I’d hope that their objections would be honoured. But the non-BNP leaflets would still be delivered by others who didn’t share their particular qualms about this material.
The latter, after all, is what happens normally.
Once again, we need to see the contractual clause in question. But I strongly suspect that they are entitled to refuse to handle items they find offensive, and not simply to refuse to handle any political items they do not agree with.
And nothing in this situation has suggested that the fuckwits shouldn’t get representation: it’s about individual postal workers’ rights to opt out.
Those postmen are using the same fascistic methods they despise in BNP. Not delivering BNP material because they are offended is plain BS.
I believe they simply disagree with their policies. Besides, they are payed to deliver letters, not to be the arbitrators of what is offending and what isn’t.
Why?
For the last frickin’ time, they are using a clause in their contract of employment…and it is nothing to do with letters, but open leaflets delivered to every address alongside regular mail
What difference does it make?
Several people are posting things along the lines of “they’re paid to deliver our mail” - but we’re not talking about mail, we’re talking about the small auxillary money-spinner the Royal Mail operates of stuffing junk leaflets through our letter boxes. And given these leaflets are not sealed, there is a very real likelihood that one from the BNP could be found offensive by some workers.
If this thread was about some company shafting a guy because he signed a contract which allowed the shafting to take place the thread would be full of people saying “It’s the guys fault he signed the contract”
We don’t know yet what the contract actually says but it’s the crux of this matter.
If they are within the contract then they can do this.
Now maybe the contract needs re-negotiating but that another thread 
I’ve searched and can’t find the wording. You’d think that it would be out there in the news wouldn’t you? One side or the other using it to back their position up.
Well done the postmen!
if the BNP want to put leaflets through peoples doors they can do it themselves. that way if it can be proven that it is race-hate literature they can get done good and proper for it.
Even racists should get an oppertunity to have their views aired in an election, but noone should be made to distribute their literature if they don’t want to, which in this situation the workers are perfectly entitled to do.
I’ve managed to find this, which is the wording of the opt-out form circulated by the CWU:
Still trying to find this damn clause…
Which ignores the fact that there is a statutory requirement that all candidates each be allowed to have one leaflet delivered free of charge to every household. Nor can it plausibly be suggested that the Post Office is in any way liable for the content of election leaflets. (There are rules about what can be said in election leaflets, but that’s not a matter for the Post Office). Do you really want the BNP to be able to sue the Post Office for damages equivalent to the cost of posting the leaflets?
That the Post Office has at some stage conceded the conscience clause is really not that surprising. For them it makes more sense, whatever the specific item to be delivered, that a postman or woman gets to make a stand on principle and everyone remains happy than that they are forced to do so and the offending item then ends up in a bin somewhere. It’s the line of least resistance.