London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East and have access to Premium Chat. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
JB I’m sure we do have different views on the desired outcome. Hence the inclusive way I phrased my post. We can be hopeful of a different political context even if we are hoping for different things.
DerekR I do agree but think we may have differing views on the desired outcome.
JB I would have thought everyone could agree that the current political situation is undesirable. A Government with a majority of minus 45 is about as useful as a chocolate fire guard.
DerekR I also agree with your post with the exception of the political aspect! I think it is a fact that the urgency of most mail has decreased significantly over last 5 years. I personally can only think of the very odd occasion when I have been waiting for something to drop through the letterbox. I would have actually have actually preferred to go down the road of 7 day deliveries if the volumes demand and it is completely commercially viable but being honest I think your scenario is much more likely.
Some good points DerekR.
It is distinctly possible that the review will result in recommendations to modify the USO. The most likely outcome would be proposals to reduce the service obligation to allow Royal Mail to deliver regulated products 5 days a week rather than 6. The CWU will have first hand experience of the likely implications because that is what happened in Jersey a few years back.
Royal Mail has very little competition in the delivery of regulated products and the way Ofcom approach this could, and should be, expected to encourage an increase because promoting competition is one of the things they are legally required to do.
It is therefore quite possible that any proposals that come out of the Ofcom reviews will be opposed by Royal Mail and the CWU for different reasons. In any event they are unlikely to be made formal requirements of regulation until well after the next General Election at which time the political context will hopefully be very different.
Ispy I have just added the extracts from Ofcom, that is my understanding that they have brought forward the review work, although it doesnt red totally clearly but does say update Q3 Oct -Nov 19 is my understanding. Full report here
madasaballoon I think you are wrong, are you sure? These are extracts from Ofcom annual plan Royal Mail efficiency review below for your perusal:
We will carry out a review of Royal Mail’s efficiency. This work will give internal analysis us more insights into the likely future sustainability of the universal postal service. We intend to provide our latest view on the sustainability of the universal postal service, in our Annual Monitoring Update of the postal market. Update Q3 2019/20
3.27 In light of the continuing decline in the letters market and broader changes in the parcels’ market and customers’ expectations, we propose to enhance our monitoring of Royal Mail. Annual Plan 2019/20 12 We will bring forward some of the work we had planned to undertake as part of our next review of the regulation of Royal Mail which, as we set out in spring 2017,22 we intended to undertake by 2022. 3.28 In the next financial year, in addition to our current work programme, we will: • Carry out a review of Royal Mail’s efficiency. This work will give us more insights into the likely future sustainability of the universal postal service. We intend to provide our latest view on the sustainability of the universal postal service in Q3. • Seek to understand the needs of postal users better. We will carry out research to review the extent to which the postal market is meeting the reasonable needs of users in light of changes in the market, in particular the growth in online shopping and continued decline in letters. We will assess implications arising from changes in postal user needs. We plan to publish preliminary findings in Q4.
Accepted and an error on my behalf, regarding USO.
Yep you are probably correct but that aint what the regulator or Royal Mail are looking at unfortunately
Mad, it would actually be more beneficial for RM to increase the USO to 7 days a week in order to keep abreast of the competition.
Ispy the USO is up for review next year as announced by the regulator. The one thing that Royal Mail and the CWU were always joined up on was that we both opposed reducing the USO as it would clearly be an open door for the competition and would reduce profitability as customers would be lost there is absolutely no doubt about that. It is suicide to reduce the service to a 5 day delivery when the competition deliver 7 days a week
Can one back to you in your last 2 posts in mng. As gotta hop now to be able to fully reply, as got to drive now to pick family up
I promise I’ll reply in mng though.
I'm not completely clued up here.
But I thought that the USO was up for revision this month? Am I wrong?
And the problem with you "missing things", is that some might hang on your every word.
I've been called out for it, but I can't remember who by. Any ideas?
So what you are actually saying now, is that RMG do not intend ending the USO. As alluded to by Mr Back on the video I watched this morning.
But you are now believing the CWU. Correct?????
I make many comments about rmg on here. Sometimes i may miss a imho. As clearly i dont have a date of the end of uso, but everyman and his dog know it is inevitable.
Look at rmg 5 year strategic plan. All cwu 21 accusations are assumptions. No where on the rmg 5 year plan, do rmg also say they are ending the uso. But your union believe rmg want to end uso, so clearly cwu think the writing is on the wall too.
But you have made a statement, correct?
Unless you can back that up, you really should say IMO.
What i'm saying is, that in your desperation to shore up your investment in your mind, you're are trying to convince others that the USO has, or will soon, be gone.
Have you got any concrete proof that the USO will no longer exist in the future. Be it near or far.
A simple question. If the answer is yes , provide proof. If it's no, then be big enough to admit your post was misleading. WRONG!
your fellow mate derek, even thinks the uso will be up for change in 3-4 years. As clearly economics is changing and so is privatisation and Rico as a plc competing force, will want to be delivering 14 times a week to the urban areas, whilst being funded in less deliveries to the rural areas, especially in conjunction of fibre broadband being installed in homes.
End of day your a plc now, you lose money and no union can save you. If you believe terry pullinger can run your business at a profit,then go with that.
I'd be more concerned with the recent starters who may not have a job should this happen.
Or maybe they'll get paid a small severance fee (VR), because they haven't been there long, and be offered re-employment delivering parcels from 3pm until 11pm.
New contracts as well.
Getting paid per parcel? I'm sure the GURU of delivery, AKA, wolvesposty, would love this role. Or could enlighten all here is this is a possibility.
All IMO. Or is it???
I Spy (with my little eye)
I wonder if the competition will be shaking in their boots when Royal Mail reduce the service from 6 days to 5 days. They will still be delivering 7 days a week, great idea, yeah lets reduce the service that will show them you really could not make this up. And people on here actually supporting that strategy absolutely amazing
Your part post 20.37 ""The USO will disappear soon""
When exactly will that be? How soon is soon?
I think you are misleading people here!
The USO isn't going to disappear over night, consultation periods are very lengthy and any major change proposal is likely to be heavily contested and take many months if not years to come into effect, and then the implications of the change have to be managed.
Revising delivery structures at all delivery offices and sorting arrangements at all Mail Centres and then dealing with the resultant workforce impacts isn't an overnight job.
At a cautious estimate I would think that getting signifiicant changes made to the USO and implementing them is a 3-4 year exercise at least. If it is done against a backdrop of an attritional relationships with the workforce it could be very costly too.
Derek,- Due you see terry pullinger running a successful profitable rmg business, with his vision and leadership and no tax payer money behind him.?
The USO will disappear soon, as technology is clearly reducing the need for 6 days a week uso service in every part of the country. Common sense tells you with competition and technology the consumer will not lose out that much and no way will the regulator pressure the USO service as time goes by.
So it goes back to my point and rico 5 year strategy is correct and needed. If rmg employees dont play ball, then there will be massive compulsary redundancies sadly.
You cannot afford to employ 140k staff with high single digit costs, with the competition around.
Fruit I wouldn't bank on it if I were you. The USO commitment is a hefty safeguard for front-line jobs.
RMG finds it difficult to take out costs at the required pace in the face of sharp drops in volume, especially after strike action where service recovery action is required.
In the short to medium term at least Shareholders ought to expect cuts to dividends and the amount of cash generated by for investment in the business.
because it requires
who knows quinny - its fast moving door numbers in short term on brexit positive/negative news . I think overall positive but t will be choppy and get out of the kitchen if it gets too hot.
Medium term - the rmg workforce do have to start working with management on their 5 year plan and allow natural redundancy of retirements and leavers, which rmg have promised in their plan. If the posties take the side of the paranoia cwu, then the market forces will sadly decimite them and shareholders may survive liquidating some of the nav.
Its time for employees to decide who needs to run the business for the long term of it. As mkt has value on ukpil of zero at moment and thats with 140k of employees. Something has to give either high single digit costs on ukpil (which is staff costs) that rmg have to pass on in prices and be uncompetitive or there is an engagement to truly improve productivity, to get a true return on capital for employees and shareholders.