RMCtv : Universal Service reform update - Message from Matt Newman

[POSTMAN]

Here, General Counsel, Matthew Newman, gives an update on Universal Service reform. You can also watch this film with Matt in conversation with Director of Corporate Affairs, Jenny Hall.



Matt writes:
I wanted to give you a quick update on the current debate regarding Universal Service reform. This is our legal requirement to delivery to all 32 million UK addresses six days a week.

As you may be aware, a few weeks ago our regulator Ofcom launched its report into the future of the Universal Service. It made clear that modernisation is essential to protect its future, to meet changing customer needs and to maintain the one-price-goes-anywhere service.

Why change is necessary
We are faced with the reality of declining letter volumes which have fallen from a peak of 20 billion in 2004/05, to seven billion today and will likely drop to around four billion in five years. On average, we now deliver just four letters per address, per week.

The number of addresses in the UK has also grown by four million. So, we are walking down more streets, six days a week, but actually delivering mail to fewer and fewer houses. As you know, we lost £419 million last year and no business can survive those kinds of losses on an ongoing basis.

Discussing the changes
Ofcom has been holding some public feedback sessions where various stakeholders, including Royal Mail, are invited to discuss their views. Many of the stakeholders share the view that change is necessary. The question seems to be not shall we change but, what do those changes look like?

We will respond to Ofcom with our own proposal by the deadline of 3 April. To inform our response, we have been speaking to thousands of customers as well as businesses who use our services, consumer groups, the NHS, Unite and the CWU.

It’s important to remember that any final decisions on changes to the Universal Service are ultimately down to Ofcom and Government. Any changes will likely take 18-24 months for us to implement, from the point any change is agreed. However, it’s important that we put forward proposals that we believe will work best for our people, our customers and our company.

We will keep you regularly updated as the debate progresses and will communicate our proposed solution in the coming weeks.

[BenacreNick]

18-24 months to implement change ?

I doubt that very much.

[Barnacle]

So he says that letter volumes have fallen from ‘a peak of 20 million in 2004-2005’. The devil is in the details. What were the volumes in the years preceding that peak?

[SpacePhoenix]

It’s important to remember that any final decisions on changes to the Universal Service are ultimately down to Ofcom and Government.

They got that wrong, it's ultimately down to parliament as a change of law will be required.

[Ren Hoëk]

So he says that letter volumes have fallen from ‘a peak of 20 million in 2004-2005’. The devil is in the details. What were the volumes in the years preceding that peak?

Not just that. What were the staffing levels?!

[rubberbond]

So he says that letter volumes have fallen from ‘a peak of 20 million in 2004-2005’. The devil is in the details. What were the volumes in the years preceding that peak?

Well given what the volumes have been like in the previous month at least , somebody is kidding somebody else, because from where I stand they are not down at all , I haven’t finished on time for at least a month if not more, the stupid later starts haven’t exactly helped either.
I don’t believe any figures or statements coming from royal Mail , it’s just manipulation.

[Philbag70]

18-24 months to implement change ?

I doubt that very much.

I think he meant 18-24 hours...

[Barnacle]

So he says that letter volumes have fallen from ‘a peak of 20 million in 2004-2005’. The devil is in the details. What were the volumes in the years preceding that peak?

Well given what the volumes have been like in the previous month at least , somebody is kidding somebody else, because from where I stand they are not down at all , I haven’t finished on time for at least a month if not more, the stupid later starts haven’t exactly helped either.
I don’t believe any figures or statements coming from royal Mail , it’s just manipulation.

There’s been something a bit whiffy about the numbers for some time now. Their numbers just don’t correlate with the experience on the ground. It sounds really basic, counting, but slight changes in how you count, when and what you count as this thing or that thing, makes a massive difference when the volumes are so huge.

[Moose67]

How come when the figures were upward of 20 million it all got delivered but now it is apparently so low we can't get the job done I think somebody is cooking the books

[enskied]

So he says that letter volumes have fallen from ‘a peak of 20 million in 2004-2005’. The devil is in the details. What were the volumes in the years preceding that peak?

I remember then back in 2004/2005 the peak years. They said our mail was going down.

[Barnacle]

So he says that letter volumes have fallen from ‘a peak of 20 million in 2004-2005’. The devil is in the details. What were the volumes in the years preceding that peak?

I remember then back in 2004/2005 the peak years. They said our mail was going down.

That says it all

[postslippete]

Here is a video with Dave Ward about the USO, Ofcom and Royal Mail


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl2nzIN0-5k


key points

* Ofcom have contributed massively to the declining profits of Royal Mail with profitable bulk mail hived off to competitors. OfCom have taken money away from Royal Mail and given it to our competitors in the bulk mail market which is still very profitable in the UK and allowed them to utilise our network. Then they come along and say they have got to cut the service. It's been a strategy via the Royal Mail board, most of whom have gone now, of running the company into the ground.

* No one sits down and engages with the Union or engages with workers directly on how we can grow the business. What they start with is the cycle of decline and that is a massive concern as it would destroy Royal Mail.

*. Greetings card companies business is growing and we need to look at expanding the role of postal workers and maintaining the USO??

*. The CWU will come up with their own report with a revision for the future

[sindba]

We should go back to de-prioritising DSA mail (anything that isn't sent using Royal Mail postage)

Don't include it in the USO, and give posties a week to deliver it as and when they call at a property, similar to households.

Royal Mail has monopoly power on mail, they should use it.

[Mr Rush]

So he says that letter volumes have fallen from ‘a peak of 20 million in 2004-2005’. The devil is in the details. What were the volumes in the years preceding that peak?

Statistics from The Postal Museum:

*Letters delivered by the Royal Mail, 1920-2010
It was slightly over 20 billion in 2006/7, having hovered around that mark since 99/00 (having shot up from 10bn in 1980) before starting to plunge in 2008 (can't imagine why). They've been bleating 2004/5 a lot recently - presumably because 20 years is a nice round number like £1m a day.

Not just that. What were the staffing levels?!

*Total number of employees since 1854
Hard to pull apart because it includes everything that used to be under the GPO banner until 1970 (largely what went on to become British Telecom), and The Post Office until 2010. Reported figures from Christmas press releases as recorded on this forum are 170,000 in 2007 (indoor and outdoor?), 115,000 outdoor in 2020, and 85,000 outdoor last year. Best guess is a high of roughly 200,000 outdoor between the introduction of the five day week in 1999 and the abolition of the second delivery in 2003.

Conclusion: staff halved, letters quartered, Tracked to the Moon.

[Ozzvaldo]

In terms of staffing levels, my DO had 120 employees (not including management) when I started in the mid 90s. According to my COM, that figure now officially stands at 79......although there are actually less people than this employed in my office because as is the case in many other DOs, RM expect us to manage with non of the annual leave cover/reserve positions filled.