The Bull  permalink

Royal Mail privatisation.

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 51 - 77 of 77
  • Message 51

    , in reply to message 50.

    Posted by hoddles off into the sunset (U14129169) on Saturday, 5th January 2013

    I haven't forgiven them for getting rid of their bicycles.

    A postman just doesn't look right dragging a trolley. 

    Our postman has a bicycle and when he is on holiday a postwoman uses his bicycle. 

    Does he know?

    What would happen if he decided to go on a cycling holiday?

    Report message1

  • Message 52

    , in reply to message 50.

    Posted by Lucretzia (U5974342) on Saturday, 5th January 2013

    <quote.Our postman has a bicycle and when he is on holiday a postwoman uses his bicycle.</quote>

    Oh you're very lucky.

    Ours used to have one too. In fact my parent's postman used to store his bike in my parent's garage.

    Now he wanders around looking very depressed, dragging his trolley behind him.

    Report message2

  • Message 53

    , in reply to message 52.

    Posted by hoddles off into the sunset (U14129169) on Saturday, 5th January 2013

    In fact my parent's postman used to store his bike in my parent's garage. 

    I had two.

    Parents, that is. Not postmen, bikes or garages.

    A guid new year to ye, Lucretzia.

    Report message3

  • Message 54

    , in reply to message 53.

    Posted by Lucretzia (U5974342) on Saturday, 5th January 2013

    Rogue apostrophe alert. Ban them, I say.

    Happy New year to you too, hoddles : )

    Report message4

  • Message 55

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by GEm (U4356909) on Sunday, 6th January 2013

    That is absolute rot you have been fed there Helen. You package has never been covered above a minimum value without paying for the insurance so if your post lady was telling you it was in the past she was wrong and you weren't covered. The split of the businesses was done because the post offices make such huge losses that it was the only way to keep them open as any commercial org would close them within a few months.

    As for there being no justification for the price rise. Well the cost of a stamp has gone up less than inflation for many years. They have the same fuel costs as we do .. Or do you think it's magic that gets stuff from one end of the country to the other. It is also a highly intensive labour operation .. They still have to deliver to every address and haven't yet figured out how to do this without a person doing each one. Oh and would you credit it each one of those people who sort, transport and deliver your mail expect to get paid. Shocking isn't it that they expect to be able to live on those wages just like you do. Bear in mind that a £1a week pay rise for the postmen costs about half a million pounds a month or more because of the numbers of people needed to deliver the service. That money has to come from income.

    We still have one of the cheapest postal services in the world and it is high quality in terms of the independent service figures the regulator monitors. The courier firms are cheaper for businesses but their delivery to your customer is nowhere near the quality of RM and Parcelforce and what do you think they do with your packages that are hard to deliver or to difficult addresses? There is a good reason they are RMs biggest customers because they repost them through the mail service.

    Rant over

    Report message5

  • Message 56

    , in reply to message 51.

    Posted by auldhairy (U14258268) on Sunday, 6th January 2013


    On a bike like this?
    www.google.co.uk/img...

    Would you Hoddles?

    Report message6

  • Message 57

    , in reply to message 55.

    Posted by Spartacus (U14762542) on Sunday, 6th January 2013

    My packages used to be covered if the value was under £50 irrespective of content. If over that, I had to pay extra. Now the particular content rather than just the value has become a price issue. Why would staff suddenly say this if it was untrue?

    It seems to me that this will be either an additional risk to my business or an additional cost depending on which way I go. It may possibly be different if I deal direct with Royal Mail rather than taking packages to the post office. I shall have to check.

    Report message7

  • Message 58

    , in reply to message 57.

    Posted by wiseraphael (U14258190) on Sunday, 6th January 2013

    FT Online....

    "High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f...

    ft.com > UK >
    Business
    Advanced search
    Sign in Site tour Register Subscribe

    Home
    UK
    Business
    Economy
    UK Companies
    Politics & Policy
    UK Small Companies
    Tools
    World
    Companies
    Markets
    Global Economy
    Lex
    Comment
    Management





    December 16, 2012 9:44 pm
    Staff to own 10% of privatised Royal Mail

    By Brian Groom, Business and Employment Editor

    The coalition is pressing ahead with plans for Royal Mail’s 150,000 staff to own at least 10 per cent of the business as it accelerates preparations to privatise the state-owned postal operator.

    Michael Fallon, the Conservative business minister, is weighing options such as a John Lewis-style trust or individual shareholdings for employees as part of the sell-off, scheduled for 2013-14."

    Report message8

  • Message 59

    , in reply to message 58.

    Posted by wiseraphael (U14258190) on Sunday, 6th January 2013

    OOOPs..sorry....pasted too much!!!

    But you get the gist!

    Report message9

  • Message 60

    , in reply to message 21.

    Posted by Go away historians of the future (U1484964) on Sunday, 6th January 2013

    >> The point about rail and mail, as I suspect Mrs T realised, is that they are inherently loss-making, and therefore cannot really be privatised <<

    Mrs T used to take half a billion quid a year out of Royal Mail to pay for other peoples' tax cuts.

    Report message10

  • Message 61

    , in reply to message 21.

    Posted by hoddles off into the sunset (U14129169) on Sunday, 6th January 2013

    The point about rail and mail, as I suspect Mrs T realised, is that they are inherently loss-making, and therefore cannot really be privatised successfully 

    "Royal Mail profits pave way for privatisation"
    www.telegraph.co.uk/...

    Report message11

  • Message 62

    , in reply to message 55.

    Posted by littlecandle (U2651900) on Sunday, 6th January 2013

    Rant over 
    Good rant.

    Loot is perfectly right. RM was a milch cow for successive administrations; profits that should have been re-invested in modernising plant and processes were siphoned off for years. The pension pot was similarly underfunded.

    lc

    Report message12

  • Message 63

    , in reply to message 57.

    Posted by GEm (U4356909) on Monday, 7th January 2013

    Helen

    You are being asked about the contents of your package - it should be against a list of prohibited items which is a legal requirement and should have been enforced properly by Counters staff and by the account people with account customers who post in bulk.

    Your lady at the PO seems to be completely confused and telling people incorrect information. The coverage for loss on your packages has not changed and you should be being asked if the contents exceed the minimum value and if you WISH to insure it further. In terms of contents the Counters staff have not been following the law for years and have been accepting packages they should not have. The authorities are cracking down on this - and while RM are leading on it you will find that the Couriers are having to follow suit if they want to retain their licences to operate.

    I don't know what you are posting but here's a helpful guide. You might want to refer your Counters lady to it
    www.royalmail.com/de...

    I wonder if she's using it as an excuse to get you to upgrade what you pay for - to boost her own income!

    Report message13

  • Message 64

    , in reply to message 63.

    Posted by Spartacus (U14762542) on Monday, 7th January 2013

    I have never sent prohibited items. I do, however, make and send jewellery. This was covered by the normal insurance when I used to make jewellery years ago. I started up my business again last year and am now told that jewellery is not covered except by special delivery.

    Is the lady at the post office wrong about it not being covered now then? I don't think she's the type to do something just to line her own pockets - not my experience of her at all.

    Anyhow I shall check it all out before I send any more stuff by post.

    Report message14

  • Message 65

    , in reply to message 63.

    Posted by hotmousemat (U2388917) on Monday, 7th January 2013

    Your lady at the PO seems to be completely confused and telling people incorrect information.....

    I wonder if she's using it as an excuse to get you to upgrade what you pay for - to boost her own income! 


    It is about the bottom line. She has sales targets. She has been told to to get you to buy higher value services. If she doesn't meet her sales targets she will be sacked. That is how life is in the commercial world.

    Report message15

  • Message 66

    , in reply to message 64.

    Posted by GEm (U4356909) on Monday, 7th January 2013

    Helen

    Standard post doesn't and never has carried any insurance whatsoever. You needed to buy the insured service. Sometimes RM would make ex-gratia payments (usually a book of 1c stamps) in the case of loss of a normal standard post item but there is NO insurance - and never has been (for at least 30 years - I can't tell you about before that). So whoever told you that standard post was insured was incorrect.

    If you want insurance then basic special delivery covers you up to a minimum amount - if your contents are worth more than that it is up to you if you want to purchase the insurance at extra cost for the extra value if you don't and it is lost you get the min amount back. If you insure it then you'll get what you insured it for. It's the same way as most insurance works.

    So your jewellery isn't prohibited - so you should still be given the list to confirm that it isn't something that's on the prohibited list and you might be asked to sign to say you've been shown it and confirmed that the package doesn't contain any prohibited items.

    Insurance then is standard on special delivery - there is NO INSURANCE on normal postal service. So she is correct in saying you have to buy it but not that anything has changed. The amounts may have varied a little over the years (the minimum) but the premise is the same. You buy standard service - no insurance, you buy special delivery you have a minimum insurance, if you want more insurance there is a charge for that.

    So - yes she is giving you a mix of correct and incorrect information. If you post quite a bit then it's worth checking with RM whether you could get it cheaper on a contract service. Check out their website for special delivery for the definitive amounts and service.

    Report message16

  • Message 67

    , in reply to message 66.

    Posted by DeeKay Bee - Disenfranchised (U236881) on Monday, 7th January 2013

    What about the up to £46 for lost post?

    www.royalmail.com/cu...


    It looks as if it makes a difference what the jewellery is made of, the Royal Mail definition of jewellery is

    i) precious metal that has been manufactured in such a way as to add value to it, including coins used for ornament;
    ii) diamonds and precious stones;
    iii) watches and jewellery where the cases of are made wholly or mainly of precious metal;
    iv) similar articles with an intrinsic value other than the value of the workmanship.

    so silver should go Special Delivery but presumably copper (for example) can go normal post.

    www.royalmail.com/cu...

    Report message17

  • Message 68

    , in reply to message 66.

    Posted by Spartacus (U14762542) on Monday, 7th January 2013

    Well that's funny because two years ago an item I sent went missing in the post (standard, not special delivery) and Royal Mail refunded me the costs of the item and postage. I think you may be mistaken in what you are saying.

    Report message18

  • Message 69

    , in reply to message 67.

    Posted by Spartacus (U14762542) on Monday, 7th January 2013

    That sounds more like my understanding of things DeeKay Bee. Not all my stuff is silver (or the silver content is minimal) but some things are mainly silver. There does seem to be a grey area as to what counts.

    With a silver item which has a value of £25 sending it by special delivery could add 20% to the price. It's one thing paying for insurance with items worth £100 or more but most of my stuff is under £40 and the additional cost could make the difference between making a sale and not making one.

    Report message19

  • Message 70

    , in reply to message 67.

    Posted by _ShropshireLad_ (U10844552) on Monday, 7th January 2013

    What about the up to £46 for lost post? 

    That was what my lady said to me, parcel was covered for up £46, but for anything more than £46 but less than £500 I needed Special Delivery. 

    Report message20

  • Message 71

    , in reply to message 69.

    Posted by Spartacus (U14762542) on Monday, 7th January 2013

    That was what my lady said to me, parcel was covered for up £46, but for anything more than £46 but less than £500 I needed Special Delivery. 

    Exactly - this has always been the case (though maybe with changes in value over time and I was never told Jewellery was not included until the last month or so.

    I was told that there is noq an exception for jewellery which had to be sent special delivery to be insured even if the value is below £46 - doesn't make any sense to me.

    Wot have you done to the thread BTW, Shrops? I kept getting an error when I tried to reply to you!

    Report message21

  • Message 72

    , in reply to message 71.

    Posted by DeeKay Bee - Disenfranchised (U236881) on Monday, 7th January 2013

    I've just been looking on a website and people who have had jewellery go missing have only been offered the cost of the materials rather than the value of the object, it makes you wonder whether it not best to just take the risk and cut your loses unless the item is very valuable.

    www.ekmcommunity.com...

    Report message22

  • Message 73

    , in reply to message 43.

    Posted by Edinburgh_Ranger (U1590150) on Monday, 7th January 2013

    On Monday I'm going to ask our postman, who is also a friend, what he and others who work for the Royal Mail what they think about the privatisation.  My brother works for the Royal Mail AH and he is constantly astounded by the utter shambles of an organisation that it is and how many of the staff do so little meaningful work.

    Report message23

  • Message 74

    , in reply to message 72.

    Posted by DeeKay Bee - Disenfranchised (U236881) on Monday, 7th January 2013

    Someone on another website said that because jewellery isn't covered they said the lost items were 'craft items' and got a refund, interestingly that was over three years ago so you must have been misinformed if you were told you could send jewellery two years ago.

    www.craftsforum.co.u...

    Report message24

  • Message 75

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by Mr_Edwards (U3815709) on Monday, 7th January 2013

    Already started hairy. I use the RM as little as possible now, because they have got greedy. I didn't send a single Christmas card by mail, and most important stuff I receive now comes by e-mail or by 3rd party delivery companies.  Me too... and bizarrely, those third party providers include the US Postal Service.

    Report message25

  • Message 76

    , in reply to message 72.

    Posted by Spartacus (U14762542) on Monday, 7th January 2013

    Fortunately the folk I was sending silver stuff to before Christmas were folk I knew. Dunno what to do when it comes to total strangers buying online, though. There are some devious folk in the world, sadly, and I can't really afford to make losses at the mo...

    Report message26

  • Message 77

    , in reply to message 74.

    Posted by Spartacus (U14762542) on Monday, 7th January 2013

    The item that got lost two years ago wasn't jewellery, but (come to think of it) I don't recall being asked what type of item it was when I posted it.

    I wasn't making jewellery at that point (or at least, not for sale) - it has been many years since I made jewellery for sale. It was only in 2012 that I restarted my jewellery making business and all the sales have either been in person or to people I know.

    The problem is one I will have to face in the coming year, though...

    Report message27

Back to top

About this Board

Welcome to the Archers Messageboard.

or register to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

This messageboard is now closed.

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.