Royal Mail - managed decline?

[Tman]

Ah, the old 'mail going through the machines' argument. So catalogues, recordeds, Specials etc aren't classed as mail now?

You're being obtuse. The vast bulk of RM letter traffic consists of business mail of various types, bills, advertising, whatever, all generally machineable mail and that's declined, no question. Going off at a tangent and mentioning whatever sort of letter you may shove through someone's door,doesn't help.

What about DSA, is that not mail as it doesn't go through a RM machine?

Who says it doesn't go through RM machines? Looks like you're arguing from a point of misinformation there.

I'm saying deliveries now take longer regardless of a drop (if there is one) in small letters, as we take more weight overall - meaning the article's suggestion that we soon may not need a door to door postal service is rubbish.
The original post didn't say anything about machined mail did it? So we're not talking about that at all. We're talking about a supposed 10% drop in mail and parcels, which is written in the article. I assume that means overall.

Ah, the old "more weight" argument.
Are you seriously arguing the point that because you're carrying more weight then volumes haven't dropped? {you are, aren't you? }
What are you saying then, you're not arguing the toss generally, but specifically to one article?

I don't often reply to these posts, and no it's not just based on my opinion - I take it you actually look around this forum? Or it only the people on here who are doing more work, and everyone else has it easy? I'll ask you the question - where do you get your figures from? It's either a sheet of paper or a computer screen, and you obviously believe them - so whether my reply was lame or not it was still correct

Nope, still lame, still wrong. Nothing's changed because you would like to believe that "paper" or "computers" have it wrong.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

TMan you still miss the point, well actually you just dismiss it without understanding it.

The 10% volume down is being used by Management to extend walks and duties that's why some don't accept it. They cut when volume is down as in letters, but they don't put in resources to cope with the increase in packet volumes. Thats why we can and do put the Volumes argument in with bag weight, its a major thing for us, especially when Posties are being sent home without pay when they can't complete, yet RM ignore the increase in Packet, non machinable mail, recordeds, specials, etc.

[Tman]

"TrueBlueTerrier"]TMan you still miss the point, well actually you just dismiss it without understanding it.

You've got that around the wrong way. I understand perfectly well the argument you and the rest put up against RM's claim of declining volumes, but the problem is that you and the rest are saying "this claim is wrong" and backing that rebuttal up with an argument which although may well be true, is irrelevant TO THE ORIGINAL CLAIM.

{I put that in caps because otherwise I'll get the usual reply of "it may well be irrelevant to you but it isn't to us etc etc"}

I know how much mail my MC processes every day; I know how much mail my area processes every day; if I was so inclined, I could check out how much mail your parent MC processed every day, and each of those reports shows mail decreasing to an alarming extent.

[Cue- reports can be fiddled, blah blah blah comments here]

You and every other hard-working DO postie may dismiss the 10% claim and keep your heads firmly buried in the sand bucket, all the while continuing with the mantra about heavy bags, etc, but you'd be wiser to face the unpleasant fact that there is a contraction in the mail being posted, and so wittering on about packets parcels specials recorded and all the rest of that jazz ain't going to help keep us all employed long-term.

Basically if you're taking out two, three,or ten times as many packets etc as you were three years ago, good for you, but there's still no correlation with the diminishing mail volume. The second fact doesn't invalidate the first.

So as an answer to your sentence at the top of the post, I'd say it's you who dismisses without understanding (or wishing to understand)

[Debbie]

DirtyHarry - can't comment about the specific case, but there is nothing wrong with planning ahead. My post is more of an 'if' scenario than a 'when' scenario.

Mailman71 - I have never worked as a postman so maybe you know some secret postman's technique that I don't. But it seems like common sense to me that while you might get 2 items at a time through a letter box, you might not get 10 through a letterbox at once, and it might not be that easy to get 10 letters in one handful. Even if you just take 5 seconds extra at each house, that means 3000 extra seconds overall - or adding 50 minutes onto the round. So working the other way, surely a 10% drop would indeed be significant if taken over the whole round.

Even if there is less letters to deliver. Flats and packets are up which mean more weight . more bags and more door knocking. which also means your out longer. ( and a pain in the bum when people are out and we have to write out 739s).
I personally am delivering more now than i ever have been and earning less than i have ever earned. ( 19years service and fit to drop) .

[bandit650]

Can i ask a question,Have any of you checked the traffic figures for your office,The reason i ask is when walking past the managers office what do i see but the traffic figures for the last week i asked for the same week for last year and guess what the mail is up by 20,000 for the same period last year.Got any clues anybody!

[OnAFlyer]

Ah, the old 'mail going through the machines' argument. So catalogues, recordeds, Specials etc aren't classed as mail now?

You're being obtuse. The vast bulk of RM letter traffic consists of business mail of various types, bills, advertising, whatever, all generally machineable mail and that's declined, no question. Going off at a tangent and mentioning whatever sort of letter you may shove through someone's door,doesn't help.

What about DSA, is that not mail as it doesn't go through a RM machine?

Who says it doesn't go through RM machines? Looks like you're arguing from a point of misinformation there.

I'm saying deliveries now take longer regardless of a drop (if there is one) in small letters, as we take more weight overall - meaning the article's suggestion that we soon may not need a door to door postal service is rubbish.
The original post didn't say anything about machined mail did it? So we're not talking about that at all. We're talking about a supposed 10% drop in mail and parcels, which is written in the article. I assume that means overall.

Ah, the old "more weight" argument.
Are you seriously arguing the point that because you're carrying more weight then volumes haven't dropped? {you are, aren't you? }
What are you saying then, you're not arguing the toss generally, but specifically to one article?

Are you actually reading my posts?

The reason isn't mail volume - 1 letter or 3 letters for a house, well it doesnt really make a lot of difference. (In fact I would probably agree that there are less 'standard' letters now than there were a year or two ago).

So what i'm saying is we have more weight regardless of mail dropping (if it has). It may be an 'old' argument to you but I don't see any answers forthcoming. Can I do the whistly face now?

And i'm arguing about this article because this is the thread it's in And in general because you won't believe anything posties say regardless of how many times you read it.

I don't often reply to these posts, and no it's not just based on my opinion - I take it you actually look around this forum? Or it only the people on here who are doing more work, and everyone else has it easy? I'll ask you the question - where do you get your figures from? It's either a sheet of paper or a computer screen, and you obviously believe them - so whether my reply was lame or not it was still correct

Nope, still lame, still wrong. Nothing's changed because you would like to believe that "paper" or "computers" have it wrong.

Nope, not lame, not wrong. You believe because letters are down that posties have less work to do. When is it going to sink into your head what posties are telling you?

As i've already said (and you've ignored) I am quite happy to believe that small letter volume is slightly down. I haven't denied that, and it's in several of my previous posts.

What I am saying (and again you are ignoring) is the fact that RM (and you) is using these figures in order to justify posties doing longer walks/collapsing etc - when in actual fact the upturn in packets. bulky/heavy catalogues, recordeds/Specials etc means the average delivery takes longer now than it ever has done.

It really is that simple. Please let it sink in this time.

[Phantom]

Is Tman and Night Tonic on their crusade again of falling mailing volumes? well it looks like it eh?

Haha well i won't get involved in this one....I'll just keep cutting off cos i have so much DECLINING mail to deliver!

Over to the 2 mail centre workers......................

[OnAFlyer]

Is Tman and Night Tonic on their crusade again of falling mailing volumes? well it looks like it eh?

Haha well i won't get involved in this one....I'll just keep cutting off cos i have so much DECLINING mail to deliver!

Over to the 2 mail centre workers......................

You obviously don't get it, so i'll explain in simple Tman terms.

Letters are down 10%, I know because it says so on my computer and sheets of paper I get. What that means is that it takes a postie 10% less time to deliver a walk, hence we can give them more work to fill in that spare time.

See, there's absolutely nothing wrong with a bit of Royal Mail logic - the figures add up perfectly

[Tman]

Nope, not lame, not wrong. You believe because letters are down that posties have less work to do. When is it going to sink into your head what posties are telling you?

OK, I'll bite.
Show me where I've ever said about posties having less work to do.
{Shame about your post above though, it just shows you haven't got much of a point to make if you resort to all that}

[South East Postie]

they may claim the service has never been better with all these figures and such. the fact is 90% of customers i talk to want one thing - early post. not in the afternoon as is commonplace these days. i find it embarrassing to deliver so late. all down to the ridiculously organised missort run. i have had a few jobs and i have never known a business to discourage efficient service and punish those who are good at their jobs.

[Tman]

"Phantom"]Is Tman and Night Tonic on their crusade again of falling mailing volumes? well it looks like it eh?

You've got it wrong Phantom, I couldn't give two wossnames whether you believe it or not. After all, what do I care? Loads of new CSS machines coming in,( which incidentally puts even more postie jobs at risk of being made p/t) so mail volumes dropping ain't my concern.

I would have thought though that facing and preparing for the inevitable would be more beneficial than ignoring or denying it, but as I say, what do I care...?

[axeman]

Tman yet again has not factored in the direct bags that get sent to do's that dont figgure on his stats sheet he sends out every day so there you have it if you can't see it it isn't there is it tman

[BELIAL]

Mountains again for a Tuesday. The dodgy bean counters can talk themselves blue in the face but if it doesn't match what you actually deliver they will always look like big fat company liars,who believes any figures produced by RM anyway

[Kevo00]

I'm not a professional journalist and unfortunately don't have time to check absolutely every source I use. The 10% fall per annum in letter and parcel traffic claim was actually sourced from the BBC website, here http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8296660.stm - this is made perfectly clear on my blog, which the post above was copied from. So if you disagree with it, write to them, although that appears to be what Royal Mail told them. I would assume however that Royal Mail know how much post they are handling as they presumably know how many stamps they sell a year. As for the internet shopping argument, I was under the impression that Amazon were moving away from using Royal Mail. However you can't expect that traffic to last forever, because people already prefer to download music and computer games in many cases, and books and films will follow.

SE Postman - good to hear someone agrees that the service provided by Royal Mail is very poor to the user, and its presently worse than ever. Recently my employers in central London sent a letter to my house in South London and it took two weeks to arrive. Its my mother's birthday in three weeks, she lives in Durham - I don't think the card would arrive on time if I posted it even now. Perhaps I will scan it in and send it to her to print out, so at least she has something on time. Is the system really this inefficient, or is it just because you guys are on strike all the time? The bus industry, among others, learned the hard way that strikes can drive away customers.

Belial - my apologies for my ignorance, perhaps you can come and do my job and do well on the first day. Or do you just not like that an outsider can work out what your 'trade' does so easily? As it is I am actually learning quite a lot by reading this and I'm not too big to admit it.

Debbie and others - if you are placed under so much physical strain by the increased volume of parcels etc., then why is there no occupational health training to avoid you working in a fashion that would cause such strain?

[Phantom]

"Phantom"]Is Tman and Night Tonic on their crusade again of falling mailing volumes? well it looks like it eh?

You've got it wrong Phantom, I couldn't give two wossnames whether you believe it or not. After all, what do I care? Loads of new CSS machines coming in,( which incidentally puts even more postie jobs at risk of being made p/t) so mail volumes dropping ain't my concern.

I would have thought though that facing and preparing for the inevitable would be more beneficial than ignoring or denying it, but as I say, what do I care...?

Well it should concern you, new machines, declining mail volumes, no need for loads of mail centre staff then eh according to YOU!