO we werent but I was using that to make a point.
B)Making unresonable demands might and that was the point I was trying to make.
C)Making resonable demands and being able to make compremises means you dont need a union to make immoral demands on your part. By this I go back to the points I made about Irish Rail, ESB workers.

Slutmonkey57b wrote:

Is this because the nature of work is so different, or because professional employees are not represented by a union that might make sure they get paid overtime like manual labourers are? And according to your above point, clearly not "playing ball" with overtime etc would have you put in a bad light compared to your colleagues, right?

QUOTE]

They are different but are based on the same principle of getting the work done on time and to a good standard.

You get paid a resonable amount based on the how much you can make your company. So what you earn is dependant on what you do.

I dont have to do overtime unless I feel I have to do. Some times deadlines cant be meet with out doing over time. If I do the work in an effiecent manar I wont need to worry about weather I've done enough over time comapred to others as long as the job is done. So your last point I would say your wrong

ballooba · 04-11-2005 06:30PM

Slutmonkey57b wrote:

Again, seeing as I'm not getting an answer here, why is it the employees who are at fault for the failings of the postal system? If there are incompetant employees who the management has failed to take action against, why is it not the fault of the management?

As I said because the unions (read staff who support union) have created a situation where it is nigh on impossible to fire a worker who is not doing their job properly. Also if someone who has been in the company longer is passed over for promotuion then there would be blue murder.

Slutmonkey57b wrote:

According to logic in the private sector, if a company is inefficient and wasting money, then the management of the company is considered incompetant. Yet according to your logic the workforce are also the management of the company.

If you are not doing your job properly in the prvate sector then you will be fired or pushed out.

Slutmonkey57b · 04-11-2005 06:59PM

ballooba wrote:

As I said because the unions (read staff who support union) have created a situation where it is nigh on impossible to fire a worker who is not doing their job properly. Also if someone who has been in the company longer is passed over for promotuion then there would be blue murder.

IF that is actually the situation in this case, HOW did it come about? Again, the management according to you shoulder none of the blame whatsoever. If I were running the company then I would want to know how the unions were handed such awesome power in the first place, eh?

If you are not doing your job properly in the prvate sector then you will be fired or pushed out.

Clearly you haven't been working that long. Come back to me in ten years when, believe me, you'll be able to produce a list as long as your arm of people who haven't been fired because of nepostism, cronyism, or sleeping their way to the top.

boneless · 04-11-2005 07:53PM

vibe666 wrote:

for a nice comparison, a friend of mine posted a CD to me from a village post office in rural Thailand last year. At the same time, he posted another CD to another mate in Cambridge.

Thailand to Cambridge = 3 days.

Thailand to Dublin = 16 days.

How's that for service?

And I live 5 minutes walk from the D2 sorting office.

In fact it's reguarly taken 2 weeks to receive stuff from the UK, inc. a wifi router I'm currently waiting for. will be 2 weeks on Monday.

The mail from Thailand to Ireland comes via London Heathrow. It has not been unknown for Irish mail to be left lying around for a couple of weeks before being dispatched on to Dublin. You cannot always blame the postal workers in Ireland.

godtabh · 04-11-2005 09:40PM

Slutmonkey57b wrote:

The union was protecting its member from immediate dismissal.

Management made a decision to let him off

they did not have to. They chose to. So if you disagree with him getting let off, it is the manager responsible you should be angry with. I am sure that the management higher up the chain would not be impressed to hear someone backing down over a shoplifiting charge like that.

The unions said they would walk out unless he was rehired. A union meeting was called with all staff called in while the shop was open. Pressure was put on the store manager and I believe he had no other option.

The options for management were a) try and call unions bluff and stick to their guns or b) back down in the hope that this would put of other would be shoplifters.

They had there reasons which I wasnt informed off.

Slutmonkey57b · 04-11-2005 10:00PM

That doesn't disprove my point that the management were the ones who made the decision to let him off. If you say they had their reasons that you weren't informed of, then how do you know the union was in the wrong?

Tesco is hardly a hotbed of union activity - why would the union go out on a limb like that and threaten to walk out unless they thought there was a good basis for doing so? If the management were in the right, and the guy was caught stealing, and there was no mitigating circumstance, then why wouldn't they call the union's bluff? Tesco can re-hire 80% of their workforce as they're unskilled anyway, and management can be brought in from other shops. I'm not saying your report is wrong, what I'm saying is that the scenario you're describing makes no sense. I can't imagine why the union would step up like that to protect the employee unless there was some legitimate reason for them to do so.

To clarify: I know of situations where a union _has_ stepped up to stop an otherwise incompetant employee from being sacked - but only when the attempted sacking was made on spurious grounds; ie an employee is on several warnings for a repeated problem, but management attempt to sack them for something that isn't actually their fault. I have never come across a situation where a union has prevented an incompetant employee from being sacked, where management have actually followed their own procedures.

All unionised environments have approved disciplinary procedures (in fact all employers should have them regardless as a matter of best practice) - if management follow the procedures there is no grounds for a union to stand on. The whole issue of "unsackable" employees should never come up - because when sacking someone, it should be based purely on their performance, and according to the established guidelines. If employees are "unsackable", I would be inclined to blame weak or incompetant management.

tk123 · 04-11-2005 10:15PM

From An Post's site :

We regret to advise our customers of postal service disruptions. Despite an offer by An Post to pay Postal Collection and Delivery staff a pay increase of 25%, and a Labour Court recommendation that this offer be accepted by the Communications Workers’ Union, the Union will engage in industrial action from midnight on Sunday, November 6th. However, this action will also affect items being posted before then.

We are putting in place all possible contingencies available to the Company in an effort to minimise the level of disruption to customers caused by this action. However, all services are likely to be affected. In particular, customers should note that the collection and delivery of mail – including next day mail and parcel services – is likely to be significantly disrupted.

godtabh · 04-11-2005 10:46PM

Slutmonkey57b wrote:

That doesn't disprove my point that the management were the ones who made the decision to let him off. If you say they had their reasons that you weren't informed of, then how do you know the union was in the wrong?

Tesco is hardly a hotbed of union activity - why would the union go out on a limb like that and threaten to walk out unless they thought there was a good basis for doing so? If the management were in the right, and the guy was caught stealing, and there was no mitigating circumstance, then why wouldn't they call the union's bluff? Tesco can re-hire 80% of their workforce as they're unskilled anyway, and management can be brought in from other shops. I'm not saying your report is wrong, what I'm saying is that the scenario you're describing makes no sense. I can't imagine why the union would step up like that to protect the employee unless there was some legitimate reason for them to do so.

To clarify: I know of situations where a union _has_ stepped up to stop an otherwise incompetant employee from being sacked - but only when the attempted sacking was made on spurious grounds; ie an employee is on several warnings for a repeated problem, but management attempt to sack them for something that isn't actually their fault. I have never come across a situation where a union has prevented an incompetant employee from being sacked, where management have actually followed their own procedures.

All unionised environments have approved disciplinary procedures (in fact all employers should have them regardless as a matter of best practice) - if management follow the procedures there is no grounds for a union to stand on. The whole issue of "unsackable" employees should never come up - because when sacking someone, it should be based purely on their performance, and according to the established guidelines. If employees are "unsackable", I would be inclined to blame weak or incompetant management.

There had been problems in the shop before hand. A couple of weeks before had some one left he was crucified. A member of management was the ring lead. The police were called and everything. For about 2 months (I joined a few weeks after your man left.

So this wasn’t an isolated incident.

Ste- · 04-11-2005 10:53PM

Siogfinsceal wrote:

they are whinging about not geting a bonus?? get over it lads I say I dont get any bonus and im working for a company who makes millions ;-(

You're talking sh1te. It's NOT a bonus.
It's a national wage agreement that EVERYBODY got, except An Post employees as the company stated it's inability to pay!
They (the company) agreed to pay after it changes work practices. The offer they recieved was not a nice one to say the least as I've heard. Why should these people have to foot the bill for the managements faults ? Likewise upping the price of a stamp is also not the way to do it. Why when John Heinz was CEO was it reported that the company was in profit then when Donal Curtain took over they released figures of being in the red of up to 48 million. Why wasn't this looked at further ?

And a side note one of the other unions the CPSU agreed to make workplace changes and they still haven't paid the staff their full entitlement due from November 2003. They got a lousey 3% backdated from May of THIS YEAR!
The rest "promisied" when they return to considerable profit. When is that likely to be ?

RuggieBear · 04-11-2005 11:01PM

All i'll say is that the Labour court has more or less sided with the Management....that's good enough for me to think the union/workers are in the wrong

godtabh · 04-11-2005 11:49PM

RuggieBear wrote:

All i'll say is that the Labour court has more or less sided with the Management....that's good enough for me to think the union/workers are in the wrong

Does any one know how the Labor Court comes to its decisions? I'm assuming it some arbitration process?

If this is the case then that would be good enough for me too.

parker larkin · 05-11-2005 12:28AM

apologies for not reading the entire thread in full, but I just wanted to state that I fully support the postal workers' strike. A couple of years ago their new management signed a deal with the union guaranteeing that the workers would be paid for their overtime (fair enough). They also were guaranteed, from my understanding, an annual raise in keeping with inflation - so not a raise as such. Again, fair enough.

In the meantime some ridiculous figures about postal workers earning 60K+ have been issued. I don't for one moment believe that the person who sells me stamps or gets up at 6am and tramps around in all weather delievering post earns that much. Actually I know it for a FACT.

Let's look at the reality of the situation: An Post are an monopoly. How on earth is a monopoly loosing money like an amputee looses blood in a Monty Python film? It can't be because there isn't enough work - after all, the staff are working unpaid overtime, estates and towns are getting bigger - thus the postal workers have more work and on the same resources.
Clearly someone is p1ssing money up a wall. My guess would be that the fault lies mainly with the managment, not the men and women who are on the ground doing their work.
Okay the postal system is not perfect - but perhaps this has something to do with bad management decisions: bringing in expensive machines to automatically sort the letters - except, unless the letters are addressed in a certain format the machine can't read them; buying a fleet of supertrucks to be used in the infamous tunnel - except, the tunnel isn't completed, and when it will be - it is too short for these trucks. Not hiring more staff and not paying the staff who are there.

An Post is a large orgnisation; it employs thousands around the country. Most of those people are hard working decent people with families, dependents, mortgages, loans, cars to be taxed insured etc etc; like the rest of us. I don't believe for one minute that these man and women would consider going out on strike unless they felt their backs where to the wall.

Also, let's remember the labour court ruled in favour of the union/workers deal being honoured by the managment.

Padraig Mor · 05-11-2005 12:31AM

Slutmonkey57b wrote:

The union was protecting its member from immediate dismissal.

Management made a decision to let him off

they did not have to. They chose to. So if you disagree with him getting let off, it is the manager responsible you should be angry with. I am sure that the management higher up the chain would not be impressed to hear someone backing down over a shoplifiting charge like that.

Similar story. This year, Irish Rail Cork station. Ticket inspector is suspended for 'irregularities', i.e. he was stealing money. It it is second time being caught. It goes to four arbitration bodies; three say get rid of him. Union reaction? Go on strike to protect this thief! (Cork commuters may remember this). Re your later points blaming management for not firing staff in similar situations - how the hell can they do so if all the other staff strike to 'protect his rights'?

the_syco · 05-11-2005 02:30AM

Slutmonkey57b wrote:

Again, why is that a good thing? Why is that something you would support? Why is it ok for an employer to use scare tactics on people with families who have done nothing wrong?

If you don't do your job, you get sacked, in a private company. In a public company, unless you did something VERY bad, you wouldn't get sacked. I've worked in short term contracts in a few public companies, and there's always a few lazy people who they can't fire.

Slutmonkey57b wrote:

If there is someone "at fault" for high wages in the post office, it is the managers who agreed to the wage levels in the first place, isn't it?

Nope. Its the unions who got them the high wages.

Slutmonkey57b wrote:

Give me a quantifiable analysis of any job that allows me as a manager to predict the "wealth" that the majority of jobs generate and i'll give you a nobel prize for economics. Judging a job's worth by its wealth generation is only applicable to sales.

You do well in a job, cut costs, or get the job done quicker, you should get payed more. If you do the same job, day in day out, take the same time, why should you be payed more?

Slutmonkey57b wrote:

I have had (i'm not joking here) fully qualified electrical engineers who speak 3 languages applying for jobs

They're not from within the EU, sadly. I know this, because if they were, their certs would be valid. Old rule says that unless the cert is from the EU it is worthless. Which is why there are universities in China which are linked to our universities and who get taught by Americans, Irish, etc, so that on the cert they get is by an American or EU country, thus its "legit". The old rule is in place, as they (EU/USA) don't trust anyone outside the EU to have their standards, or that the university that is on the cert actually exists.

Slutmonkey57b wrote:

If, as a manager, I found that employees had signed up to a changed job description and then refused to fill that description, I'd be quite happy to press it as a disciplinary matter. So why haven't the management done that if the situation is as simple as "de workers" not doing their jobs?

If the managers tried to fire them, they'd just walk into the union, the union would call it unfair, and they'd threaten a strike.

jrey1981 · 05-11-2005 04:05AM

I agree with parker larkin - in my book the management are at fault. There is no good reason why An Post shouldnt be making a mint at the moment which would more than cover pay demands and what have you.

In my opinion it needs an injection of a bit of innovation and entrepreneurialism - it needs to get with the times and look at where it can add value.

And anyone who says "privatise the fekcers" will soon be complaining when the cost of posting a letter doubles....they are just being very short-sighted. In my experience the private couriers are not too hot on customer service and they charge a helluva lot more than An Post.

Ste- · 05-11-2005 09:27AM

the_syco wrote:

If you do the same job, day in day out, take the same time, why should you be payed more?

Because of this damn country and the rate of inflation and cost of living goes up every year. They have to agree to a "pay rise" as some of you are calling it. It's nothing but. It's money you lot already recieved. National Wage agreement mean ANYTHING ?

05-11-2005 10:04AM

hang on a second

Have ye any idea of the amount of new houses that have gone up in the last couple of years and the increase in the volume of post??
Of course postal workers are doing more work.

I know my own postman is delivering to upwards of a thousand more houses than 2 or 3 years ago for no extra pay... he's working untill 7 at night most days to do this.
How is that fair??
He has to sort all this mail himself.

I know this is a common scenario.

Supercell · 05-11-2005 10:54AM

Some very strongly worded articles on the An Post website indeed, after reading these, I really have little sympathy for "de workers".

An Post Demands End To CWU Ban on Casual staff as absenteeism soars

Some excerpts

102 Dublin postal staff failed to turn up for work this Monday morning at delivery offices around the City and County. This represents an astonishing sick absence rate of nine per cent among the 1200 postmen and postwomen employed by An Post across the capital.

Except for the immediate pre-Chrismas period, An Post is currently prevented by the Communications Workers Union from hiring casual staff to cover day-to-day delivery staff absence in the Dublin area. Absences can only be filled by existing staff on an overtime basis.

An Post plans and budgets for a sick absence rate of four per cent. Each one per cent rise above this level costs the company €5 million annually.

Service Disruption is irresponsible, unnecessary and unfair.

Some excerpts

Disruption of the national postal service by members of the Communications’ Workers Union is grossly irresponsible and unnecessary. It will only inconvenience customers, further damage An Post’s business and seriously jeopardise jobs.

A Labour Court recommendation, already accepted in full by the company, allows for full payment of the terms of Sustaining Progress, as well as significant productivity/change payments, in return for long-overdue cessation of outdated, inflexible, overtime-ridden work practices in An Post’s mail collection and delivery operation.

A proposal that the CWU end their ban on the Company’s hiring of casual staff in Dublin so that An Post can counteract high levels of delivery staff absenteeism has been long-fingered the union, despite their hollow cries of concern about quality of service.

The national postal service can no longer be held to ransom by a union whose only focus is resistance to change and the preservation of a self-serving overtime culture.

Amazingly strong words to put on a public website, the frustraition felt by management is very clear to see.

Ste- · 05-11-2005 11:45AM

And why are they off work ? Because they are over worked and underpaid.
Hardly good morale building by a company is it ?
102 staff from a couple of thousand workers is a drop in the ocean for them.
Of course the company is gonna release propaganda like that. To try and make people like yoursleves not look at the facts on the table.

Why not take a walk down to the GPO on Monday and ask the postal workers there about that propaganda.

The national postal service can no longer be held to ransom by a union whose only focus is resistance to change and the preservation of a self-serving overtime culture.

That bit is lovely. What about An Post changing their jobs in such a way that they do more work for less pay.
Would anyone stand for this ?

The company is in a bad way at the moment. why ? how can you blame the workers, they do what management tells them to do. It is a case of bad management.

parker larkin · 05-11-2005 12:51PM

I wouldn't work without being paid for it or getting time in lieu for it

I certainly don't think anyone else should do the same.

Also, I will most certainly not be using Irish Ferries now, or in the near future. (but that's an aside)

05-11-2005 01:18PM

Ste- wrote:

That bit is lovely. What about An Post changing their jobs in such a way that they do more work for less pay.
Would anyone stand for this ?

Farmers

That said, the company should be pro active with that absentee rate and pay according to the work done.
They can only do that by charging the customer accordingly.They are not allowed to do so.
As regards casual staff-thats the relatively new worry from unions that full time jobs will be replaced by cheaper casual jobs ie foreign workers.
Unions have to be realistic about this, in that the competition has easy access to that type of labour force if they want it.

This Dispute is solvable by direct intervention by the government.
They are the masters of an post on the publics behalf.
Lets face it-post is effectively a public service.
Ergo public monies should subsidise at least the letters end of it and that means paying the staff a fair wage and it being subject to normal productivity.
If something acceptable is put in place, the rot of absenteeism shouldnt be there and could be dealt with sternly and accordingly.
courier type deliveries should be different and charged at cost plus margin

The company is in a bad way at the moment. why ? how can you blame the workers, they do what management tells them to do. It is a case of bad management.

To be fair, yes but its also typical of a company that doesnt have to operate like private sector companies and have its prices charged relative to the cost of production plus a margin.

godtabh · 05-11-2005 01:41PM

Ste- wrote:

And why are they off work ? Because they are over worked and underpaid.
Hardly good morale building by a company is it ?
102 staff from a couple of thousand workers is a drop in the ocean for them.
Of course the company is gonna release propaganda like that. To try and make people like yoursleves not look at the facts on the table.

Why not take a walk down to the GPO on Monday and ask the postal workers there about that propaganda.

That bit is lovely. What about An Post changing their jobs in such a way that they do more work for less pay.
Would anyone stand for this ?

The company is in a bad way at the moment. why ? how can you blame the workers, they do what management tells them to do. It is a case of bad management.

It’s been said before that the unions have placed a ban hiring of new people. So what do the workers expect? They vote in the ballets the unions hold. So it’s down to them that new staff aren’t hired to help out.

I read into this that if by not hiring new people there is a lot of over time to be done. This over time increases their wages. It was reported in the Independent that some postal workers double their wages with over time.

By hiring new people over times go. It seems An Post workers don’t want this cause their lifestyle will be adversely affected. But there jobs are not sustainable and I don’t think it won’t last.

If the post services is let open to competition An Post workers will lose out most because a new companies operate as a going concern. They may well increase prices but since it is mainly business who use this service (when was the last time some one sent a hand written letter to any one?) they would be willing to pay extra for this service if the service is more reliable than An Post.

As for workers do what management tells them it’s not as black and white as that. If management wants to do something they've to ok it with unions or else things can get out of hand.

I'm sure if managements hand tied with union’s things could be different. On one hand you could be working with a slave driver or on the other hand you could have a decent management that looks after staff while making their profits.

I think that if you have a positive work place productivity will increase and as a result the profitability of the company should increase so it is likely that management will treat their employees well.

godtabh · 05-11-2005 01:46PM

Ste- wrote:

Because of this damn country and the rate of inflation and cost of living goes up every year. They have to agree to a "pay rise" as some of you are calling it. It's nothing but. It's money you lot already recieved. National Wage agreement mean ANYTHING ?

Companies suffer from inflation as well. In order to over come inflation comapines need to increase producitvity. Increae producitvity increae pay which I think is fair. Do the same work get the same pay.

If you do the same work why should you expect to get higher pay?

Ste- · 05-11-2005 01:59PM

A ban was placed on hiring full time staff (I think). They are allowed to recruit casual staff as they have advertised new positions available. in areas such as the DMC etc. So a total ban wasn't introduced by the unions. You haven't asked why the ban was put there. It wasn't so they could get more overtime. That wouldn't be good practice by the union and I doubt they'd be allowed to do it by law.

I'm all in favour of a bit of competition. But with the stranglehold An Post have it'll be hard to break.
As for posting a hand written letter, don't you get birthday, valentine or Christmas cards ? There has been a drop in the volume of hand written letters with the increasing popularity of internet, email etc but it still does happen.

As for management working with the unions before things get approved that dosn't always happen. Typically things get done and the unions have to intervene! Typically some postal workers that work the jobs of two people.

And I have a feeling that the small amount of other staff that will pass the picket on Monday wil be asked to do some of the CWU staffs work. Which isn't allowed.

I think that if you have a positive work place productivity will increase and as a result the profitability of the company should increase so it is likely that management will treat their employees well.

In theory that is well thought out. But as we all know theories and reality differ slightly. Morale in An Post is low. Workers aren't being paid what is LEGALLY owed to them, from 2 years ago. How happy would you be ?

And the money was given to the staff at the national lottery, why ? because they are a slightly different company with a different union then why haven't other unions been paid the full backdated money ?
The CPSU kept their end of the bargain but have still not recieved full payment!

If you do the same work why should you expect to get higher pay?

A) it's not the same work, they as stated are having longer routes more letters etc.

It's not higher pay, it's an increase that was given to everybody else.

An Post workers have a Cushy Deal

Comments