EMAIL AND WEB DELIVER SHARPEST BLOW TO ROYAL MAIL FORTUNES

Night Tonic · Post by **Night Tonic** » 04 Dec 2008, 18:29

I'd be more impressed if we had input from someone else from the 5000 members theres supposed to be. Whenever I log in its the same 10-15 people, month in month out, saying the same old tired thing. Whenever you DO get anyone who does at least have a reasonable grounding, particularly Fozziebear, you all put your fingers in your ears. Maybe thats what Ward and Hayes did during the negotiations.

Post by **dvbuk55** » 04 Dec 2008, 18:38

Night Tonic wrote:I'd be more impressed if we had input from someone else from the 5000 members theres supposed to be. Whenever I log in its the same 10-15 people, month in month out, saying the same old tired thing. Whenever you DO get anyone who does at least have a reasonable grounding, particularly Fozziebear, you all put your fingers in your ears. Maybe thats what Ward and Hayes did during the negotiations.

Well at least we are employed by Royal Mail at present and therefore have valid input of the circumstances we face today - you're not another spanner dangler are you?

Tman · Post by **Tman** » 04 Dec 2008, 18:47

Well at least we are employed by Royal Mail at present and therefore have valid input of the circumstances we face today

-

Hmmmmm....you sure about that (that's if I'm reading it right; it IS ambiguous in it's illiteracy

).

you're not another spanner dangler are you

Again you go on about this. I'm beginning to think you were one of the ones who wasn't good enough all those years ago, and had the old "never mind son, not everyone has got what it takes, but there's a bike and a pouch with your name on it here in RM" speech...

Post by **dvbuk55** » 04 Dec 2008, 18:56

Tman wrote:
Well at least we are employed by Royal Mail at present and therefore have valid input of the circumstances we face today
-

Hmmmmm....you sure about that (that's if I'm reading it right; it IS ambiguous in it's illiteracy ).

you're not another spanner dangler are you
Again you go on about this. I'm beginning to think you were one of the ones who wasn't good enough all those years ago, and had the old "never mind son, not everyone has got what it takes, but there's a bike and a pouch with your name on it here in RM" speech...

Nope, I'm afraid not - I wasn't good enough to be a grease monkey, just the usual run of the mill labouring tasks for me for the last forty odd years. I don't have a complex about what I can or cannot do or feel that what I do has any bearing on my ability - though you obviously have. I'll bet you came top of the class too - I am not worthy

Night Tonic · Post by **Night Tonic** » 05 Dec 2008, 10:38

Well clearly the other 5000 aren't either as we never see them. Either there are 5000 earwiggers or they don't exist, and if its 15-20 fighting for the cause, McDonalds may be the best option.

Post by **dvbuk55** » 05 Dec 2008, 11:40

Night Tonic wrote:Well clearly the other 5000 aren't either as we never see them. Either there are 5000 earwiggers or they don't exist, and if its 15-20 fighting for the cause, McDonalds may be the best option.

Funny you should mention that - we're going there for our christmas lunch from work

BELIAL · Post by **BELIAL** » 05 Dec 2008, 22:05

Now if you said pique, well

Night Tonic · Post by **Night Tonic** » 06 Dec 2008, 00:39

I'm not lambasting your point of view, just the lack of new voices. If I logged off for a month and came back, it'd be the same names saying the same things when I came back. The CWU seem to have given up altogether from what I can see so I can never quite work out why 'rank and file' even gets a mention now. I'm as adverse to power bullies as anyone else but this is like picking over the bones 12 months after the battle is over. I know thats the feeling where I work and I presume in many other DO's. I must admit I mostly log in for Norberts bits and pieces as they're often cryptic (and he won't mind me saying that) and a good read.

Email and the web IS killing the business and although Ebay might be helping a bit, even thats on the way down now. People don't want to spend, including advertisers and like any business thats losing money, it'll shrink - same as volume. I've seen this business go through many changes. We still wore caps when I started. I am definately not delivering as much mail as I used to. Lot of junk yes, but nowhere near as much mail. The weight may well be the same, especially with recorded and catalogues, but weight isn't even on the same graph as profit.

Big Daz · Post by **Big Daz** » 06 Dec 2008, 05:08

The 15-20 figure is actually more, as like me they are saying what everyone in their delivery offices are saying, so when I say i get 4 bags a day compared to 2 bags in 1991 on a virtually identical deliverey route and mail levels are not going down another 70 people agree with me.

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 06 Dec 2008, 11:22

A question was asked on here during one of the perennial threads concerning mail volumes. The question, from memory, if mail volumes are rising as “pouch carriers” claim why would Royal Mail claim they are falling.

Well after long consideration I have come up with a list. However, in no way should this be seen as a list of actions that RM Senior Managers have either endorsed or are actually carrying out. It is a hypothetical list in response to what was I hope a hypothetical question.

1.If senior managers are contemplating a Management buy out when we are privatised the company will cost less it we are handling less mail overall. The same goes for the % we handle against that which rival operators handle.

2.If budgets are based on volumes then a reduction in volumes will result in smaller budgets.

3.If head count is based on volumes then when these are falling they can be used to reduce head count.

4.If we are going to be privatised our market price will be lower if we are in a market where volumes are falling and where our share of that falling market is also falling.

5.If we are to be broken up and various parts sold off then again falling mail volumes will result in a cheaper price.

6.Falling mail volumes leads to falling revenue which means its harder to fund the USO. This therefore strengthens the argument that RM need help to provide a 6 or 5 day USO.

7.Failing mail volumes would mean that the value of colleagueshares (which are based on the perceived value of the company) would go down.

Weakness in this position if there is a real decline in volumes:

1.If Local Managers bonuses are based on a reduction in budgets, and if mail volume is falling then their budgets and bonuses will be squeezed so why would they support a volume is declining picture if its not true. Of course they could offer better bonuses by changing the qualifying parameters.

2.If there is year on year growth in volumes how are they able to falsify the figures. However, in theory this would be an easy task due to the amount of units in which counted and the size of the numbers involved.

3.If there is no real decline in mail volumes why are independent companies and bodies confirming the decline. It would have to be a massive conspiracy if they were in collusion with RM Management.

Questions that should be asked:

1.If there is a reduction in volume how did we make a profit after a loss when the posted decline between the 2 periods was 1-2%.

2.If there is a reduction in volume can the increase in weight brought about by PIP explain the apparent increase in weight that we carry.

3.Why do the profits reported by Royal Mail have such major differences year on year. The “Yo-yo” effect as described by one member.

4.What are managers bonuses based on.

5.If we have a declining market and falling revenues why are bonuses apparently increasing.

Post by **dvbuk55** » 06 Dec 2008, 13:26

This is all based on statistics of course and if the statistical input is wrong then the conclusions are also wrong.

You have raised a number of good points and I am sure Nightonic will have some sort of rebuttal at hand, unless he has signed off for a month of course.

axeman · Post by **axeman** » 06 Dec 2008, 17:59

it's not only e-bay there are plenty of firms to buy of on the internet so not quite true that internet traffic in packets is going down butis increasing evermore upward and has been for some time it's certainly not on a downward spiral

norbert · Post by **norbert** » 06 Dec 2008, 19:44

dvbuk55 wrote:This is all based on statistics of course and if the statistical input is wrong then the conclusions are also wrong.

You have raised a number of good points and I am sure Nightonic will have some sort of rebuttal at hand, unless he has signed off for a month of course.

having been in a Industry where there have been senior managment buy outs - at a ridiculously cheap price - £100,000 each , they did later become millionaires as Del Boy used to say ; by selling on again - I take my hat off to you for getting to the absolute bottom of all this and it will most probably cut some pro RM / Hellmail nonsense out

Let's just say some people MAY ! have been accused of barking up the wrong tree but they were not far off the scent either , mistrust in RM is justifiable - that's not some deranged conspiracy theory from the far left .

Senior Management have been accused of wasting two years with endless union bashing and trying to turn staff against the union , then another two years in a privatization bid and the mandatory panic thereafter . :lfo has thrown his dummy out more than once and is leaving a defeated man .

Then you've got to look at the attitude from :lfo & :cfo "s sycophants - " these packets are just " granny parcels " - Grandma seems to send a lot of them !

heapsy · Post by **heapsy** » 06 Dec 2008, 23:11

axeman wrote:it's not only e-bay there are plenty of firms to buy of on the internet so not quite true that internet traffic in packets is going down butis increasing evermore upward and has been for some time it's certainly not on a downward spiral

I second that my friend. I work in a very busy office and the packet situation is horrendous.

Stormproof · Post by **Stormproof** » 07 Dec 2008, 05:26

How can packets be down?

Our Callers office has gone from a space 15' x 10' with 3 lengths of floor to ceiling racking to a space of 15' x 40' with at least 8 lots of racking and its still not enough.