ANNOUNCEMENT : ALL OF ROYAL MAIL'S EMPLOYMENT POLICIES (AGREEMENTS) AT A GLANCE (Updated 2021)... HERE

ANNOUNCEMENT : PLEASE BE AWARE WE ARE NOT ON FACEBOOK AT ALL!

priority shares

Postal workers discussion forum. Discuss the day to day life in a Blue Shirt.
NWpostie
Posts: 3622
Joined: 04 Aug 2007, 17:32
Gender: Male
Location: Sector 001 Borg Collective, 6 o f 9

Re: priority shares

Post by NWpostie »

In addition to my post I see my keeping the shares including the extra I brought as keeping them out of the hands of the city brokers and equity liquidators.


We are all share holders in this company as somebody is saying before we making the best of a bad lot, so it is incumbent on us to keep the shares for as long as we can in order to secure our own future this includes block voting at shareholder meetings, while we may not be able to overturn some resolutions at the AGM at 10% we can make things a bit uncomfortable if we choose to.
Six of Nine loves Seven of Nine, together in Electric Dreams.
TrueBlueTerrier
FORUM ADMINISTRATOR
Posts: 72767
Joined: 30 Dec 2006, 10:29
Gender: Male
Location: On my couch

Re: priority shares

Post by TrueBlueTerrier »

chrisj wrote:
BernardBresslaw wrote:
chrisj wrote: The better RM does the better we 'might' do.
That's all very well, but when jobs are slashed, hourly wage brought in line with competitors, benefits abandoned, and our pensions modified, suddenly making a few hundred quid from shares, doesn't seem like that good a deal.

Or are you suggesting we should put up with those minor inconveniences, just so our stock improves?
So do you have a crystal ball? You speak as if those negative things are already happening... They might or they might not.
They are Royal Mail are being very upfront about it.
In written evidence submitted to a committee of MPs for its inquiry into privatisation plans, Royal Mail has conceded that "the company will employ fewer people in future, whoever owns it".

The company added that it "remains committed" to achieving this without compulsory redundancies.

http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-10- ... in-future/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;?
All post by me in Green are Admin Posts.
Any post in any other colour is my own responsibility.
If you like a news story I posted please click the link to show support Any news stories you can't post - PM me with a link
My sharing of news articles should not be interpreted as an endorsement or condemnation of any particular viewpoint or the issues presented. I share them solely for informational purposes.
Darren Bent
Posts: 2150
Joined: 05 Oct 2007, 15:38
Gender: Male
Location: Pride Park, Derby, DE24 8XL

Re: priority shares

Post by Darren Bent »

Royal Mail will cut white collars workers and managers but for post delivery workers they probably be a small cut as we need postal workers. For people who are already in with 34+ hours contract will probably be ok for short and medium term. But newcomers might suffers with poorer contract :no no.

It is hard to know what will happens in few years time.
cloherty1976
MAIL CENTRES/PROCESSING
Posts: 1236
Joined: 11 Mar 2010, 12:16
Gender: Male
Location: The south

Re: priority shares

Post by cloherty1976 »

Would I be right in saying we should get 660 free shares?
RobertT
EX ROYAL MAIL
Posts: 6703
Joined: 09 Sep 2007, 14:26
Gender: Male

Re: priority shares

Post by RobertT »

cloherty1976 wrote:Would I be right in saying we should get 660 free shares?
The government still haven't announced the opening price, as far as I know they will do that on Friday 11th October.
660 shares would equate to a opening price of £3.03 per share but reports I've read suggest the price will be £3.30 which would mean 605 shares.
Links to all RM pension related websites are here
BernardBresslaw
Posts: 381
Joined: 24 Nov 2011, 15:52
Gender: Male

Re: priority shares

Post by BernardBresslaw »

TrueBlueTerrier wrote:
chrisj wrote:
BernardBresslaw wrote:
chrisj wrote: The better RM does the better we 'might' do.
That's all very well, but when jobs are slashed, hourly wage brought in line with competitors, benefits abandoned, and our pensions modified, suddenly making a few hundred quid from shares, doesn't seem like that good a deal.

Or are you suggesting we should put up with those minor inconveniences, just so our stock improves?
So do you have a crystal ball? You speak as if those negative things are already happening... They might or they might not.
They are Royal Mail are being very upfront about it.
In written evidence submitted to a committee of MPs for its inquiry into privatisation plans, Royal Mail has conceded that "the company will employ fewer people in future, whoever owns it".

The company added that it "remains committed" to achieving this without compulsory redundancies.

http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-10- ... in-future/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;?
They are becoming even more brazen

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013 ... job-losses" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It will all be ok though, as long as we have our shares...
fishtank
Posts: 19732
Joined: 28 Sep 2007, 17:22
Gender: Male

Re: priority shares

Post by fishtank »

RobertT wrote:
cloherty1976 wrote:Would I be right in saying we should get 660 free shares?
The government still haven't announced the opening price, as far as I know they will do that on Friday 11th October.
660 shares would equate to a opening price of £3.03 per share but reports I've read suggest the price will be £3.30 which would mean 605 shares.
Surely the value of the shares only relates to the value of the company.
From what I've heard the allocation will be 1 billion shares,assuming employees were allocated 10% this mean approx 100,000 divided by 150,000 employees or around 660 shares per employee.
The value of that shareholding will then depend on the opening price.

If your scenario is right the value of the employee shareholding would be fixed and this would not equate to 10% of the company.
good times, bad times you know I've had my share
chrisj
Posts: 1883
Joined: 21 Dec 2010, 16:24
Gender: Male

Re: priority shares

Post by chrisj »

TrueBlueTerrier wrote:
chrisj wrote:
BernardBresslaw wrote:
chrisj wrote: The better RM does the better we 'might' do.
So do you have a crystal ball? You speak as if those negative things are already happening... They might or they might not.
They are Royal Mail are being very upfront about it.
In written evidence submitted to a committee of MPs for its inquiry into privatisation plans, Royal Mail has conceded that "the company will employ fewer people in future, whoever owns it".

The company added that it "remains committed" to achieving this without compulsory redundancies.

http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-10- ... in-future/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;?
What exactly have we or the Union done about the jobs that has been lost so far? Nada! So it is not just about privatisation, letters are on the decline and there is more competition - that is a fact!

Moreover, some of us will lose our jobs with RM but so others (including our folks) will be employed by other couriers and competitors.

With better and sophisticated machinery and even more modernisation, inevitably, there will be job losses. It is just the evolution of things - no industry can stay the same forever; continue to employ 2 people to do 1 job etc. The government wanted us to make more profit compared to our Revenue and they have put things in place to start that process but a Private company will take it further - so what!

We can remain stagnant and allow the competition to actually take over and then we shall see that there will just be few jobs going.

Job losses would have been inevitable but that is not about 'Terms and Conditions' - and you should know better.

The alternative is for us to cripple our employer and then we get 'shutdowns' where we are ask to take involuntary leave because the employer has very little money to pay us.

The fact of the matter is the company need to shed some dead wood - people need to get with the programme or find another job that will satisfy them. We have 3 years to play with and then we can fight on real issues not rumours or suppositions.

BTW, a lot of the PT staff already know what it feels like to have inferior T&C so it is not that far for some of us to fall...

Irony: Our Pension funds and others in the UK will now be invested in RM - more reasons to make it a success; nothing about being a slave to profit but not a disruptive influence.
Last edited by chrisj on 09 Oct 2013, 16:15, edited 1 time in total.
RobertT
EX ROYAL MAIL
Posts: 6703
Joined: 09 Sep 2007, 14:26
Gender: Male

Re: priority shares

Post by RobertT »

fishtank wrote:
RobertT wrote:
cloherty1976 wrote:Would I be right in saying we should get 660 free shares?
The government still haven't announced the opening price, as far as I know they will do that on Friday 11th October.
660 shares would equate to a opening price of £3.03 per share but reports I've read suggest the price will be £3.30 which would mean 605 shares.
Surely the value of the shares only relates to the value of the company.
From what I've heard the allocation will be 1 billion shares,assuming employees were allocated 10% this mean approx 100,000 divided by 150,000 employees or around 660 shares per employee.
The value of that shareholding will then depend on the opening price.

If your scenario is right the value of the employee shareholding would be fixed and this would not equate to 10% of the company.
You could be right there fishtank. I went on our allocation being worth £2,000 each, so the price of each share will decide how many we actually get. I suppose we’ll find out soon enough.
Links to all RM pension related websites are here
BernardBresslaw
Posts: 381
Joined: 24 Nov 2011, 15:52
Gender: Male

Re: priority shares

Post by BernardBresslaw »

chrisj wrote:
TrueBlueTerrier wrote:
chrisj wrote:
BernardBresslaw wrote:
chrisj wrote: The better RM does the better we 'might' do.
So do you have a crystal ball? You speak as if those negative things are already happening... They might or they might not.
They are Royal Mail are being very upfront about it.
In written evidence submitted to a committee of MPs for its inquiry into privatisation plans, Royal Mail has conceded that "the company will employ fewer people in future, whoever owns it".

The company added that it "remains committed" to achieving this without compulsory redundancies.

http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-10- ... in-future/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;?
The fact of the matter is the company need to shed some dead wood - people need to get with the programme or find another job that will satisfy them. We have 3 years to play with and then we can fight on real issues not rumours or suppositions.
Were you one of the 300-odd who refused the free shares, out of interest? I'm sure it was you who said they wouldn't be with Royal Mail in 3 years time, so wouldn't want them anyway. Apologies if I'm mistaking you for someone else...
chrisj
Posts: 1883
Joined: 21 Dec 2010, 16:24
Gender: Male

Re: priority shares

Post by chrisj »

1000,000,000*£3.30 = 3,300,000,000 ($3.3 billion)
Employee Value in Co = 3,300,000,000/10 = 330,000,000

Employee number (estimate) = 150000*

Employee Share value = 330,000,000/150,000 = £2,200

The real share value after trading will go up and down.

So the figure of £2000 is about right if the range is within £2.60-£3.30
chrisj
Posts: 1883
Joined: 21 Dec 2010, 16:24
Gender: Male

Re: priority shares

Post by chrisj »

BernardBresslaw wrote:
chrisj wrote:
TrueBlueTerrier wrote:
chrisj wrote:
BernardBresslaw wrote:
chrisj wrote: The better RM does the better we 'might' do.
ll satisfy them. We have 3 years to play with and then we can fight on real issues not rumours or suppositions.
Were you one of the 300-odd who refused the free shares, out of interest? I'm sure it was you who said they wouldn't be with Royal Mail in 3 years time, so wouldn't want them anyway. Apologies if I'm mistaking you for someone else...
I do not foresee myself being with RM in 3 year time unless they allow me to take a year's special leave or year-out...

I did not opt, I never will - why bother! The other thing is that I am looking forward to about at least £60 dividend next April - so why opt out at this stage.

I am a realist and see things what what they were. My opinion is also formed by previous employment and lack of. Only a few years ago, I was with Angard so you can just imagine that I do not fall under the category of those that have been with RM for so long that they do not see themselves as mere employee - which is what we all are.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013 ... job-losses" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

According to the article - 50,000 jobs have gone in a decade and there will have been job losses regardless of who owns RM - that is the real world. Even packet growth will tail off with time and the competition will get better and stronger unless RM keeps them down and they are helped by regulators and employees.

Posties and other ordinary folks making some money from shares is far better than yuppies and big financial institutions... IMO. The more we buy, the more pissed off they would get because they have to buy it from us at a higher price - thatis, if the share price go up and we do not put spanners in the works.
TrueBlueTerrier
FORUM ADMINISTRATOR
Posts: 72767
Joined: 30 Dec 2006, 10:29
Gender: Male
Location: On my couch

Re: priority shares

Post by TrueBlueTerrier »

chrisj wrote: What exactly have we or the Union done about the jobs that has been lost so far? Nada!
They have tied Royal Mail into an agreement of no Compulsory Redundancies for CWU represented grades for the life of the 2010 agreement. Hopefully it willl also be in the 3/5/10 year legally binding agreement as well. :pray :pray

How much that counts for anything we will found out.
All post by me in Green are Admin Posts.
Any post in any other colour is my own responsibility.
If you like a news story I posted please click the link to show support Any news stories you can't post - PM me with a link
My sharing of news articles should not be interpreted as an endorsement or condemnation of any particular viewpoint or the issues presented. I share them solely for informational purposes.
cloherty1976
MAIL CENTRES/PROCESSING
Posts: 1236
Joined: 11 Mar 2010, 12:16
Gender: Male
Location: The south

Re: priority shares

Post by cloherty1976 »

TrueBlueTerrier wrote:
chrisj wrote: What exactly have we or the Union done about the jobs that has been lost so far? Nada!
They have tied Royal Mail into an agreement of no Compulsory Redundancies for CWU represented grades for the life of the 2010 agreement. Hopefully it willl also be in the 3/5/10 year legally binding agreement as well. :pray :pray

How much that counts for anything we will found out.
If they do call strikes and the deal ends up at 3 years legally binding agreement what has this all been for?
fishtank
Posts: 19732
Joined: 28 Sep 2007, 17:22
Gender: Male

Re: priority shares

Post by fishtank »

cloherty1976 wrote:If they do call strikes and the deal ends up at 3 years legally binding agreement what has this all been for?
What has what all been for?
Nobody has been asked to do anything other than put an X in a box so far.
Challenging stuff,I'm not sure how people cope. :cuppa
good times, bad times you know I've had my share