The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring financial educator and author Jared Dillian has been released. Listen here.
I can only see 1 page of posts at a time just now another LSE glitch but having just watched DW's latest 2-minute video he is casting doubt on whether they will put the ballot out. This follows a meeting earlier today with the business and they are wanting assurances from the business that they will get every manager to approach every rep and say they will work together, review every revision, work to restore QoS as per the agreement. Perhaps this is what Henky heard this morning (apologies if not Henky can't see original post)
AngerS it is and I hope we get plenty of detail in the full report. I am also keen to see the updates on automation roll out, integration of parcels. Sick Leave levels. Attrition levels and headcount numbers. Any discussion around USO. Site closures/concentrations. New buildings. Productivity improvements, Detailed volumes of traffic and change of mix. Of course the forward-looking statements will be critical and anyone's guess how the market will react. I am sure there will be lots to digest.
T2k Ofcom have a price cap on 2nd class standard letters and large letters plus small/medium packets up to 2kg/ This is set at CPI and in place from April 2020 to March 2024.
As AngerS says it's a balance between cost and losing business also some customers downgrade to 2nd class if 1st goes up too much.
AngerS as you say the CWU are trying to claim they had some influence on ST's stepping down. Few of their members who comment on FB are falling for that if anything their members are getting even more vitriolic. As a footnote to that my wife met with 2 friends still managing in the business and they both reiterated that is well known that ST was brought into to do a specific task and was fully expected to stand down.
I think the CWU exec were hoping claiming his (ST) departure as some sort of win may gain them a few more yes votes.
I watched the CWU live session (not sure why they do them at this time) obviously it was such good news they couldn't wait until more people could watch and ask questions. CWU saying its very positive and reiterated the agreement being the way forward. Also good to hear how they are going to rebuild the company.
Darbo in parts the committee did make it sound like that. I am not sure it would be able to prove any one individual was personally accountable. As CEO of course the buck would stop with ST.
I am not sure if your holier than thou comment is directed at me but no problem you are fully entitled to your opinion. I only give my opinion based on some facts and experience and I am not responsible for how you perceive them.
Ispy I am well used to someone else having the last word. I can clearly see the picture, and some would do what they could to finish early. If some could clear and still have time spare, why not make it 150 new DPs each? You can see where I am going with that thought. I am reading that hundreds are already at capacity already and physically struggling. Surely it is better to work to have equitable workloads and where needed put in additional hours.
I know that is difficult in practice but surely working towards that is better than saying all of you are getting an arbitory/random level of new work regardless of local circumstance. If we could master measuring and aligning workload it would improve matters. You could also say if we can achieve better alignment and ensure delivery to specification, we could gain more business and grow, and everyone could have a share in profit's say 20% you get the vision. AIMO
Broch if you have access can you say how many. I can't recall without checking if the number is reported to Ofcom. I am sure it is more than the reference to the small number mentioned in the daily service report and the 14 offices listed as most impacted. Whatever the number they need to be improved.
https://www.royalmail.com/service-update
Ispy we could spend all night discussing what would and could work in DO's. I am sure the address management Centre would be delighted if Aplus was updated on a regular basis. Redirections and PAF would also benefit. I know plenty of offices were/are happy to run with vacancies with the blessing of local reps to ensure O/T S/A.
I accept job and finish worked and local deals but like most things when it gets abused it gets challenged. When people demanded 4 hours O/T to do a special one-off urgent business collection that would take 90 minutes top giving the manager no option it's not right. It had to be fair to both parties.
No doubt we could exchange hundreds of anecdotes of what worked well and the areas that got out of control.
The decline in letters and the cost to serve have highlighted the need to change and reign in some bad practices.
Let's hope you are correct in your 100% certainty of a yes vote. I certainly don't share your level of confidence but remain hopeful and fearful in equal measure.
Ispy not sure if you mean revisions won't work now going forward or have never worked, I thought in the past a lot of offices were clearing after revisions. Of course, people work in diverse ways and at different paces with variable volumes and change of traffic mix does make it difficult to make one size fit all. Actuals with local knowledge and a degree of flexibility should at least give a baseline. Not being sarcastic but it is sad you can't get any traction with your idea as you and lower-level managers believe it could work. Cant recall if your office has had a revision recently with CWU input, if the managers agree with your idea not sure why it wouldn't have been considered if it brought about savings and maintained the correct service levels and fits with network plans etc.
Ispy are you still expecting a YES vote?
p.s I have done deliveries and been in scores of delivery offices so have a fair idea of how they work.
Broch yes down to implementation and of course everyone needs to be aiming for the same/agreed outcome. I am sure there will be some managers pushing through changes but how many? I hope a list of these offices will be available to be discussed at the joint meeting. I know it is difficult to assess the number of revisions already implemented or in process or planned but are talking 10% not doing what they should? Every time DW/AF speak the anger and negativity on CWU FB seems to get stronger. I know it is only a snapshot, but it looks like about 95% are saying NO. DW/AF certainly have their work cut out and as I said earlier a no vote would surely mean DW/AF have lost the support of their members.
I am at a loss to see how this will play out.
p.s no further news on the suggestion of using pension surplus to fund an increase to the lump sum.
Broch I agree with you but there is a stark difference between discussing change and agreeing and importantly making it happen. The exec has endorsed the agreement and deployment of the changes with all the accepted caveats. Equally the business must ensure the agreement is happening on the ground as per.
AngerS I hope you are wrong but think you may be right. In that case DW/AF will need to appear to be still pushing for a yes vote (as they were in last video) until they have the joint meeting, and they may at that point say we didn't get the reassurances we wanted so we can no longer recommend the deal. Surely, they couldn't change their stance again and accept the risk of special administration that they were rightly genuinely concerned about a few weeks ago.
Would they really risk that to ensure they stay onside with the no voters and stay in their roles? Is the business happy to go down this route? Is that why some managers are not adhering to the agreement?
I am only voicing my thoughts and opinions as this seems yet another potential twist.
Broch I agree with most of what you say, particularly around customers going elsewhere. I talk with a senior manager whose teams are very close to our major customers and you are absolutely correct, those businesses want certainty around no more strikes and consistent service. Hopefully the joint meeting will move this all forward.
I have just watched DW/AF latest video update; they certainly still appear keen to get a yes vote for the agreement and allege a power struggle in the BOD. I don't think there is much doubt that ST will be going but unclear any change of CEO will change the overall direction of the BOD perhaps it will improve communication/joint working and deployment of the agreement but I think the direction of travel will remain pretty much the same.
AngerS yes lots of external factors influence matters. Financials may help fill in some of the potholes or deepen them. I wonder if the CWU exec are going to use the delay to see exactly what is presented in EoY results and the forum to say things have changed and we no longer support the current proposed agreement. Perhaps they are now seeing a no vote as more likely and if that were the case surely their positions would be untenable, I can't see any good news being presented in the numbers so the previously discussed possibility of special administration is not going to change. IMO
Broch,
It mentions having a joint session with ROD/GM's and Divisional Reps to discuss adherence to the IR Framework and address concerns around revisions already in place. Obviously, the vote will take place after EoY financials so perhaps an opportunity to see if there is any movement in taking from the pension surplus to boost lump sum and to see the latest financial position. Dare I say it also gives CWU more time to explain the agreement.
Redceo that is certainly what I would be doing but seems the news is already out there. I think if it is before the ballot any mention of a severance package will not be well received but will probably already be in his contract IMO. If a successor was announced at the same time as ST's exit it might be seen as a positive.
As always nothing straight forward.
AngerS similar thoughts. It will just be about the timing of ST's exit. Maybe announced at results day. I would be surprised if they don't have it all planned and someone in the frame or a few candidates to be considered. Hopefully, it will be to start the rebuild and move the business forward. I'm not sure what DK has planned but again actions at results may clarify.
Citadel advisors have reduced by a further 0.10% so now below the reporting threshold.
https://shorttracker.co.uk/company/GB00BDVZYZ77/