LTB 485/22 - ROYAL MAIL GROUP DISPUTES - OFCOM & THE USE OF 'RYDE' DELIVERY APP

[POSTMAN]

LTB 485/22 - ROYAL MAIL GROUP DISPUTES - OFCOM & THE USE OF ‘RYDE’ DELIVERY APP
No. 485/22
7th December 2022

TO: ALL POSTAL BRANCHES

Dear Colleagues
ROYAL MAIL GROUP DISPUTES – OFCOM & THE USE OF ‘RYDE’ DELIVERY APP
Enquiries have been received from Branches in relation to the ‘Ryde App’ being used by Royal Mail Group to recruit couriers in their ongoing attempt to undermine the successful strike action that is still overwhelmingly supported by our members.

Concerns Raised with Ofcom
https://www.cwu.org/wp-content/uploads/ ... egrity.pdf
The attached correspondence has been sent to Dame Melanie Dawes – CEO Ofcom, and Lord Michael Grade the Chair, to raise our legitimate concerns about the risk of loss and theft of mail, as well as the increased possibility of identity theft and fraud from casual employees having access to the names and addresses of customers. Royal Mail Group has not provided any definitive insight or information as to what the training involves and there is the real concern that it will be insufficient to achieve the mail integrity obligations of Royal Mail as set out in ‘Essential Condition 1’ of their licence. In addition, it is questionable as to whether background checks on applicants are being completed thoroughly.

Ryde Courier App
In terms of Royal Mail Group employees applying for such ‘Ryde’ courier posts, below is the clause taken from the 2018 OPG contract, that still pertains and which you may be familiar with. This relates to employees taking other employment.

Your employment with Royal Mail is a full/part occupation. You must not engage in any other employment such that you would be unable to meet your contractual obligations to Royal Mail. Further, any additional hours of work you may perform for another employer aggregated with those that you perform under this contract must not exceed the limits that apply under the Working Time Regulations 1998 or any agreements that relate to working time. You must not be involved in or have an interest in the activities of any organisation whose business is in competition with that of Royal Mail or any of its business units or subsidiaries and must advise Royal Mail of any other employment which you hold or intend to take.

Branches and Representatives will recognise and appreciate that the union has not directly or indirectly encouraged members to disrupt Ryde’s activities. What is apparent however, is that if Royal Mail Group use ‘Ryde’ couriers to deliver letters this is a de facto contracting out of USO work and is something that we will continue to challenge via Ofcom and the media.

In closing we would like to express our thanks for the continued support of all Reps and members during this dispute. The success of the industrial strategy is despite the provocative stance taken by Royal Mail Group.

Further updates will be provided in due course.
Any enquiries on the above should be addressed to the General Secretary/Acting Deputy General Secretary at jdunn@cwu.org/hford@cwu.org.
Yours sincerely

Dave Ward Andy Furey
General Secretary Acting Deputy General Secretary (Postal)

[k979aaa]

Well this is how they want the whole of R/M apparently by paying deliveroo and Uber Eats drivers to drive Royal Mail vans for £132.64 for an 8 hour shift story here: https://novaramedia.com/2022/12/07/roya ... es-strike/ So if your thinking of breaking the strike in the end you could be on less than minimum wages of £50 for same 8 hour shift after the dispute if Simon Thompson wins!

[wandle]

The CWU are absolutely right to get the regulator involved. Using people who have not had background checks to deliver Mail is a breach of the licence conditions for USO provider(s).
Are Thompson & co deliberately trying to get RM stripped of their licence (and thus relieved of the Universal Service Obligation

[OldGamekeeper]

That's so close to the probable truth but has OFCOM recognised the position that they are being manoeuvred into ?
Since opening up the postal market to competition only one company has attempted to provide a letter delivery service (Whistl?) which failed miserably within a matter of weeks after much national acclaim at launch....and it didn't even consider delivering outside major cities where delivery costs need to be subsidised. As such much of RM letter workload is DELIVER ONLY with a price set by OFCOM. The result is RM having to maintain a vastly more complex delivery network than that of highly profitable parcels... which is resource hungry for a negligible amount of profit i.e. far to much effort for too little return when obliged to satisfy shareholders. There is now the question of whether RM still have the expertise to manage such a network given the number and level of talent that has been removed from management ranks. This last point was recognised in the financial press at the time RM announced their last round of manager reductions i.e. 'a move too far that may risk loss of control'. Some months later those concerns have become reality and there seems no urgency or effort to remedy the poor service given. So is there a strategy to keep taking the OFCOM fines until the regulator is put in a position to make a decision....increase the price of delivery of letters posted with RM competitors or tell HM Government they have no choice but to renationalise if they wish to maintain a service delivering their tax and NHS communications. No private or public limited company is going to want it so OFCOM wont be able to give it away. But then they might concede initially to a 5 day delivery service before bowing down to 3 or 4 days. They certainly need to get their thinking caps on and get seriously involved.

[OldGamekeeper]

That's so close to the probable truth but has OFCOM recognised the position that they are being manoeuvred into ?
Since opening up the postal market to competition only one company has attempted to provide a letter delivery service (Whistl?) which failed miserably within a matter of weeks after much national acclaim at launch....and it didn't even consider delivering outside major cities where delivery costs need to be subsidised. As such much of RM letter workload is DELIVER ONLY with a price set by OFCOM. The result is RM having to maintain a vastly more complex delivery network than that of highly profitable parcels... which is resource hungry for a negligible amount of profit i.e. far to much effort for too little return when obliged to satisfy shareholders. There is now the question of whether RM still have the expertise to manage such a network given the number and level of talent that has been removed from management ranks. This last point was recognised in the financial press at the time RM announced their last round of manager reductions i.e. 'a move too far that may risk loss of control'. Some months later those concerns have become reality and there seems no urgency or effort to remedy the poor service given. So is there a strategy to keep taking the OFCOM fines until the regulator is put in a position to make a decision....increase the price of delivery of letters posted with RM competitors or tell HM Government they have no choice but to renationalise if they wish to maintain a service delivering their tax and NHS communications. No private or public limited company is going to want it so OFCOM wont be able to give it away. But then they might concede initially to a 5 day delivery service before bowing down to 3 or 4 days. They certainly need to get their thinking caps on and get seriously involved.

[clashcityrocker]

That's so close to the probable truth but has OFCOM recognised the position that they are being manoeuvred into ?
Since opening up the postal market to competition only one company has attempted to provide a letter delivery service (Whistl?) which failed miserably within a matter of weeks after much national acclaim at launch....

Not quite correct.
The company began delivering in West London in April 2012, later rolling out its end to end service in Manchester and Liverpool.[3]

In May 2015, Whistl announced that it would suspend door to door deliveries in London, Liverpool, and Manchester after the private equity investor LDC, a division of Lloyds Bank, decided not to fund further expansion citing "ongoing changes in postal market in the United Kingdom dynamics and the complexity of the regulatory landscape"

So 3 years of delivery. Royal mail then screwed them for which they paid a hefty fine but led to their backer pulling out.

[posted]

other than the obvious 'delivery' difference, how is this fundamentally different from RM using contractors to drive HGVs, carrying our mail in their vehicles and sometimes those contractors sub-contracting?

[k979aaa]

other than the obvious 'delivery' difference, how is this fundamentally different from RM using contractors to drive HGVs, carrying our mail in their vehicles and sometimes those contractors sub-contracting?

Because you will not have a contract ie they can tell you don't need you today do one is that going to pay the bills!

[posted]

other than the obvious 'delivery' difference, how is this fundamentally different from RM using contractors to drive HGVs, carrying our mail in their vehicles and sometimes those contractors sub-contracting?

Because you will not have a contract ie they can tell you don't need you today do one is that going to pay the bills!

I was questioning if the precedence is already there, contracting out and that being potentially further sub contracted out

[TopperGas]

other than the obvious 'delivery' difference, how is this fundamentally different from RM using contractors to drive HGVs, carrying our mail in their vehicles and sometimes those contractors sub-contracting?

Not sure it's any real difference than the 11.000 agency staff delivering mail etc, when I started as a postie via an agency I only had a few basic checks carried out. I sense a bit like the CWU asking the Government to review DK's potential takeover, OFCOM will have a quick review of the facts and then say they've no concerns. You do start to get the impression the CWU are just clutching at straws.

[k979aaa]

other than the obvious 'delivery' difference, how is this fundamentally different from RM using contractors to drive HGVs, carrying our mail in their vehicles and sometimes those contractors sub-contracting?

Not sure it's any real difference than the 11.000 agency staff delivering mail etc, when I started as a postie via an agency I only had a few basic checks carried out. I sense a bit like the CWU asking the Government to review DK's potential takeover, OFCOM will have a quick review of the facts and then say they've no concerns. You do start to get the impression the CWU are just clutching at straws.

Look if you don't fight you loose if you die fighting your a hero not a hero just not a surrender monkey either that some on here epouse!