Royal Mail discussion

[Dai Corner]

Then send it 2nd class?

Indeed. Second Class is good enough for most post and wouldn't require delivery staff to walk up and down every street every day

 

[najaB]

Indeed. Second Class is good enough for most post and wouldn't require delivery staff to walk up and down every street every day

So there isn't really a problem then - people who need the next day delivery pay 90p those who don't pay 61p.

 

[Dai Corner]

So there isn't really a problem then - people who need the next day delivery pay 90p those who don't pay 61p.

I think the problem is that the 95p doesn't cover the cost of next day delivery (which isn't guaranteed anyway).

 

[Mcr Warrior]

So there isn't really a problem then - people who need the next day delivery pay 90p those who don't pay 61p.

It's actually 95p / 68p, isn't it?

 

[tigerroar]

Indeed. Second Class is good enough for most post and wouldn't require delivery staff to walk up and down every street every day

Deary me, that's not how it works. 1st class is processed and dispatched on the day it's posted, 2nd class is put to one side and processed the following morning and dispatched with the 1st class later that day and is delivered the following morning. Everything that enters a delivery office is delivered on that day regardless of what class it is.

That's how it used to work when I did processing when I started in 1989!

 

[Dai Corner]

Deary me, that's not how it works. 1st class is processed and dispatched on the day it's posted, 2nd class is put to one side and processed the following morning and dispatched with the 1st class later that day and is delivered the following morning. Everything that enters a delivery office is delivered on that day regardless of what class it is.

That's how it used to work when I did processing when I started in 1989!

That was important in 1989. I'd question whether it is now, three decades later.

 

[najaB]

It's actually 95p / 68p, isn't it?

It is, indeed. I was thinking of last year's prices.

 

[gswindale]

As @tigerroar says, Royal Mail is obliged - by law - to deliver mail within the stated delivery times, unless force majeure applies. The postie can't just decide that he/she can't be bothered.

I'm not suggesting an individual postie makes the decision though.

I'm suggesting that there is a possibility that the 6 days a week delivery round isn't actually necessary anymore and maybe the government should look at amending the USO.

I remember in the 80s that we used to get a daily delivery of milk. During the 90s, this was slowly reduced (starting with the removal of Sundays I believe). All of my family have now moved away, but I believe our former dairy company no longer exists, and that "Milk & more" deliver on only 3 days out of 7.

Times change and in the interests of both costs and environmental concerns, is a near daily service still really necessary anymore? Other than the fact there is the USO, I'm not really seeing a convincing argument that it is.

I'd also agree that 1st and 2nd class should be scrapped. Our experience at work is that regardless of class selected on the franking machine the post takes the same amount of time to reach us (we've occasionally sent post to ourselves when we've been invoicing between multiple clients).

Maybe it was important up until the mid/late 90s, but it doesn't seem to be quite so important now.

 

[najaB]

I'm suggesting that there is a possibility that the 6 days a week delivery round isn't actually necessary anymore and maybe the government should look at amending the USO.

There's already a proposal with Ofcom to drop Saturday delivery.

 

[DelayRepay]

For comparison, how recently was it - if at all - that being paid weekly was abolished on the railways?

I don't know the answer for the railways, but a family member who worked for a local council had their wages changed from weekly to monthly during the 1990s. At the same time their wages changed from being paid by cheque to direct bank account credit.

I remember this family member being against the change due to concerns about budgeting, and having to wait longer to receive any overtime they were owed. It worked out ok though. Provided any change is phased in so that people don't suddenly face a four week gap between paydays, it doesn't seem like an issue worth having an industrial dispute over.

 

[Typhoon]

Would Derek care whether he got a catalogue every day or several catalogues a couple of days a week?

Would his neighbours notice how often they got their post?

Catalogues maybe not but the official stuff, yes

there is one chap in our road who gets lots of post (quite a few catalogues, but he orders stuff from catalogues, so they are not rubbish to him, some official stuff because of past associations

That mostly comes first class!

It's okay to break the law as long as you don't get found out?

And they would be. He and also his sons will know exactly what he is entitled to. When the power lines were blown down, most of the rest of us, shrugged shoulder, stuff happens, they are doing their best. For him, next morning UK Power Networks had resources out for him; the family had hit the phones. Not more support than he was entitled to, but exactly the support and promptly. There are quite a few people like them around; if a postman/woman omitted a road, it would soon be on social media, local news channels. reaching MPs inboxes.
It would need intervention from the Secretary of State to alter the current arrangement and I would reckon that the average Conservative Party member is more likely to send and receive letters than the average person in the street.

 

[Grumbler]

It would need intervention from the Secretary of State to alter the current arrangement and I would reckon that the average Conservative Party member is more likely to send and receive letters than the average person in the street.

Or perhaps average Conservative Party members are less likely to be wedded to old fashioned communication methods.

 

[zero]

So there isn't really a problem then - people who need the next day delivery pay 90p those who don't pay 61p.

It's actually 95p / 68p, isn't it?

It is, indeed. I was thinking of last year's prices.

Last year's prices weren't 90p/61p either!

 

[gswindale]

Out of interest, what proportion of letters are sent 1st class and what is the cost of producing a book of 6 stamps? If the latter is greater than the cost of the 2nd class stamps, but less than the cost of 1st, then how about scrapping 2nd class and adjusting the cost of 1st to ensure that the Costa are covered?

 

[Typhoon]

Or perhaps average Conservative Party members are less likely to be wedded to old fashioned communication methods.

I would have thought that unlikely, they tend to be towards the more elderly end of the spectrum. Massive generalisation but more elderly people (especially those on their own, or those caring for someone in their own household) tend to like receiving letters, it breaks up the day. Possibly a quick chat ('Just the one today.', 'Thank you', 'See you tomorrow', 'Bye') might be the only meaningful conversation they have that day. That will be how some got through lockdown.

 

[DelayRepay]

I would have thought that unlikely, they tend to be towards the more elderly end of the spectrum. Massive generalisation but more elderly people (especially those on their own, or those caring for someone in their own household) tend to like receiving letters, it breaks up the day. Possibly a quick chat ('Just the one today.', 'Thank you', 'See you tomorrow', 'Bye') might be the only meaningful conversation they have that day. That will be how some got through lockdown.

But this is the same argument that's sometimes used against replacing bank counters with ATMs, or replacing staffed checkouts with self service in the supermarkets.

The purpose of the Royal Mail is to deliver letters, not to provide social interaction for the elderly.

 

[Typhoon]

But this is the same argument that's sometimes used against replacing bank counters with ATMs, or replacing staffed checkouts with self service in the supermarkets.

The purpose of the Royal Mail is to deliver letters, not to provide social interaction for the elderly.

You are right, it is not a social service, but the Conservative Party membership contains quite a number of these people. The government can realistically do nothing about the closure of bank branches, and the spread of self-service tills (which I as an elderly person prefer) except mutter the desire that the organisations consider the elderly. But it can do something (or nothing) about the Universal Service Obligation

The Postal Services Act 2011 sets out the minimum requirements the Universal Service Provider must deliver. These are statutory. They can only be altered with the consent of the UK Parliament.

In light of the latter it effectively would need government approval. Since, as far as I know, the government does not subsidise Royal Mail, there is no incentive for them to reduce this obligation in any way. There is a disincentive, the irritation of some of their supporters.

When there was consideration of no deliveries or collections on 1st January this year, there needed to be a consultation resulting in seven responses and a thirteen-page report. That is for no collections and deliveries on a day when no-one was expecting them. The response to a much more radical reduction in collections would dwarf that and much would be directed towards the Secretary of State by his own supporters. A Secretary of State who is untried in a department that actually does something, in a government that has enough 'enemies' on its own benches and more than enough problems of the making of its predecessor or external sources. Why create another problem for itself?

Quote from https://www.royalmailgroup.com/en/a...-were-regulated/universal-service-obligation/

 

[DelayRepay]

You are right, it is not a social service, but the Conservative Party membership contains quite a number of these people. The government can realistically do nothing about the closure of bank branches, and the spread of self-service tills (which I as an elderly person prefer) except mutter the desire that the organisations consider the elderly. But it can do something (or nothing) about the Universal Service Obligation
In light of the latter it effectively would need government approval. Since, as far as I know, the government does not subsidise Royal Mail, there is no incentive for them to reduce this obligation in any way. There is a disincentive, the irritation of some of their supporters.

If the alternative is to increase the price of stamps, that may also alienate the same Tory voters.

If there is a chance to appear tough against an industry whose trade union is taking industrial action, that may also provide an incentive.

If there is a chance to increase shareholder profits, that may also provide an incentive.

Who knows what the Government will do? My view is they probably don't care that much whether the post is delivered each day or not.

My view is that in the modern world, the requirement of daily deliveries to every property in the land is outdated. There is nothing I receive that's time critical these days. If I knew post wasn't being delivered daily, I would just make sure birthday cards etc were posted a few days earlier. And people sending urgent items can always use alternative services.

 

[Grumbler]

You are right, it is not a social service, but the Conservative Party membership contains quite a number of these people.

So do the other parties. I suspect that most of the opposition to rationalising the Victorian era postal service comes from the Labour-supporting Communication Workers Union.

 

[Dai Corner]

In light of the latter it effectively would need government approval. Since, as far as I know, the government does not subsidise Royal Mail, there is no incentive for them to reduce this obligation in any way. There is a disincentive, the irritation of some of their supporters.

Although there are probably just as many Conservative supporters who own shares in Royal Mail and would welcome the relaxation of this costly obligation.

 

[najaB]

Although there are probably just as many Conservative supporters who own shares in Royal Mail and would welcome the relaxation of this costly obligation.

A lot of them also own properties out in the country and would be dead set against the idea that their postal costs would go up if the "one price for all" part of the USO went, which is actually more costly than the requirement to deliver daily.

 

[Dai Corner]

A lot of them also own properties out in the country and would be dead set against the idea that their postal costs would go up if the "one price for all" part of the USO went, which is actually more costly than the requirement to deliver daily.

The relaxation I had in mind was reducing the number of deliveries a week from six to, say, three rather than the flat rate pricing.

 

[najaB]

The relaxation I had in mind was reducing the number of deliveries a week from six to, say, three rather than the flat rate pricing.

I understand that, but the requirement to deliver daily is much less of an impediment to profit than flat rate pricing. One delivery from London to Stornoway costs RM more than a weeks' worth of daily deliveries in urban areas. So, logically, it should cost a lot more.

 

[Grumbler]

Since, as far as I know, the government does not subsidise Royal Mail, there is no incentive for them to reduce this obligation in any way.

Yes it is subsidised. Unlike other communication providers, the RM is not subject to VAT.

 

[Dai Corner]

I understand that, but the requirement to deliver daily is much less of an impediment to profit than flat rate pricing. One delivery from London to Stornoway costs RM more than a weeks' worth of daily deliveries in urban areas. So, logically, it should cost a lot more.

Three deliveries a week to Stornaway instead of six should produce significant savings then?

 

[najaB]

Three deliveries a week to Stornaway instead of six should produce significant savings then?

And the people of Stornoway deserve a lesser postal service why, exactly?

 

[Trainbike46]

And the people of Stornoway deserve a lesser postal service why, exactly?

Ending the USO would definitely lead to a lesser service provision for the Scottish Highlands and Islands, and probably for NI and even rural areas of England and Wales, though

 

[Dai Corner]

Ending the USO would definitely lead to a lesser service provision for the Scottish Highlands and Islands, and probably for NI and even rural areas of England and Wales, though

The point I and others have made is that many ( most, probably) households only get post two or three days a week anyway, despite the USO, as the volume just isn't there. It could even be argued that knowing your delivery would alway be on (say) Monday, Wednesday or Friday would be an advantage.

And the people of Stornoway deserve a lesser postal service why, exactly?

I'm arguing that the people of the UK would be happy with fewer potential (as opposed to actual) deliveries a week and wouldn't miss seeing the postman walk past their houses every day.

 

[najaB]

Ending the USO would definitely lead to a lesser service provision for the Scottish Highlands and Islands, and probably for NI and even rural areas of England and Wales, though

Lesser service provision, higher prices or, more likely, both.

I'm arguing that the people of the UK would be happy with fewer potential (as opposed to actual) deliveries a week and wouldn't miss seeing the postman walk past their houses every day.

Any chance you could provide the survey data...?

 

[Dai Corner]

Lesser service provision, higher prices or, more likely, both.

Any chance you could provide the survey data...?

No noticeable loss in service, cost reductions which could be shared between staff, shareholders and customers.

Just personal opinion, of course. Could you share your survey data showing that people notice how long letters take to arrive or would miss watching the postman walk past their houses when they have no post?