A letter of 10/01/13 from the CWU Assistant Secretary Simon Sapper to me reads ...The Central Counties & Thames Valley Branch has laid formal charges against Mr Colin Jarvis under the terms of Rule 14.
Okay fair enough. Then Simon Sapper goes on to state ...Copies of the correspondence from the charging branch are attached. Which is untrue, false, a lie. No such correspondence from the charging branch was attached and/or accompanied the letter of notification. All that was included were copies of Rule 14 and the Bye-laws which govern.... Both of which, incidentally appears to have undergone some significant changes during 2011 / 2012. I wonder why? I wonder if the whole CWU membership was consulted on those significant changes made to the CWU rulebook and by-law by a closed group of white senior CWU officials?
Okay fair enough. Then Simon Sapper goes on to state ...Copies of the correspondence from the charging branch are attached. Which is untrue, false, a lie. No such correspondence from the charging branch was attached and/or accompanied the letter of notification. All that was included were copies of Rule 14 and the Bye-laws which govern.... Both of which, incidentally appears to have undergone some significant changes during 2011 / 2012. I wonder why? I wonder if the whole CWU membership was consulted on those significant changes made to the CWU rulebook and by-law by a closed group of white senior CWU officials?
This is not, unsurprisingly, the first time that the CWU's NDC and the officials therein have made untrue, false and wholly disingenuous and dishonest submissions within correspondence to me. e.g. In letter of 30.03.2012 NDC official Simon Sapper states: ...Obviously the NDC is not a legally qualified body, so it can only bring to bear the judgement and experience of its lay membership; but again it seems to me that if a lay body has been deficient in some regard....
A full-time trade union official of many many years standing, who sits on the CWU's NEC describes himself and his NDC colleagues as and I quote ...not a legally qualified body... and implies that these full time CWU officials are ...lay members.
Somebody, please please please have a little peek at Simon Sapper's trade union official's profile on the CWU website and that of his NDC colleagues and tell me whether you, the reader, considers those full time professional union officials to be ...lay members and/or part of the CWU's lay membership ?
Still not to worry, that's par for the course for how some CWU officials choose to carry out their trade union duties and obligations in law. Not very dissimilar from a great many BT line management and BT HRBP management. That is to say - white people protecting white people protecting white people. Whilst BME members and employees keep their heads well down and hidden, to cowardly, unprincipled and frightened to do the right thing and stand up and be counted.
When I rejoin the CWU c. 2013/14 I will, no doubt, be ordered to appear in front of the NDC on the charges laid against me by the CC&TV. As in: ...should the charged member rejoin the CWU at some stage in the future, the NDC (i.e. its lay membership, yes?) will revisit the situation at that time.
But first, I have the extremely serious matter of judicial proceedings of a criminal nature brought against me, to address. After which I will exercise my right to peaceful protest in respect of particular and specific trade union members and/or particular and specific corporation's employees.
No comments:
Post a Comment