Letter to RM issue of shares (point raised by Geoff in chat)

[stephen500]

I know I have just posted this reply on another thread, but since this thread deals directly with this issue, I thought it would be appropriate to share it here as well.
Reply received on 19/07/2013 and my reply.
From: Gary Redmond
To:+++++++++++++
Sent: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 12:38
Subject: Shares 14430
Dear Stephen
Thank you for your enquiry of 15 July 2013. I'm glad you have asked the question as it has given me the opportunity to reassure people that Free Shares and the Act you refer to are completely different. The Free Shares which are going to be offered on a flotation are nothing to do with the legislation you set out, which, as you say, has recently brought about a change to employment law which allows employers and individual employees to agree that certain employment rights are waived in return for shares in their employer.
The Free Shares are to be awarded under a longstanding, HMRC approved share plan known as a Share Incentive Plan. Further details have yet to be announced but it is clear that these shares will be free - under HMRC rules employees cannot be asked to give anything up, including employment rights, in order to receive Free Shares .
You therefore don't need to opt out of the Free Shares to keep your employment rights. Receiving Free Shares won't reduce your rights.
Kind Regards
Gary Redmond
Chief Executive Office
Royal Mail HQ
100 Victoria Embankment
LONDON
EC4Y 0HQ

Dear Gary Redmond, [Royal Mail HQ]
Chief Executive Office
Royal Mail HQ
100 Victoria Embankment
LONDON
EC4Y 0HQ
Thank you for your reply, which I will share in full.
However I would also like to point out that "the Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013" employees do indeed give up rights to receive shares under the Act provided the shares are worth at least £2000.
So for clarity are you stating that under HRMC rules this "Share incentive scheme", in which we receive free shares, specifically rules out requiring "loss of rights" for shares and is separate from "the Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013"
I will wait for a reply from Vince Cable or Michael Fallon (via my Mp), which I will share with you.
Hopefully he will confirm, in writing, that the "scheme" and the Act are separate.

[stephen500]

Dear Dave [Ward] and Billy [Hayes],


I have shared Gary Redmond's reply, as requested by yourself.

I have published Gary's response in full.

Just because RM state this is their position, does not mean I take this at face value.

I await a reply from Vince Cable or Michael Fallon (via my Mp) to have them confirm that we are not covered by the Act and that we are being given shares under the "share incentive scheme".

I would be grateful if you could share with us, when you have taken legal advice, the unions position on this.

Do the union concur with Gary Redmond that this is a "share incentive scheme" and the share issue is not covered by the act?

Or do you take a different view.

I will share your replies on the CWU facebook page. (national and branch).

Thank you.

[Visionary Man]

Thank you for all your work Stephen.

I eagerly await any further information.

Geoff

[clashcityrocker]

[Visionary Man]

Hi Stephen... still no replies from Vince Cable / CWU yet?

[stephen500]

http://www.cwu.org/ltb-520/57566/13-pos ... rrata.html
Log in as CWU member, to access doc.
LTB 520 Postal Policy Forum _ Arrangements and Amendments
Recommendation (2)" Due to the “Growth & Infrastructure Act 2013” coming to the attention of our members, the NEC will obtain a report from an appropriate Barrister in how this legislation would affect the Union and its members in the future if free shares were issued.

This report will also outline any potential impact on the individual. This report will be circulated to the membership no later than 30th September 2013."
Greater Manchester

[stephen500]

Hi Stephen... still no replies from Vince Cable / CWU yet?

Had reply from RM HQ, their opinion is not covered by act. Had letter from MP who has forwarded question to Michael Fallon, so awaiting reply. Had this from Andrea Snowden Head of Admin (Gen Sec off (B Hayes) "You would wish to know that the issue of free shares and the consequences of such an employee offering is been considered by us". So that's the update so far. So CWU HQ is aware

[fishtank]

Union rep told me today that head office had sent out a document to reps detailing the loss of rights etcetera if shares are accepted. Document was by Morgan Stanley Lawyers.

There has been no document sent out to reps that details any impact the Growth And Infrastructure bill will have on any potential Royal Mail share issue.

What is happening here is two things...

1.A genuine call to have legal clarification which in my opinion is a good thing,this will be put to the Postal Policy forum on the 31st July.

2.A rather short sighted attempt by some in the union to use the bill as another weapon against privatisation.
There are two flaws in this plan.

1. It's a lie and the members should not be lied to even when the cause appears to be just,the ends do not justify the means.

2. It's a lie that will easily be found out and the union will look at best foolish and at worst dishonest.
Not a good idea heading into possibly the biggest fight we will ever have.

The members have already rejected privatisation overwhelmingly,there is absolutely no need to invent boogeymen to convince them even more.

[barrowc]

There's an article on myroyalmail.com about this now - http://www.myroyalmail.com/news/nationa ... our-rights

Free Shares and your rights

06:00am, 24 Jul, 2013
Sarah Womack

Your employment rights will not be reduced if you receive Free Shares


There has been some speculation that you would need to opt out of the Free Shares to keep employment rights.

You won’t! Receiving Free Shares won't reduce your rights.

Free Shares and section 31 of the Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013 – new legislation which allows employees to agree with their employer to reduce their employments rights in return for shares – are completely different.

The Free Shares that are going to be offered on a flotation are nothing to do with this new legislation. The Free Shares are to be awarded under a long-standing, HMRC approved share plan known as a Share Incentive Plan.

Further details have yet to be announced, but under HMRC rules, employees cannot be asked to pay anything or give anything up, including employment rights, to receive Free Shares.

[Visionary Man]

Hi all.

We all received a print out of the news article on myroyalmail.com today.

I'm going to tell everyone now that this issue was raised by me and me alone. I am a cwu member but nothing to do with its administration. I am trained to the level of a paralegal and retain a layman's interest in important legislation. I stumbled across this with a friend and immediately became suspicious of the potential of conspiracy. I could not be sure so I raised it the only way I could think to get the issue noticed.

I fully accept fishtank and tbt's data so far and it looks good but I am still not entirely at peace with it. I am still concerned that the shares could be issued before the legislation comes into effect and then we will all find ourselves coming under its terms regardless of our method of entry.

I am still eagerly awaiting any further information from Stephen and thank him once again for taking this issue seriously and taking appropriate action.

Best regards
Geoff

[Visionary Man]

Does anyone have Twitter? I'm not on it.

Perhaps these guys will have some more info?

http://www.ifsproshare.org/lobbying/pub ... pdates.cfm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Geoff

[Visionary Man]

In furtherance to refuting fishtanks claims against the cwu I will also point out a brief history of my experience of the actions of our board to add some context to why I feel I have no trust in them presently.

Crozier takes an obscene amount of money to do very little but shut most of RM down at a time when it was already *very* clear that the future trend of mail volumes would be moving towards packages. After the mad dotcom rush and the economic projections of ecommerce became more grounded after the bubble burst and the dust settled, I would argue such inaction was tantamount to incompetence. We are 10 years too late in our parcels stratagy.

Upon proposing modernisation, the cwu proposed strike action. I scold the cwu at this point for not communicating well with members about the issues and reasons for them. I unfortunately had to hear about the feared projections of privatisation from a radio 4 news item. But that aside, I remember only too clearly the letter from senior management explicitly expressing that there were no plans for privatisation. Retrospectively that letter now seems intentionally deceptive. If genuinely it never was in the plan then what the hell were the board doing with such short term strategies. It alls either their honesty or their acumen into question one way or the other.

WCM in principle I liked the concepts underpinning Mr Yamashina's methods. But where was the sue diligence in this scheme? Why was it implemented at the same time as modernisation? How could its effectiveness ever have been properly measured? Could our md not see the elephant in the room that it involved vastly over administering tasks which were never on the scale of coplexity required to make it an efficient system?! Cause I was pointing out all these problems on day 1 of its announcement and my expressions fell on deaf ears. The cwu's claim that it was wrapping paper for a quick sale rings more true now than ever.

The downright dirty play of colleague shares following the modernisation agreement.

Now looking at it from my perspective, finding this piece of legislation with all these perfect coincidences surrounding it... What else am I going to think other than it's just another scam for our plutocracy to get out of their obligations?

So no this is nothing to do with the cwu. This is to do with our executive completely failing their staff and now trying to make a play when they have no trust or support from the majority of people they manage. When they are paid soooo much for this kind of amateurish display, it's time to stand up and not get messed about by people that clearly don't give a damn about us.

Best regards,

Geoff

[Visionary Man]

Apologies for spelling errors. Doing this on my phone.

[clashcityrocker]

.... and immediately became suspicious of the potential of conspiracy.

Best regards
Geoff

Did you see any lizards?

[stephen500]

Do you really think I am going to take what RM put out on their employee web site at face value?
As said I await a reply from Michael Fallon and, if passed at the special conference, a special report prepared for the CWU by an appointed barrister.
I look forward to his/her report after 30th September.
I am not basing huge financial decisions that I may need to make in the future without being sure of my position.
When I am totally confident that I can't have the rug pulled under my feet re: comp redundancy and EVR, then and only then will I accept shares.
I would not call it "lies", Geoff in good faith raised a possible issue with free shares.
I have never said that this new Act does dilute our employee rights, only that it might.
And I challenge any one to prove that I have.
What I have done is ask the question and so far RM have replied that it does not.
However that does not mean that RM is right.
I look forward to more replies from interested parties, ie the government department concerned and legal advice from the union.
I will then have to make a considered opinion as to whether I accept shares, which every other employee will also have to do.