07/11/07: The best postal service â€“ until now

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 08 Nov 2007, 10:05

http://www.eastbourneherald.co.uk/lette ... 3450418.jp

By P Sayers
secretary, ME&U Party, Southfield, Polegate.

The UK has had, until now, the best postal service in the world.

In the UK we have the anomaly of the shareholders (the UK government) preventing the managers from increasing their postal charges in order to reduce the losses, or even make a small profit.

Any other business, for example a postal service competitor, would be obliged to increase costs in line with the cost of fuel, wages, business rates etc.

It would appear that the government is deliberately forcing the Royal Mail into a situation where it is obliged to continue making losses on a daily basis in order to change working practices.

A change in working practices inevitably means the downgrading of the service that this country has enjoyed for any years.

Surely, in a business environment the Royal Mail managers must be allowed to increase their charges in line with costs and allow the
market to decide the acceptable price for mail delivery.

It should be remembered that the cost of sending letters to John O'Groats is exactly the same as a letter sent to an address in the same town.

The cost (comparatively higher for local) balances out for the entire country which is surely the more reasonable way to charge, rather than by mileage which would introduce untold complications.

If we are to retain our Royal Mail as it has always been, the best in the world, then the government must allow management to decide postal costs and let the market decide what is reasonable and what is not.

Hands off our mail service. The present losses are not acceptable and no business can be expected to operate under such conditions.

jmlr1971 · Post by **jmlr1971** » 08 Nov 2007, 11:55

DGP1 · Post by **DGP1** » 08 Nov 2007, 14:46

The present losses are not acceptable and no business can be expected to operate under such conditions.

What losses?????

Post by **TrueBlueTerrier** » 08 Nov 2007, 15:08

disgruntledpostie1 wrote:
The present losses are not acceptable and no business can be expected to operate under such conditions.

What losses?????

The article is from October when RM were claiming they were operating at a loss, but the spirit of the article is still relevant I think.

davidessex · Post by **davidessex** » 08 Nov 2007, 19:26

what i find funny is that the shareholder, the government, is loaning us ex amount of money to pay for modernisation, pensions and pay rise ect. i wonder what interest rate it is paying/charging itself ? and can it give some of the profit it took out over the last thirty years ( my legnth of sevice so far ) that i helped earn , back to the industry.

yogibear · Post by **yogibear** » 08 Nov 2007, 19:30

davidessex wrote:what i find funny is that the shareholder, the government, is loaning us ex amount of money to pay for modernisation, pensions and pay rise ect. i wonder what interest rate it is paying/charging itself ? and can it give some of the profit it took out over the last thirty years ( my legnth of sevice so far ) that i helped earn , back to the industry.

Who are you kidding davidessex? 30 years ago i saw you on top of the pops with that cheeky smile

DirtyHarry · Post by **DirtyHarry** » 08 Nov 2007, 20:36

yogibear wrote:
davidessex wrote:what i find funny is that the shareholder, the government, is loaning us ex amount of money to pay for modernisation, pensions and pay rise ect. i wonder what interest rate it is paying/charging itself ? and can it give some of the profit it took out over the last thirty years ( my legnth of sevice so far ) that i helped earn , back to the industry.
Who are you kidding davidessex? 30 years ago i saw you on top of the pops with that cheeky smile

I remember that, when he split his trousers wasn't it?