Union warns of £2 Cumbria rural postage charge

[TrueBlueTerrier]

http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/busin ... d/1.323479" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

People could end up paying £2 to send letters to rural homes in Cumbria if the Government presses ahead with a planned privatisation of Royal Mail, a union has warned.

Paul Griffiths, a Carlisle postal worker and union rep for the Communication Workers’ Union (CWU), called the Government’s plan to sell off the publicly-owned firm “disgusting”.

Business Secretary Vince Cable unveiled the coalition’s controversial plan this week.

Ministers plan to sell off 90 per cent of the company to the private sector, with 10 per cent going in shares to Royal Mail workers.

Overseas firms would be allowed to bid and there will be no upper limit on how big a stake a single company can buy.

That opens up the possibility of a foreign-owned company completing a takeover of the British postal network.

Mr Griffiths said: “I am frankly pretty disgusted with the plan, but this is what happens when you get a Tory government.

“We are only one year in to a three-year modernisation deal the union signed with the previous government.

“We want a chance to prove we can modernise.

“We have already changed; for instance, we have agreed to treat Saturday as a normal working day and people have taken voluntary redundancies to make way for new flexible working practices.

“The postal service is a public service; it is not viable for a private company to run it as it is now.

Mr Griffiths added: “People rely on the post; how many thousands of people run businesses based on a PO box?

“If it is privatised, I can see it costing £2 to send a birthday card to somewhere like Seascale or Egremont.”

The Government said the Royal Mail and the Post Office were two “cornerstones” of British life.

Mr Cable said the plans were aimed at securing “vibrant futures” for both. “My policy is to put them on a stable footing for the future,” he said.

“Royal Mail is in a difficult position. There is no hiding the facts – mail volumes falling, a multi-billion-pound pension deficit, less efficiency than its competitors and an urgent need for more capital at a time when there are huge constraints on the public purse.”

Mr Cable said “substantial investment” was needed if the Royal Mail was to modernise and adapt better to the digital age.

[dvbuk55]

And Paul Griffiths knows this because....................I wonder what he would have said if he had been asked to justify his statement.

I don't doubt the pricing structure would change under privatisation eventually, but it's ludicrous to suggest a letter to Cumbria would cost £2.

[smokerjim]

And Paul Griffiths knows this because....................I wonder what he would have said if he had been asked to justify his statement.

I don't doubt the pricing structure would change under privatisation eventually, but it's ludicrous to suggest a letter to Cumbria would cost £2.

How often do we hear and read of unjustified ( and unjustifiable ) statements from management, competition, right wing journalists, politicians, businessmen, etc, etc ad nauseum? Why can't we do the same? What's good for the goose is good for the gander imo! to Paul Griffiths

[dvbuk55]

And Paul Griffiths knows this because....................I wonder what he would have said if he had been asked to justify his statement.

I don't doubt the pricing structure would change under privatisation eventually, but it's ludicrous to suggest a letter to Cumbria would cost £2.

How often do we hear and read of unjustified ( and unjustifiable ) statements from management, competition, right wing journalists, politicians, businessmen, etc, etc ad nauseum? Why can't we do the same? What's good for the goose is good for the gander imo! to Paul Griffiths

Wrong! In order to make a valid point he should not have stipulated specifics, such as £2 and Cumbria - what would have been more effective would be the allusion to price increases possibly by distance - that gets everyone thinking. The second point is if asked to justify the statement you look a bit silly if you cannot, which doesn't make it a lie exactly, but makes any further information, true or not, suspect.

[smokerjim]

And Paul Griffiths knows this because....................I wonder what he would have said if he had been asked to justify his statement.

I don't doubt the pricing structure would change under privatisation eventually, but it's ludicrous to suggest a letter to Cumbria would cost £2.

How often do we hear and read of unjustified ( and unjustifiable ) statements from management, competition, right wing journalists, politicians, businessmen, etc, etc ad nauseum? Why can't we do the same? What's good for the goose is good for the gander imo! to Paul Griffiths

Wrong! In order to make a valid point he should not have stipulated specifics, such as £2 and Cumbria - what would have been more effective would be the allusion to price increases possibly by distance - that gets everyone thinking. The second point is if asked to justify the statement you look a bit silly if you cannot, which doesn't make it a lie exactly, but makes any further information, true or not, suspect.

Fair enough, I'll conceed those points, but I still think the principle of using the media to publicise negative / worst case results of changes to RM still holds water.

[dvbuk55]

Wrong! In order to make a valid point he should not have stipulated specifics, such as £2 and Cumbria - what would have been more effective would be the allusion to price increases possibly by distance - that gets everyone thinking. The second point is if asked to justify the statement you look a bit silly if you cannot, which doesn't make it a lie exactly, but makes any further information, true or not, suspect.

Fair enough, I'll conceed those points, but I still think the principle of using the media to publicise negative / worst case results of changes to RM still holds water.

I couldn't agree more - the problem is you have to have people educated in how to deal with the media, not make unsupported claims and to date there isn't anyone who, in my opinion, has dealt with the media in whatever form in a manner which constitutes confidence.

I once made a reference to CWU TV and how very amateurish it appeared, the money would have been better spent on media training and please don't tell me they've had it.

[smokerjim]

Wrong! In order to make a valid point he should not have stipulated specifics, such as £2 and Cumbria - what would have been more effective would be the allusion to price increases possibly by distance - that gets everyone thinking. The second point is if asked to justify the statement you look a bit silly if you cannot, which doesn't make it a lie exactly, but makes any further information, true or not, suspect.

Fair enough, I'll conceed those points, but I still think the principle of using the media to publicise negative / worst case results of changes to RM still holds water.

I couldn't agree more - the problem is you have to have people educated in how to deal with the media, not make unsupported claims and to date there isn't anyone who, in my opinion, has dealt with the media in whatever form in a manner which constitutes confidence.

I once made a reference to CWU TV and how very amateurish it appeared, the money would have been better spent on media training and please don't tell me they've had it.

I'm sure they've had it...not the media training, just that they've had it ( which leaves us up sh*t creek in terms of PR, lobbying & spin )