Member Info for Talk2Much

The whole USO argument is getting very frustrating. The CWU saying RMG want to "undermine the USO" - that looks to me like it couldn't be further from the truth. It was Ofcom themselves who, a couple of years ago, said that the vast majority of customers would be just as happy with a 5 day letter service as a 6 day letter service. Parcels under the USO at the time were only a 5-day service - I've not checked to see it that's still the case.
With letters continuing to be in decline, I would say a 5 day service is very workable, and could also make structural change much easier. It won't exactly cost people jobs as there are so many vacancies, and the attrition rate would quickly resolve any surplus.
Imagine - loads of posties get the opportunity to work Monday to Friday, but then you can offer jobs with rotating days off or simply a different structure to deal with a 7-day parcel service.
People are moaning about being unable to find a workable solution, what would be so bad about a solution like this?
Those happy to work weekends and later hours can do, those wanting to work Monday to Friday can do.

Isle
I could get overtime instead of a day in lieu if I really wanted to. My job is not my life. I'm not saying I couldn't do without the cash, I'm just not about to take it in these circumstances. It's bad enough that when I turn up at offices I get accused of doing it for the £1000, which I'm not even being offered. Weekends are for family and football for me. Aside from that, when I'm working within my contracted hours, I do what my employer asks of me, since they pay me.
I do get a sense that they're trying to trigger a hostile reaction from me . Sorry to disappoint.
And there are very few non-ops managers. It's why non-ops get trampled on by the business on a routine basis. There would not be a lot of money on offer across the entire business - and non-ops don't work weekends so they're hardly going to do that now with an offer designed to incentivise that will only antagonise.

Isle
Yes, I've been offered the vouchers and a day in lieu but I have better things to do with my Saturday and I'm reluctant enough to cross the lines under instruction on any day. In the meantime, my ops colleagues will get there £1000 or £1500 just for doing their job - that annoys me.
I don't think the business is going the best way about this, but I think it's deliberate. I believe if they had canvassed staff for those willing to change hours or work Sundays etc, there would have been enough happy to do that to satisfy RMG's requirements. Instead they've told everybody what they want with no leeway.
I don't think there's a level from OPG to middle management who are happy with how this is going. The business is on a trajectory and for once the CWU appear powerless. Time may change this, but it very probably won't.

For the angry posties (and I'm not saying you don't have a right to be), the discussion boards on royalmailchat.co.uk are ideal. Mostly like-minded people who will support each other and not get into the sort of nonsense we see here. I know some of you guys use it since I've seen some of my material on this forum turn up on the site. I'm no more of an insider than the next RM employee, but as a manager I find using the royalmailchat forums really helps to get a handle on how the OPGs genuinely feel and, more interestingly, what they base their arguments on.
An awful lot of the recent posts suggest that the employees don't give a damn if they bring the company down with them. Imho the company won't die. There's value in the shares in GLS, and negative value for RMG. Split them up and I'd be keen to hold them both. GLS will bloom and RMG will be a phoenix from the ashes. The OPGs won't have any of the luxuries they have now, but the business will still exist. It has to.
Apologies... a long way from my usual tone but it's Friday so I've had a glass or two...

Teslo - a great and very valid post. I've just been watching the CWU emergency meeting. Members were suggesting that the CWU "didn't see this coming" but the 2 Dave's argued that they knew it would happen.

The CWU basically plan to escalate action - so I can see shares getting even cheaper. Did somebody give the CWU the script to get RMG sold and they still chose to follow it? They've already fallen into the trap of carrying out IA which gave RMG the chance to rip up old agreements, and now it seems they're hell bent on an all-or-nothing approach which, in my opinion, will leave them with nothing.

RMG are playing the game quite well. People look back at Rico and how he tried to do it, and he didn't get the approach right. This *looks* beautifully orchestrated by the senior management, with the CWU being good enough to step on every bear trap on the way through.

In the unlikely event that the CWUs counter measures work and RMG decides to pay people more without demanding change and efficiency improvements, the company is as good as dead. They're losing money now and it won't improve without adapting, and the CWU don't want that.

It's all "in my opinion" and I don't play with trolls so please, I'd rather agree to disagree then get in some of the flames that go on in here :) .

It would be a planner's job for sure, Dynamo. But a planner would normally use all the right tools to understand the work required and build an office duty set to cover that. The "revisions" being talked about are a simple re-write of duty structures in an office to make sure the office spends less. I don't know how this is supposed to work if there's no factual information being used to do this, but can understand why managers would be reluctant to do such a thing. RMG used to do proper, thorough, structural revisions in offices which were, largely, successful in reducing costs. Last year they tried to race the process in hundreds of offices and consequently, as has been pointed out, failed to make any savings as a result of the revisions. This appears to have shattered the company's faith in a process which used to work well (albeit was time consuming) and led them to doing what I've heard referred to as a "paper exercise to pretend they're cutting costs".

RGPostie - the PDA OA data can be used to "have a conversation" but not to take somebody down the conduct code. It's always seemed strange to me. I take your point on PDA OA also being available to review current routes, but when the data shows so many walks finishing earlier than scheduled this points to a rebalancing of work as many routes have scope to have work added to them. I'd prefer to avoid an argument on this because there's enough of that on this forum already. If managers and posties use PDA OA to its fullest capabilities then office revisions would stand a much better chance of working and saving money whilst also making sure everyone's workload is fairer.

Apologies - I was trying to capture as much as possible. It will all be in writing in full somewhere soon anyway.
The point that "Millions invested in new technology but legacy agreements stop us from using data to improve performance and safety" is a great one. We have vehicle telemetry that tells us about driving practices including speeding, but cannot use the outputs of this to discipline staff. We have PDA OA that can tell us when somebody isn't moving or hasn't moved in ages and we can't use this to discipline staff. We could also use the PDA OA online to let customers know where the parcel is but guess what - we can't use it. All because CWU agreements prevent this. It wouldn't be unreasonable for us, as a modern employer, to use all the information available to us to help improve performance an safety, and I think part of this is what they are aiming to do.
The Industrial Action has given RMG the right to make changes to agreements and deploy change by executive action, and I think this will take a lot of power away from the CWU in the workplace. They'll still be there to support and represent employees but won't be able to dictate to the business in the way they have done in the past.

Interesting times. A change in the relationship with the CWU may ease any concerns DK has too.

Further update to come later today. around 12:15
CWU talks haven't made progress in 5 months and industrial action is ongoing
Need to break the impasse, losing £1m a day, need to transform the business
Proposed to take the talks to ACAS - up to the CWU to respond
We need to change the way we work with the CWU to make faster progress and reduce costs
Want to modernise the way of working with the CWU:
CWU given notice on a number of agreements
Want to consult on a new relationship
Need to move away from the system where CWU can veto/block change
Will continue to recognise CWU
CWU will still represent colleagues
Will consult and negotiate with changes & trials & new ways of working
IR framework is outdated and slows down progress
CWU should not be negotiating overtime, leave, etc
CWU should not be delaying trials and veto new initiatives
Millions invested in new technology but legacy agreements stop us from using data to improve performance and safety
CWU IR structure is costly and complex. Agenda for growth states that in IA periods RMG can use executive action
Bringing to an end parts of the agenda for growth and changing the structure of reps and agreement structure

RMG commit to be the best employer with best terms and conditions, no zero hours contracts
......
Sounds like RMG plan to push on with changes regardless. CWU members will not like this at all - oh wait, that's most of the staff.

Managers have been invited to a conference call this morning at 08:30 with "an important business update". I can only assume this news will be with the market soon if it's relevant...

I realise this post is almost half a day old, but I thought it made very interesting reading:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/08/25/time-royal-mail-call-bluff-militant-union-leaders/
I looked back over the agreement and read this:
7 Exceptional Circumstances
7.1 The Employer shall be entitled to notify the CWU at any time that any or all of the
Protections will no longer continue, if any of the following exceptional circumstances
apply:
.
.
.
e) if there is national-scale industrial action (in the form of a strike or action
short of a strike) which has been authorised at national level by the CWU,
namely industrial action which either (i) involves employees in the majority
of operational workplaces across Royal Mail Group Limited; or (ii) involves
employees in an integral part of the operation whereby taking action will
have, or is reasonably likely to have, a similarly disruptive effect.

So tomorrow's strike effectively gives RMG the right to change quite a lot. That may also support DK's move because RMG may soon be able to revise the Mtsf (redundancy terms) and write different contracts for new entrants among other things...

JB - valid points regarding financial returns of strike action. Back in my days as an OPG I never quite grasped the whole IA thing. Having worked in tough environments like retail and hospitality before RMG, I was blown away by the terms and conditions and couldn't see what the fuss was about sometimes. OPGs who have been with RMG for may years don't appear to have an understanding of the real world around them. There are not many employers who try to design entire office revisions around a finish time that will allow their staff to complete the school run. Having children is a choice, and to expect your employer to do everything it can for you, even when it flies in the face of good business sense, reeks of entitlement. I have children. Sometimes I can take them to school, sometimes I can't and my wife might (if she's not working) or maybe my parents, or maybe I'll put them on a bus. Such is the nature of my job. Anyway - I'll move on before it turns into a rant!

As for the USO - I'll put my conspiracy hat on (although this isn't wildly far fetched). Some time ago research was carried out by OfCom that hugely emphasised the fact that around 96% (may even have been higher) of people and businesses would not miss Saturday letter deliveries. OfCom can't change the USO, but I'm pretty sure ST is trying to persuade the government to do so. The fact that we are loss making and saying that this is partly a result of the continuing fall in letter volumes will add weight so ST's case. Reduce our USO for letters to Mon-Fri and we might make money once again so you won't need to renationalise a failing service. Running with the high levels of vacancies as we are, a reduction in the USO would mean much less of a likelihood of redundancies - so are we planning ahead? All new contracts I think include a clause about Sunday working, and we know 7 days a week parcels are what RMG is looking towards.

And Anger - you're suggestion that I contribute more is gratefully received. I try to be less emotive in posts (although my use of "entitlement" earlier will trigger some one here) and usually wait until I can write something that I consider to be constructive. Also, I work on an RMG laptop during the day and have to step away to my own computer when posting here :) .

Phunt - I'm not saying that for certain. Under normal circumstances most of our profit comes from Q3/Q4. Our first result aren't usually as bad as what has been reported, so whether the same turn around is achievable or not will remain to be seen. Personally, I'm concerned that business lost during these strikes won't come back to us and that will knock our Q3 revenue hard, making it much more difficult to recover from the losses at this point.

First thought is, if those of you that hate one another and each other's opinions took the decision not to react to one another, this board would be a much better place.

That aside..
I believe in the figures that state we are losing 1m a day. The simple facts are that traffic and therefore revenue has fallen, but our costs have not. RMG is very good at working efficiently when it is busy - it is nowhere near as good at reducing costs and working efficiently when mail volumes are low.
Some of the issues with cost are, imho, of our own making. Running offices with high levels of vacancies (and there are a lot like this) does not help them to save money. It complicates managing the indoor and outdoor elements of the job - covering a 6 hour vacancy won't become an hour each for 6 people, it will cost more. As much as you can argue that people aren't managed effectively, it is very difficult to do so. I've been in offices where the CWU rep has told staff not to return to the office if they finish work early as they'll be sent out with more work. End result is dozens of staff all arriving at the office exactly on time and the office needing to pay overtime for work which could have been done as part of the normal working day.
As for the cost of strike action, there are a few sides to this. Firstly, yes there is a people saving by not paying OPGs. However, you're using managerial grades to cover some of the work which means you're paying more for it and also affecting time scales of any projects those managers are involved with. The roll over of work after strike days actually sees us more efficient on the return because, as I said earlier, when we're busy we're more productive. This means we won't spend as much on overtime as the work would have cost on the day (overtime rates are also lower than the standard hourly rate once you have done over 10 hours). The biggest cost to RMG is the loss of business, much of which we will struggle to win back for some time if at all.
Inevitably, as traffic increases through Q3 our productivity and revenue will once again increase. The strike could have a lasting impact on how much our revenue will increase in Q3, but under normal circumstances our busy periods help pay for our quieter periods.
I could go on, but what I'm saying will probably get lost in the flame fest that this forum appears to have become recently.

I've continued to follow this board even in the absence of seeing any posts from me. I do a lot more reading than writing but as an RMG employee of many years and, of course, a shareholder, there is (usually) some quite interesting and healthy debate on here.
My personal view right now is that the shares seem undervalued but I also don't believe we've seen the bottom yet. There is a tremendous amount of unrest amongst employees both at CWU and CMA level, and the business is pressing forward with its agendas on all fronts before saying (for example) "We've already deployed the change so why bother balloting now?".
The overwhelming majority of CWU grades seem very keen on IA, as they currently believe this is the only way RMG will seriously consider changing their offer. CMA grades in operations are also considering IA because of the reorganisation that has resulted in a lot of upset. These are challenging times but these things all get resolved one way or another eventually. I only wish I'd got out when they were around 600 because I'd be buying back in at these prices with all that spare cash!

Very frustrating finding my way through the posts to read anything worthwhile.

The £200 lump sum (payable in July) is an advance because the business says there are too many calculations for the 120,000 affected staff to be paid the rise quickly. The pay rise will eventually be backdated to April and any corrections will be made in August payslips taking the first £200 payment into account.

I always considered the 72p charge a bit ridiculous when RM's competitors rates for the same service tend to be part of the postage cost. For RM, parcel collection such as this should be at virtually no cost to them whilst giving them a shot at a corner of the market they currently have only a very tiny slice of. Every day, a postie will either have a delivery to make, at which point they can collect the items, or they will be delivering very close by. Add the dedicated parcel delivery routes that they will be introducing, and more vehicles will be available to pick up larger volumes if necessary whilst they are out delivering.

I'm eager to see how many of the general public will be using the high street, etc again when we have all got so very used to having everything ordered and delivered using online services for most of the past year. A trip to the shops is overrated if you ask me :)

JB, I read this as he has increased his personal holdings by 8%, as opposed to buying 8% more of RMG.

Ahhh lots of challenge around the efficiency of van sharing. Being well aware of how many RMG employees are on here, I accept the criticism. I shall clarify and expand a little, if I may.
Van sharing in normal conditions, and certainly in the conditions at the time it was initially deployed, is a very efficient way of working, and certainly cheaper than buying twice the number of vans. The inefficient element of shared vans revolves, for the most part, around the larger parcels that cannot be delivered on foot. My point was that shared vans support "...getting parcels and letters delivered together as much as possible, which is the most efficient way", and I stand by this for parcels that can be delivered on foot. If you are taking letters to a door and can carry a parcel with you, then better to go up that path once than use one person to deliver the letters and another to deliver the parcel. The challenge to shared vans currently is the number of larger parcels that have to be delivered by van. We know the business has realised this because they intend to strip out as many of these large parcels as possible and place them on dedicated parcel routes. If a passenger has to stand around and wait while the driver delivers larger parcels then I wholeheartedly agree, this is the cost of two peoples' time and is indeed very inefficient.
Split out the larger parcels onto dedicated routes, use shared vans as they were intended back in the day when RMG handled far fewer large parcels, and I would argue that they are still an efficient way of working.
Thanks for reading :)

Fair point teslo. No matter what the results, I think the likelihood of a dividend being considered before RMG make a good full year profit is very slim. I'm not sure I'd fancy buying in right now, as the shares appear to be jumping on some sort of assumption that the increased lockdown will boost profits. We all know it boosts income, but whether RMG can keep a grip on the costs is another matter entirely. Shared vans have always been the key to getting parcels and letters delivered together as much as possible, which is the most efficient way. The lockdown means shared vans are no longer being used, so the parcels which were already expensive to deliver end up costing more.
Personally, I'm not tempted to increase my investment and, if anything, I would lean towards taking some profit. I'm in for the long haul though, as I am optimistic of a long term increase, maybe even dividends in 22/23??