Delivery to Neighbour: Amendment to Notification to extend t

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Delivery to Neighbour:
Amendment to Notification to extend trial period

http://www.royalmailgroup.com/sites/def ... ension.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

February 2012


Dear Sirs,

Delivery to Neighbour:

Amendment to Notification to extend trial period

I am writing to notify Ofcom and Consumer Focus that Royal Mail intends to extend the time period
of its on-going trial of Delivery to Neighbour (“the Trial”) for a further three months (until 26 May
2012) on the grounds that:

 Customers have welcomed the Trial and find considerable benefit in it, supported by
evidence of extremely low levels of consumer complaints and opt-outs from the Trial; and
 in light of this, there is considerable benefit in maintaining a live trial area after the busiest
postal time of the year while the trial is formally evaluated and wider use of Delivery to
Neighbour arrangements is considered.

Background

Postcomm made a Direction on 29 September 2011 which allowed Royal Mail to make
arrangements for a trial of Delivery to Neighbour. As required by the Direction, Royal Mail notified
Ofcom and Consumer Focus on 27 October 2011 (“the Notification”) that it would start the Trial in
certain parts of six delivery areas and this would run from 28 November 2011 until 25 February
2012. The Trial covers c.748,000 delivery addresses served by 1,410 delivery walks made by Royal
Mail postmen and women from 21 Royal Mail Delivery Offices and 8 Scale Payment Delivery Offices.
Customers who are likely to receive a delivery of mail from the units involved in the Trial may optout
of the Trial at any time by displaying prominently at their address a sticker which is available free
of charge via the website http://www.royalmail.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; or following a telephone call to a dedicated Royal Mail
Customer Services phone number.


Performance during the Trial

Key Performance Indicators for the Trial were set out in the Notification, and Royal Mail has been
collecting data which will support a full evaluation after the 3 month period ends at the end of this
month. Royal Mail customer research is on-going, and Consumer Focus has also commissioned its
own research, which is continuing.

Interim Royal Mail performance data have been made available to Ofcom and outlined informally to
Consumer Focus. These show that:
 there has been a very small number of customer complaints about the Trial;
 a very low proportion of delivery addresses have chosen to opt out of the Trial; and
 the proportion of items delivered first time is significantly higher in Trial areas than in
neighbouring control areas.

The initial indicative results of Royal Mail’s customer research are also very positive.
Royal Mail acknowledges, however, that the Trial must be evaluated in line with the Direction and
notification, that the three month period has not ended, and there are measures and other evidence
which has not yet been fully gathered and assessed, including the views of our postmen and
women.

Proposed continuation of Delivery to Neighbour Trial period
In light of the apparently high customer benefit and extremely low levels of customer complaint
about the Trial, Royal Mail proposes to continue the arrangements in their current form in the
existing Trial areas for a further three months. After 25 February 2012 (the original end date for
the Trial), Delivery to Neighbour would continue until Saturday 26 May 2012. This will ensure we
continue to provide a service which evidence suggests our customers value.

Royal Mail would nevertheless conduct the evaluation of the Trial based on data from the period
until 25 February 2012, as originally planned. This will ensure that relevant Trial data is used and
the evaluation is not delayed. If significant issues emerged after 25 February 2012, it would be
sensible to include them in a further or final evaluation. However, Royal Mail might choose to stop
gathering some data in all locations after 25 February 2012, although we undertake to continue to
collect and monitor the number of relevant complaints for the full period.

We also believe it will be useful to have live Delivery to Neighbour areas during the evaluation, in
case further questions arise during or after the evaluation and in light of feedback.

Customer information

Royal Mail recognises that both posting and receiving customers in Trial areas need to be informed
of the extension of the period of the Trial. We will therefore:
 make a further door-drop to all affected delivery addresses in Trial areas. We intend to do
this as soon as possible and in any event before 25 February;
 update posters in Post Offices in trial areas;
 make relevant changes to the Royal Mail website for posting and receiving customers; and
 re-emphasise the information in the next available planned mailing to account customers
which is due to be distributed in early March.

We believe these communications and arrangements are appropriate and adequate.

Royal Mail will continue to comply with the requirements set out in the Direction and is committed
to working with Ofcom and Consumer Focus to address any issues with the Trial during the
extended period.


Yours sincerely,
Simon Oates
Director of Regulatory Strategy

[DGP1]

Is anyone actually doing this or is it one of those things that managers are just lying about up the line?

[glenfiddich]

we're a trial office but noone seems to be asking how many packets you leave at neighbors.they just counting whats brought back to callers office seems a bit ineffective as i know quite a few who left stuff with neighbours before trial started so they arent getting a true picture.

[gazzer]

Im a bit confused here, if this is a trial why do the P739 Jan 2012 cards have a box on them to be ticked saying the item has been left " with your designated neighbour"

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Im a bit confused here, if this is a trial why do the P739 Jan 2012 cards have a box on them to be ticked saying the item has been left " with your designated neighbour"

It has had that on ours since Tracked Items were introduced, and to clarify we are not trial office for the "leave with neighbour" scheme.

[5plusbonusball]

Basically , you can ask any nearby neighbour to take a packet in, if they fill out the p739 themselves with their name and signature to say that if the item gets damaged or lost at their house they are liable for it, then take this back to the original house . Or you can slip it if no-one offers to take it in which is easier and less embarrassing!

[not me]

Basically , you can ask any nearby neighbour to take a packet in, if they fill out the p739 themselves with their name and signature to say that if the item gets damaged or lost at their house they are liable for it, then take this back to the original house . Or you can slip it if no-one offers to take it in which is easier and less embarrassing!

lol,where did you get that from?

[justdeno]

I was told when Tracked came in that you have to try 5 households either side of the address if they were not in, which is very time consuming,and a nightmare when you find out the neighbours hate each other.

[POSTMAN]

I was told when Tracked came in that you have to try 5 households either side of the address if they were not in, which is very time consuming,and a nightmare when you find out the neighbours hate each other.

I wouldn't bother,they told us the sameish at our place,we refused.

[POSTMAN]

https://www.myroyalmail.com/mrm/appnews ... aspx?i=564" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Customers around the country are avoiding inconvenient trips to collect their mail thanks to our delivery to neighbour trial.

Delivery offices putting the new way or working to the test are noticing a difference.

Good feedback
At Edinburgh East Central, the feedback from staff and customers is good so far.

‘It’s common sense really,’ says postman Dave Loudon.

‘Assuming you’re on your regular walk, you know who to leave parcels with.

‘Older customers really appreciate it as they sometimes find it difficult to get into the delivery office.’

Working well
At Pontardawe in south Wales, staff have noticed they are bringing back fewer items to the office. Feedback from customers is good as well.

‘It’s a good idea and is working well,’ says postman Gary Ferguson, pictured.

‘It’s keeping customers happy, and it’s also helping back at the office too, as we’re not as busy in enquiries so we can get on with carrying out other essential tasks.’

[fishtank]

‘It’s a good idea and is working well,’ says postman Gary Ferguson, pictured.

‘It’s keeping customers happy, and it’s also helping back at the office too, as we’re not as busy in enquiries’

Gary's job disappeared in the new revision because enquiries wasn't too busy.
Gary is now back out on delivery.
"f**k this delivery to neighbour shite" said Gary.

[not me]

I was told when Tracked came in that you have to try 5 households either side of the address if they were not in, which is very time consuming,and a nightmare when you find out the neighbours hate each other.

I wouldn't bother,they told us the sameish at our place,we refused.

As I said to the DIMs
we got told our duties were achievable because the computer cannot be wrong
they redid them some months later and most came out too long
so where is the time for going round neighbours houses appearing from?
no answer was the quick and witty retort

[andy2007]

I was told when Tracked came in that you have to try 5 households either side of the address if they were not in, which is very time consuming,and a nightmare when you find out the neighbours hate each other.

I wouldn't bother,they told us the sameish at our place,we refused.

As I said to the DIMs
we got told our duties were achievable because the computer cannot be wrong
they redid them some months later and most came out too long
so where is the time for going round neighbours houses appearing from?
no answer was the quick and witty retort

The next time they come out with "the computer can't be wrong", just tell them that, that's only true, if the Software is written properly, and it's used properly. There's even a technical term for this type of error: GIGO (Garbage In, Garbage Out). It's usually caused by a poorly trained, or lazy user. But is sometimes caused by bugs in the Software.

Computers take their instructions very literally, and can't make allowances for "Human error". Your Managers, either don't understand that, or are deliberately ignoring the possibility that it isn't being used properly.

[fishtank]

The next time they come out with "the computer can't be wrong", just tell them that, that's only true, if the Software is written properly, and it's used properly. There's even a technical term for this type of error: GIGO (Garbage In, Garbage Out). It's usually caused by a poorly trained, or lazy user. But is sometimes caused by bugs in the Software.

Computers take their instructions very literally, and can't make allowances for "Human error". Your Managers, either don't understand that, or are deliberately ignoring the possibility that it isn't being used properly.

The bottom line is Andy this job cannot be planned or resourced by a computer.
There are far too many variants to make anything that comes out the other end valuable as anything other than an excuse to cut numbers and harass staff.
Our senior negotiators should have known that but because of a lack of relevant experience and a desperation to be "involved" they were blinded by the technology.
There is still this fascination within Royal Mail and certain sections of the CWU with the application of a one-size fits all "performance" measurement system...as if somehow you can turn delivering mail into a maths equation.
It's a dead end and a waste of money,we have individual office managers who are paid a great deal of money and should be able see inefficiencies in the way their office is run and improve performance without having to run back to the IWT....as for outdoor,no two days are ever the same...they would only have needed to ask a Postie to find that out.

[andy2007]

I completely agree with you Fishtank. But as long as there are Managers who have total faith in the reliability of these systems (whether feigned or genuine), I thought it would be useful for people to be able to counter that argument with the fact that errors of this type are so common, that there's even a technical term for it.

It's a falicy that computers can't make mistakes. But it's one which is perpetuated by the authors, in order to encourage people to spend large amounts of money buying them.