December 2008 Executive Council Report

[TrueBlueTerrier]

The Fight of our Lives


December 2008 Executive Council Report

Government Review/CWU Campaign


The Government Review on the future of the postal service was finally published shortly before Xmas. No doubt the timing was deliberate. To call it the Hooper Report, after the person who was given the task of producing it, would be to do a disservice to the man himself. Far more accurate to call it the Mandelson Report, with a bit of help from Adam Crozier. Much of it bears no resemblance to the signals sent out by Hooper before publication and some passages are in direct contradiction to what was said in the interim report published last summer. You can almost see where the original text has been deleted and Mandelson’s alternative substituted.


To be fair, the Report isn’t entirely negative from the CWU point of view. It does accept that the Government are going to have to take responsibility for the pension deficit, something we have been arguing for some time now. The details of how they would do this, however, are not spelled out. If the Government just took responsibility for the deficit, then this would give Royal Mail an extra £250 million a year in revenue. If, on the other hand, they took over the entire running of the fund, then this would free up over £700 million a year, money that could fund both RM’s modernisation and improvements to our terms and conditions. The report does say, though, that the changes to our pension scheme that were forced onto us earlier this year were “essential” and that it would be in no one’s interests to take industrial action against them.


The Report also calls for the abolition of Postcomm, again something we have been campaigning for. But the news on this isn’t all good. Instead, it suggests that responsibility for regulating the postal industry should be transferred to Ofcom, the telecomm regulator. What this would mean in terms of changes from what happens now isn’t made clear, so it’s difficult to see how this would benefit us. The way Royal Mail sets out its finances is heavily criticised in that it is sometimes impossible to see where money is being spent and whether services are profit or loss making. We have long pointed out the way management use figures to suite their own ends and would welcome more transparency. The Report, in calling for outside management to be brought in, is clearly of the view that the current lot running Royal Mail are not up to it. That’s something we can all agree to.


Although the Report states that looking at Post Office Ltd (POL) was not part of its remit, it does recommend that this stays fully publicly owned, offering a wider range of services.


The Bad Bits


Unfortunately for us, the Report has far more bad bits than good. For a start, it identifies the CWU as the villain of the piece. It’s all our fault, apparently, that industrial relations in Royal Mail are so bad and it’s down to us that they haven’t been able to modernise as quickly as necessary. Apparently, we’re too good at persuading MP’s and Ministers of our point of view! Nothing whatsoever to do with management putting off buying new machinery, despite having been given over £1 billion three years ago to do precisely that. Our role in future, according to the Report, is to “accept the scale of the transformation required, and show that it can tackle the behaviour and internal processes which at present result in confrontation and obstruction.” In other words, roll over and die. All that management need to do is to “set out its vision for the company in a transparent way, the implications of transformation, the risks of failure, and the opportunities in diversification.” Translated into English, that means, “tell them what you’re going to do.”


The problem with Royal Mail, the Report argues, is that it doesn’t make enough profit compared to other European postal companies. Is this down to the opening up to full competition before virtually every other country? Is it down to the crazy competition rules that hand competitors money on a plate? The massive pensions deficit? Not at all. It’s all down alternative digital media, costing £500 million a year in lost profits (RM figures – you believe them?), RM inefficiency and our members being overpaid and under worked. In a passage straight out of the Crozier hymnbook, the Report repeats the lies about delivery staff finishing three hours before their time and our members being 20% overpaid compared to others in the industry.


And the solution? The Report quotes approvingly of the way foreign postal companies have reduced the numbers of both their mail centres and delivery offices. The French reduced both by half over 10 years and the Swiss did the same in three. It considers that “the UK postal service could operate efficiently with around half the current number of mail centres.” That doesn’t necessarily mean half the existing Royal Mail mail centres either. TNT haven’t been building mail centres around the country far too big for their own needs for nothing. It argues that modernisation (closures) should be completed “swiftly and cost effectively” and accepts that this “will bring a significant reduction in jobs”. Reports that this could be 50,000+ are probably not exaggerated. It doesn’t think that Royal Mail has either the money or the managerial expertise to carry this out and therefore recommends a joint venture with a private company operating in the postal sector. For the time being, it rejects outright privatisation but gives the game away by stating, “This option would only be appropriate and feasible if modernisation had been completed.” So at least we now know what the endgame is.


What is missing from all 164 pages of the Report is any idea of what the service will look like after all this major surgery. All that is offered is a commitment that the universal service will remain on social (stamped) mail and that there will still be a 6-day service. Contrary to what was said in the Interim Report produced in the summer, the final Report also tries to argue that competition, far from threatening the service, has actually brought benefits. “Benefits are already visible for the largest customers. Over time, we would expect both smaller businesses and residential consumers to benefit from choice, a more efficient service and new products.” Quite what they base this on is not made clear and even the Report has to accept that since competition, new products have been few and far between.


The CWU Campaign


The Postal Executive met just before Xmas to discuss our response to the Report. We recognise that if all the recommendations in the Report go through unchanged, then potentially this would spell the end not just for tens of thousands of our members’ jobs but for Royal Mail and the CWU as well. We have a short period of time in which to campaign to prevent the worst aspects of the Report from becoming a reality, 3 – 6 months at most. This campaign will need to be aimed at the policy makers, Government Ministers and MP’s, all groups with an interest in the continuing survival of Royal Mail and the general public. For that reason we agreed to re-set up the “Stand by your Post” campaign. We also agreed to set up a “War Cabinet” at CWU HQ comprising of the GS, DGS(P), head of comms and the Postal Assistant Secretaries and chaired by the PEC chair. This will meet weekly and report to the PEC. For the duration of the campaign, all postal issues will go through this body to ensure a co-ordinated approach. We also agreed to set up similar bodies at Regional level involving Regional Secretaries, Political Secretaries and Field Officers. A National Briefing has been called for 15 January to discuss the campaign with our Reps.


The campaign will have to have two aims. The first will be to expose the Mandelson Report for what it is, a fairly shoddy and flimsy excuse to privatise Royal Mail. We will need to go through the Report line by line to point out the inconsistencies, contradictions and downright lies. We will need to defeat the view in the Report that the price to pay for the Government accepting its obligations on our pension scheme is the part-privatisation of Royal Mail and that what is needed is a dose of TNT. The only thing they can teach us is how they kept competition out of their country.


But defeating the worst aspects of the Report is not enough. If we’re going to win the support we need, we must be able to argue for an alternative. We need to spell out what we think a modern postal service should look like. This must include an agreed last letter time of no later than 14.00 for town deliveries and a restored firms delivery of 09.30 last letter with a second, sweeper delivery. It could also include the provision of a super first class service with an 09.30 last letter time and teatime delivery or re-delivery of packets. Collections should be flexible to suite the needs of the customers, not the company. Enquiry Offices should be expanded and offer more services to act as Royal Mail’s shop front. By raising the issue of the service with the public, we will find out if there is anything else they might be looking for from their postal service.


Mail Centres and the Distribution network should be arranged on the basis of what provides the best service, not the cheapest and machinery introduced to make the service better, not worse. This will inevitably lead to some changes and possible staff movement and job losses. Our members should not have to suffer as a result. Guaranteed jobs for those who want to stay with the transport provided to get them to their new workplace. For those who want to go, a decent exit package plus re-training to qualify them for other jobs. And until they find other jobs, an interim payment for at least three years to keep earnings at the average level of the past three years.


The big question is who is going to pay for this? We must reject the idea that private capital is the answer. Even if there was any going begging, and that’s debateable at the moment, private companies would only be prepared to put something in now if they thought they could take more out later. Part of the funding could come from Royal Mail itself. If the Government takes over responsibility for the pension scheme, or even just the deficit, there would be a minimum of £250 million a year extra available and possibly up to £700 million. If the rules on competition were changed to either remove cherry picking by competitors or make them contribute towards the USO, then this would bring in extra. But the real task ahead is to convince the Government that Royal Mail is more than just any old business. To convince them that it is a service that’s worth saving and that they’re going to have to start putting money in instead of just taking it out. After all, if they can spend hundreds of billions bailing out wealthy bankers, then why not us with the chance to save tens of thousands of jobs thrown into the bargain.


If, through our campaign, we can convince the public that this is a worthwhile aim, then we stand a fighting chance in 2009. What we don’t have, though, is much time left to just sit around thinking about it.


Stopping Royal Mail Management


Even the best public campaign will be ultimately useless unless we can stop Royal Mail’s current slash and burn policy. Our members will lose faith with our ability to defend them and the public will conclude that there is little left to save. Management believe, probably with good reason, that the Report gives them full backing and they are planning to step up their cutbacks. Many delivery offices, already struggling under past budget cuts, were given further proposals on Xmas Eve to take out yet more hours and duties. Past agreements on last letter times and maximum length of deliveries are being torn up in their attempt to save every last penny. Expect further announcements of more mail centre and delivery office closures before long. This isn’t modernisation, it’s murder.


The CWU have always said that we are more than willing to discuss change, but by negotiations and agreement. Management must be persuaded that this is the only way that change is going to happen. Hopefully, this can be done by discussions with us and with a little arm-twisting from those with influence outside the business. If not, then a national dispute in the near future will be inevitable.


Pete Keenlyside

Postal Executive

30 December 2008

[dvbuk55]

Well I noticed a lot of ifs - and the problem is this is all reactive - the writing has been on the wall for the last couple of years and we are as a union now looking for a workable solution? The problems we are facing haven't arrived overnight. Royal Mail have ridden rough shod over a number of agreements and the weakness the union has shown has only strengthened Royal Mail Management.

"Our members will lose faith with our ability to defend them" - well they certainly got that right. There has been little backbone shown in recent years and rather like Chamberlain it has been a campaign of appeasement. Perhaps the biggest indictment is the shock that the CWU feel hard done by when Hooper is suggesting they have been a stumbling block in Royal Mails plan for modernisation. In reality they should have been more like the Berlin Wall. I just wonder if the leadership would have been so reticent in calling for and maintaining industrial action if it had been a Conservative Government in power. I do criticise the union for being involved in a myriad of campaigns which have absolutely nothing to do with the working conditions and agreements that the members face and to be sizing up a situation NOW when the stable door has been wide open and the horse is servicing the mare next door is a little rich for my blood.

I am of course the product of a militant background from the workforce of the 70s, when principle mattered more than political ambition or financial necessity and when the workforce was solidly behind the union because they believed the union had their best interests at heart and actually knew what the workforce faced at the sharp end. Today I am afraid that isn't the case, there seems to be a complacency by the leadership which has led to the situation we find ourselves in and barring a second coming there looks to be little to be done now to rectify what is a dismal situation. Campaign and delay and get the best for the workforce and look for more closures and job losses and

[Big Daz]

It seems again the CWU has been caught out

First there was the big push to have a regulator as they thought it would act as a buffer between them and a conservative government to stop RM being sold off, didnt quite work out that way though did it?

Now we have had the big push for a review and lo and behold it it didnt quite work out the way the CWU thought it would.

Perhaps we need to keep ?

[Big Daz]

However we cant just sit on our hands, shrug our shoulders and say never mind!!!

As Pete says its a fight for our lives!!!

In terms of the CWU impeding change, Mr Hooper seems to have failed to realise RML with CWU backing tried different walk sequencing machinery and then dithered for england on which make of machine to go with

[dvbuk55]

However we cant just sit on our hands, shrug our shoulders and say never mind!!!

As Pete says its a fight for our lives!!!

In terms of the CWU impeding change, Mr Hooper seems to have failed to realise RML with CWU backing tried different walk sequencing machinery and then dithered for england on which make of machine to go with

Well that's exactly what has been happening for the last few years.

How many plans for modernisation have the CWU put forward? How much has the CWU spent on outside sources investigating the figures put forward by RM, how much on investigating walk speeds by an independant source, weights on walks, and any number of factual statistics that are quoted by RM? Iin order to be in a fight you need to know what your talking about and hearsay is not good enough. What it be more than we gave to the Labour Party or less.

[k979aaa]

However we cant just sit on our hands, shrug our shoulders and say never mind!!!

As Pete says its a fight for our lives!!!

In terms of the CWU impeding change, Mr Hooper seems to have failed to realise RML with CWU backing tried different walk sequencing machinery and then dithered for england on which make of machine to go with

Well that's exactly what has been happening for the last few years.

How many plans for modernisation have the CWU put forward? How much has the CWU spent on outside sources investigating the figures put forward by RM, how much on investigating walk speeds by an independent source, weights on walks, and any number of factual statistics that are quoted by RM? In order to be in a fight you need to know what your talking about and hearsay is not good enough. What it be more than we gave to the Labour Party or less.

No political party will serve us nor should they we all should fight our own corner/rights i get postmen/women coming too me saying the union are not doing enough!. They themselves are the union and if any of the expression's of today's foray in to preaching to the converted is to go by we are all wasting our time too many hanger's on ass licker's and yes men and women!. It is for the union too empower the movement and the masses and as the masses are not up to it where do we now stand?. It can only be up to a man/woman of vision that we will see our shining light for our brave new future to empower that vision upon one and all and give us all the strength to hold out too the evil that taketh the light of our life away!.

[Big Daz]

In my view the whole money and poltical parties/politicians lark needs rethinking from scratch with options put to the political levy paying mbrs to vote on.

Then perhaps we can unite and have faith on political expenditure instead of endless debates and arguments.

[Yahoorsur]

'Industrial Relations Summit Meeting – The Hooper Report

In light of the Hooper Report the Postal Executive has agreed that the Union should write to the Chief Executive of Royal Mail calling for an urgent Industrial Relations Summit meeting between the leaders of our respective organisations.

Whilst we do not accept Hooper’s clichéd portrayal of the Union, we are in total agreement that CWU members and Royal Mail will only be successful if there is a fundamental change to the current industrial and employee relations environment.

The CWU is ready and willing to set a new course for industrial relations and will support the modernisation of the company'

The white flag is being run up.IMHO :mfo :lfo :cfo

[stokes11eg]

'Industrial Relations Summit Meeting – The Hooper Report

In light of the Hooper Report the Postal Executive has agreed that the Union should write to the Chief Executive of Royal Mail calling for an urgent Industrial Relations Summit meeting between the leaders of our respective organisations.

Whilst we do not accept Hooper’s clichéd portrayal of the Union, we are in total agreement that CWU members and Royal Mail will only be successful if there is a fundamental change to the current industrial and employee relations environment.

The CWU is ready and willing to set a new course for industrial relations and will support the modernisation of the company'

The white flag is being run up.IMHO :mfo :lfo :cfo

Does moderrnnisation mean even more job losses, and reduction of hours,AND original contracts not bieng worth the paper they are written on?Again ,i am not anti -union, but for the past few years have felt completely let down by the C.W.U.