Royal Mail privatisation

[Mojo]

My main use of the postal system these days is for correspondence with railway companies and being sent rail travel vouchers. With many companies now allowing tickets to be submitted online; how long until they all send you compensation with eVouchers for their websites?

 

[gnolife]

My main use of the postal system these days is for correspondence with railway companies and being sent rail travel vouchers. With many companies now allowing tickets to be submitted online; how long until they all send you compensation with eVouchers for their websites?

Don't be giving them ideas!

 

[cjmillsnun]

BT might only need to run a cable once to a farm in the middle of nowhere but it can still cost rather a lot of money.

Then once installed, the customer can switch to another provider.

I guess BT Openreach now does this and can effectively charge any provider but many would simply refuse the business. I am not sure BT can in most cases.

BT have a universal service obligation. They must provide a voice telephone service to anyone who asks for it.

 

[Roverman]

And said law cannot be changed?

Exactly, any private firm that comes in will have a lawyer or 10 looking over the nitty gritty of this deal, not just for things like Due Diligence but to see where they can cut corners.

Even at the moment I'm posting items with a first class stamp that are taking 6 days or so to arrive at their destination. Its just not good enough.

 

[rdeez]

This seems to have been done for purely ideological reasons, as the benefits to the state and the public are unclear.

The government (and therefore the state and, by extension, all of us) keep the huge pensions burden - no risk to investors.

The service has recently begun turning an overall profit and the government's own forecasts predict continued profits in coming years - profits that will now go to investors (that otherwise could have been reinvested in the service or back to state funds).

The universal service obligation will simply lead to price increases in uncontrolled areas (like parcel delivery) or cost cutting in order to deliver ever increasing profits to shareholders long term. Shareholders, let's remember, aren't happy with mere consistency - they want results to improve year on year.

Will the public benefit from improved service and lower costs? Doubtful.
Will Royal Mail employees enjoy better job security, working conditions and pay? Very doubtful.
Will shareholders make a tidy profit? Most likely.

 

[Clip]

Don't be giving them ideas!

Why whats wrong with that? As long as they have the same validity as RTV's now I dont see why this is such a bad thing to happen?

Do you not thik we already use too much paper in the world,anything to reduce paper usage is fine with me.

 

[Butts]

Apparently 90% of Staff voted against privatisation in a consultative ballot in June.

It is estimated that 368 out of 150,000 staff have refused the free shares on offer to employees.

A case of "having your cake and eating it" ?

 

[ainsworth74]

I think it's more case of they don't want to be privatised, but if they're going to be and don't have a choice in the matter they might as well have the shares. It's what I'd have done if I was Royal Mail staff.

 

[Butts]

I think it's more case of they don't want to be privatised, but if they're going to be and don't have a choice in the matter they might as well have the shares. It's what I'd have done if I was Royal Mail staff.

As I understand it the Union was neutral on the share matter, would they not have had more credibility if members had been advised to turn down the offering as it represents part of the privatisation package.

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

As I understand it the Union was neutral on the share matter, would they not have had more credibility if members had been advised to turn down the offering as it represents part of the privatisation package.

Whatever they do, it will be used against them - I was against the demutualisation of the Building Societies in the 80's/90's (which contributed to today's chaos) but they still sent me a cheque...what was I supposed to do?

Oddly enough, on my spellchecker 'demutualisation' comes up as 'renationalisation'!

 

[yorksrob]

As I understand it the Union was neutral on the share matter, would they not have had more credibility if members had been advised to turn down the offering as it represents part of the privatisation package.

I think it's perfectly reasonable and sensible for the Union to be against privatisation, and for them to allow members to make their own choice on shares if privatisation becomes a fait accomplis. The Union is entitled to have an opinion on the future of the business, but they still have to allow workers to get the best possible outcome given the circumstances available.

 

[Butts]

Whatever they do, it will be used against them - I was against the demutualisation of the Building Societies in the 80's/90's (which contributed to today's chaos) but they still sent me a cheque...what was I supposed to do?

You could have donated the money to charity !!

Oddly enough, on my spellchecker 'demutualisation' comes up as 'renationalisation'!

The Government can't win either, it's either too cheap and a roaring success or a flop and priced too highly

 

[SS4]

Apparently 90% of Staff voted against privatisation in a consultative ballot in June.

It is estimated that 368 out of 150,000 staff have refused the free shares on offer to employees.

A case of "having your cake and eating it" ?

Or is not doing so a case of "cutting off your nose to spite your face"?

What was the alternative? If you're kicked out your home for a railway line are you not entitled to compensation? The privatisation will go ahead anyway.

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

The Government can't win either, it's either too cheap and a roaring success or a flop and priced too highly

Well, anyway, how do you know that I didn't give the money to charity, but that's not the point, I would have preferred not to have been in that position. I would imagine many postal workers will feel the same, they will receive a paltry sum now and face the future with some trepidation.

 

[Roverman]

As I understand it the Union was neutral on the share matter, would they not have had more credibility if members had been advised to turn down the offering as it represents part of the privatisation package.

Unless the Union is a highly qualified expert on financial matters I believe they had to be neutral.

 

[Greenback]

The difference is that the board of Royal Mail currently only answer to the government. Once the IPO is complete, and the shares begin trading, they will answer to all the new shareholders, including most of the staff they employ.

The idea that individual shareholders will have any sort of control or power over the business is a tad unrealistic, don't you think? As with all other privatisations, it's likely that big institutions will soon be massively in the majority, even if they aren't in the beginning!

I can see this all going horribly wrong and we, the taxpayer, will be left to sort the sorry mess out by paying £1 for 2nd Class and £2 for 1st Class post. Parcels will rocket up to a minimum of £10 (killing off most of Ebay) and deliveries will be once a week at their convenience.

However I don't feel sorry for all the greedy fools who have been drawing out cheques of £10,000 a time to buy shares in the enterprise.

Yeah, so can I.

Do you envisage such a law change ever being passed ?

As I said previously, once it becomes evident that the business cannot be sustained on an uneven playing field, some sort of changes will have to be made. Either the universal service will be curtailed, or the government will have to stump up cover it.

I think it's more case of they don't want to be privatised, but if they're going to be and don't have a choice in the matter they might as well have the shares. It's what I'd have done if I was Royal Mail staff.

Quite right. A very pragmatic approach!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

As I said previously, once it becomes evident that the business cannot be sustained on an uneven playing field, some sort of changes will have to be made. Either the universal service will be curtailed, or the government will have to stump up cover it.

Can you let us know how many countries in the EC have a state-run mail delivery service and how many are run privately.

I note your comment about unsustainability and wonder if that particular matter has had to be addressed in other EC countries.

 

[rdeez]

Apparently 90% of Staff voted against privatisation in a consultative ballot in June.

It is estimated that 368 out of 150,000 staff have refused the free shares on offer to employees.

A case of "having your cake and eating it" ?

Also worth noting that the government required that all staff were automatically enrolled to receive shares by default, and to decline, they were required to fill out lengthy forms.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

However I don't feel sorry for all the greedy fools who have been drawing out cheques of £10,000 a time to buy shares in the enterprise.

It seems that the type of investor who made such a large share application were the type of investor who will receive no shares. Is that what you alluded to ?

Shares reached 450p per share on the first day of trading which meant an extra increase in the value of the shares that were specifically reserved for the staff of the company.

 

[richw]

Can you let us know how many countries in the EC have a state-run mail delivery service and how many are run privately.

When we were in Tenerife we were warned by our reps to use the state mail, as the various private mail companies don't empty their boxes every day due to cost.
This seems reflective that my postcards were delivered within 48 hours of posting in Tenerife to being delivered to UK addresses, whereas family members have used private companies and the delivery has taken 2 weeks.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

When we were in Tenerife we were warned by our reps to use the state mail, as the various private mail companies don't empty their boxes every day due to cost.
This seems reflective that my postcards were delivered within 48 hours of posting in Tenerife to being delivered to UK addresses, whereas family members have used private companies and the delivery has taken 2 weeks.

When I asked the question about EC countries in my posting, I did not envisage an island off the west coast of Africa would be used an an example...

 

[Eagle]

Tenerife is part of the EU though.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Tenerife is part of the EU though.

I really was hoping for details of countries upon the mainland of Europe...not an off-shore dependency (?) of one of those EC countries.

 

[DarloRich]

So farewell then Royal Mail. Same old tories same old shi*e

 

[Buttsy]

As a private company, the Royal Mail is now answerable in the first instance to it's shareholders, not government.

No profits, shareholders angy. Shareholders angry, pressure on board to do something. Pressure on board, get angry with government about ridiculous law. Rich people angry about law, goverment change law.

I believe this is where 'privilege' comes from - private law that was made by the aristocracy (rich) in years gone by...

 

[DarloRich]

As a private company, the Royal Mail is now answerable in the first instance to it's shareholders, not government.

No profits, shareholders angy. Shareholders angry, pressure on board to do something. Pressure on board, get angry with government about ridiculous law. Rich people angry about law, goverment change law.

I believe this is where 'privilege' comes from - private law that was made by the aristocracy (rich) in years gone by...

Whilst us, the mere scummy users of the service, must pay more and more for the "privilege".

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Whilst us, the mere scummy users of the service, must pay more and more for the "privilege".

People who deserted the high street booksellers in favour of Amazon (et al) are just one example of this internet shopping age where the Royal Mail parcel/package business has grown in recent years as a result.

 

[Butts]

As a private company, the Royal Mail is now answerable in the first instance to it's shareholders, not government.

No profits, shareholders angy. Shareholders angry, pressure on board to do something. Pressure on board, get angry with government about ridiculous law. Rich people angry about law, goverment change law.

I believe this is where 'privilege' comes from - private law that was made by the aristocracy (rich) in years gone by...

My belief was that The Government retained 38% of the shares making them the biggest shareholder.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

So farewell then Royal Mail. Same old tories same old shi*e

This brings a point to mind about a "modern" postal industry..the "Royal" connection in the company title. Does any other European monarchy have a named link in its postal services and in Britain, could the word "royal" be discarded without going through some arcane procedural method ?

 

[WillPS]

People who deserted the high street booksellers in favour of Amazon (et al) are just one example of this internet shopping age where the Royal Mail parcel/package business has grown in recent years as a result.

A small and decreasing amount of Amazon's parcels go through Royal Mail. If I buy online from somewhere other than ebay I expect to receive parcels through Hermes or Yodel these days.