Does Royal Mail underestimate how much experience it has lost?

[postslippete]

On the shop floor I genuinely wonder if RM fully understands the operational impact of losing so many long-term experienced staff. In our office the managers appear to be relying heavily on these new starters and many of them are now working long hours, mainly because experience and speed often takes years to develop. Duties that seasoned posties complete are now stretching well beyond the usual spans, leading to increased overtime and delivery excess.

Mistakes are also becoming more common with mis-deliveries, missed collections, parcels not being scanned and items brought back to the office unnecessarily. None of this is a criticism of the new starters as they are being asked to learn a job at pace on reduced terms and under constant pressure - but it does highlight a big flaw when it comes to cost-saving. If RM believes that it is saving money by replacing experienced staff with cheaper new contracts then the hidden costs of increased overtime, re-deliveries, customer complaints and failed targets need to be acknowledged.

On top of this is the churn with over half of those recruited on the new contracts have already left the business which means repeated costs for recruitment, training, uniforms and equipment. Being paid significantly less than experienced colleagues for doing the same job doesn't exactly inspire any sort of loyalty or long term commitment. Are RM genuinely saving money here or just shifting visible costs into invisible ones while eroding service quality? At what point does the business recognise that experience, stability and workforce morale are assets rather than liabilities?

Are we going to look back in 5 years and realise when the knowledge base was stripped out in the name of "modernisation" only to find that the service is slower, more error prone and actually more expensive to run?

[Clappedoutpostie]

I have been saying all of this for years now. The company will do anything to save a £1 even if it costs them £10 to save it. The people running this buisness don’t know the buisness.

[derekm]

Our office has lost about a dozen or more experienced posties who had about between 10/20 years service to be replaced by new starts who were lucky to last about a week before they packed it in for something easier.

[Deadly]

Royal Mail don't care as short term (which is all they care about) they are saving money emplying new starters over long serving staff.

[funkflex55]

The new owners probably don't care because as soon as the assets are stripped the business will be sold or declared bankrupt. Or maybe not but the current business direction doesn't look like it's actually being managed by anybody that actually cares about it.

[postmanplod2025]

its time for the cwu to represent the legacy contracts not right the way things are going, new starters being favoured now while we are being sickened off

[Hyrrokkin]

Of course they know of the impact of losing so much experience - they just do not care !

High turnover of staff is the Amazon business model - which RM have copied.

[ted_e_bear]

They're probably still fully convinced of the misguided opinion that it's a minimum wage job, anyone can do it eh, come on you get something with an address on and you take it there.

[Mr Rush]

High turnover of staff is the Amazon business model - which RM have copied.

In the same way cargo cults have bamboo control towers, bamboo radios, and bamboo runways. The loot will arrive any day now.

[jimmynailsalive]

Boss actually said this evening they had overestimated the delivery rate of the new starts and reason office was struggling.

[yubin282]

Some days my office has nobody on the IPS. They fill the office with new starters doing OT on the IPS (i know they have to learn somehow)

I then clear down the mail, sort it then walk back to IPS to re-sort the missorts everyday. My personal records is 71 items missorted.

[TopperGas]

Of course they know of the impact of losing so much experience - they just do not care !

High turnover of staff is the Amazon business model - which RM have copied.

Have Amazon been going long enough to lose experienced staff or are they just continually replacing inexperienced?

[TopperGas]

Royal Mail don't care as short term (which is all they care about) they are saving money emplying new starters over long serving staff.

Are they actually saving money if the new starters have to be now paid OT to complete the duties the legacy staff had no trouble competing?

I'm struggling to think of one new starter in our DO who can compete a duty like the experienced postie they've replaced.

[Smoothbackground]

I'm struggling to think of one new starter in our DO who can compete a duty like the experienced postie they've replaced.

Yeah, I’m struggling too. Really struggling. I definitely can’t “compete a duty” like the experienced posties I replace, that’s for sure, and I think other new starters will be in the same boat.

By way of example, the firms duty I’m covering over peak is normally done by a legacy staff member who regularly leaves four yorks of oversized for it on a daily basis. They’ve taken him off it for Xmas as they’re wanting the duty cleared by one person, not five people picking up bits and pieces. The normal dutyholder is now getting upset watching three of us newbies rotating on his duty and all three of us — one of whom is 67 years old — having no issue clearing it daily, even finding time to do a few LATs in the afternoon to take us up to our finish time! We definitely can’t complete it like be does!

So yes, experience can lead to knowledge and efficiency, but too much experience/job bitterness can actually be counterproductive and lead to massive inefficiencies, and more often than not it’s a defeatist or “I can’t do it, it’s too much” mentality.

[abuch1980]

On the shop floor I genuinely wonder if RM fully understands the operational impact of losing so many long-term experienced staff. In our office the managers appear to be relying heavily on these new starters and many of them are now working long hours, mainly because experience and speed often takes years to develop. Duties that seasoned posties complete are now stretching well beyond the usual spans, leading to increased overtime and delivery excess.

Mistakes are also becoming more common with mis-deliveries, missed collections, parcels not being scanned and items brought back to the office unnecessarily. None of this is a criticism of the new starters as they are being asked to learn a job at pace on reduced terms and under constant pressure - but it does highlight a big flaw when it comes to cost-saving. If RM believes that it is saving money by replacing experienced staff with cheaper new contracts then the hidden costs of increased overtime, re-deliveries, customer complaints and failed targets need to be acknowledged.

On top of this is the churn with over half of those recruited on the new contracts have already left the business which means repeated costs for recruitment, training, uniforms and equipment. Being paid significantly less than experienced colleagues for doing the same job doesn't exactly inspire any sort of loyalty or long term commitment. Are RM genuinely saving money here or just shifting visible costs into invisible ones while eroding service quality? At what point does the business recognise that experience, stability and workforce morale are assets rather than liabilities?

Are we going to look back in 5 years and realise when the knowledge base was stripped out in the name of "modernisation" only to find that the service is slower, more error prone and actually more expensive to run?

I have seen how RM treat loyal long term posties. (A cheap template written card. )I'm not surprised nobody stays that long anymore. Are you?...