Member Info for Scampthedog

You want to be careful Pussy-Pie...I reckon he wants to slip you more than just a dirty old trout.

Fruitster: "scamp - tiger told you". Told me? Told me what?

This is not something I have just assumed or plucked out of the air...it was mentioned by RMG itself last night in their latest "Work Time Learning" video.

The company did not pay the statutory amount last time, and it will not pay the statutory amount this time either...and to the best of my knowledge never has only ever offered the statutory amount. Why would it? This is VR -- Voluntary Redundancy you muppets!! Jeez...what a pair of plonkers.

Really? Have you any idea of the cost? No of course not! Well, let me enlighten you. If just 5000 posties took up that offer (my best guess) you would be looking at a sum of over, well over I might add, £200 000 000. Thats right -- two hundred million!! As for the enhanced pension payments, I have no idea at all regarding this...but, again -- a frightening amount of money! I wonder where all this money is suddenly going to appear from?

Comment several minutes ago from Terry Pullinger outside the High Court: (not a direct quote) even if we win today this is not going away...we will carry on fighting...there will always be something else. You lot just don't get it do you: without the consensus of the CWU this is going nowhere...absolutely nowhere. And just to show how the company is now starting to backtrack I have been informed, as of last night, that RMG is now willing to offer Voluntary Redundancy to anyone with over twenty years service and only a couple of years to go before retirement. The last offer was two years full pay plus an enhanced pension -- thats a lot of dosh!! A change in attitude? You bet ya! A couple of weeks ago even this was regarded as just fanciful pie in the sky. Not anymore it would seem. Wonder what else they might start backtracking on? Whichever way...it is all going to cost a lot of money.

HawKey47: "Personally, can’t see the SP moving more than tuppence either way". Wrong!!

DerekR: "Redceo doesn't even know what day of the week it is. He is consistently one of the most useless contributors to follow as for as information, advice and share price projections are concerned". Agreed!!

Quote from Redceo: "Fruit. Agreed the court decision will have an impact but it's small change territory where the SP is concerned". Are you joking, mister? The decision is everything as far as the s.p is concerned...in the short to mid term at the very least. One other thing you need to realize as well: if the Judge finds in favour of RMG today it is not just a question of "yes, I agree, you can have your injunction - goodbye"! He will also give recommendations to both parties...and might only give the Injunction based upon RMG agreeing to "Formal Negotiation". This is not an open and shut case to be resolved in the next several hours. It has to be sorted and sorted soon...otherwise it is just a can of worms getting kicked on further down the road. And anyone who thinks differently about that is totally deluded.

This is how it was all set up: CWU threatened to strike several years ago under Moya the Magnificents tenure - Judge granted RMG an injunction but the put them firmly behind the eight ball and insisted they went to formal negotiation - Sue Whalley (poor ignorant cow) was shoved into the debating chamber - CWU walked all over her - everyone smiling (especially Moya) because strike averted - Moya hailed as a heroine and receives massive golden handshake - Moya leaves - everyone happy!! What I forgot to mention was Moya and Rico, as this was all going on, in secret talks, were discussing and agreeing on all the ongoing actions, and the fact that Sue Whalley was the chosen sacrificial lamb, had no intention of sticking to any of it when Rico took over. Rico comes in - sacks Sue Whalley (sacks most other people connected with 4 Pillars!!) - and within several months announces a complete reversal!! Errr...how am I doing so far?

Its not the CWU who started this uproar. It was RMG who reneged on the 4 Pillars agreements. You need to get your facts straight.

Will look again.

Not arguing that day to day incidents that dictate market forces effect the share price. Have always claimed, and it a most obvious and glaring fact...and should'nt really need stating, that if the strike happens over Christmas then this s.p will fall quicker than a *****'s drawers. Quite simple really. As for people buying into this at the current s.p over the last couple of weeks, and with the terrible threat of a hugely devastating strike hanging over their heads, then I say...if it comes off --fair play!! I am a more cautious creature myself by nature.

Just checked CWU's Facebook page, Isleworth...no mention of RMG offering to go to talks. What it does mention is the court case set for two in the afternoon tomorrow.

If the CWU have released this news, regarding talks, it could be the reason for the slow, sustained rise in the s.p today...I was rather intrigued to know what it was all about. Like I have stated many times before: those in the "know" always hear about it first. If true there will be an announcement from RMG early tomorrow morning. Cannot be a bad thing for the CWU: if RMG commit to full-blown "Formal Negotiation" then they are compelled to come to some sort of binding resolution. However...the Devil will be in the detail here. It will also cost RMG a substantial amount of extra money -- analysts will be busy!

...Yawn!!! And after all that...it comes down to just one thing. Well, one thing regarding the current s.p that is. What some gin swilling, chain smoking, overly educated, far detached, arrogant, pig-in-a-wig thinks about it all tomorrow. And "thats" going to be the final word on "that".

Conceded, in part, Madasaballon. However...I still believe a Judge would include this is his assessment of the situation. How could he not? It is a major part of what actually happened. And on that note, folks, I bid you all goodnight.

Any High-Court Judge is not going to impose a strike injunction against the CWU based upon RMG's protests that a strike at this time of year will both ruin Christmas for their customers and perhaps disrupt a general election. A very childish and stupid claim for RMG to make. Ruining Christmas has nothing to do with it...and the proposal leading up to balloting for strike action was started long before a general election was even ever mentioned. Ridiculous contentions!!

Any imposing of an injunction will only be granted if RMG can clearly demonstrate in court that:-
1. Encouraging posties to openly cast their vote in groups may have compelled or coerced someone to cast their vote differently to what they would/might have done so if being in the secrecy of their own home.
2. The intercepting of "live mail" in transit before arrival to its addressed destination has broken the statutory law concerning lawful obligation and lawful protection of that mail.

This last point is rather awkward if we look closely at it in greater depth...awkward for the people who have intercepted it that is. RMG, even if they don't get awarded an injunction, might decide there are grounds for sacking people based upon: "willfully holding up the Royal Mail" (can be a custodial offence) and illegal disruption/removal of mail in transit...might even be regarded as theft (most definitely a custodial offence!)

A real can of worms this one!!

Two big glaring problems for the CWU regarding validity of the vote.
1. Did each and every postie, concerned in these group votes, personally ask for their letter, containing their ballot paper, to be handed to them directly at their place of work and not have it delivered to their home address? Or were they handed it, without their secret and private consultation, beforehand, by some person or persons acting on their own authority? Thus circumventing their lawful right to a secret vote.
2. Will any Royal Mail manager confirm they gave their permission, if indeed it is the case they are empowered to be able to do so, for the ballot-paper letters to forego the legal requirement of completing the process of delivery, and, therefore, enable the posties to intercept and open their letters at that particular point without completing its lawfully required prerequisite?
Because if the answer to both these questions is"No"! Then the validity of that ballot, before a High Court, will be deemed no also.

Unfortunately, for the CWU, any High-Court Judge is highly likely to declare this vote null and void based upon the voting irregularities that obviously took place. I would not for one minute blame the Postal Executive...the blame lies firmly at the feet of that extraordinarily incompetent "Communications Officer" Chris Webb. If the High-Court Injunction is granted Webb will be gone. Sacked, pushed or jumped, it will, for him, all amount to the same thing...and quite rightly so in my opinion.

Well, well, well...what a complex little web thy weave Royal mail. Lol. And what a b@lls up the CWU leadership has made of all this. Now then, I wonder, which poor sod is going to be held responsible for this monumental c0ck-up? Dave Ward? Err, no. Terry Pullinger perhaps? Errrrr...noooo, I think not. Maybe Chris (heavily bearded) Webb? Oh dear! If it does go the way of RMG, and I do not see any reason why a High Court judge would fundamentally disagree with their contentions, then somebody is going not only to have to fall on their own sword -- but will most definitely be helped upon it! Goodbye, Chris (heavily bearded) Webb, methinks. P.s He certainly does look like some sort of intellectual...does he not?