Jump to content


RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE (ISSUE 397 - MAY 2014): Available to download now. Get the app from Apple Newsstand or GooglePlay, or click here to read it online now at Pocketmags.com - Print edition in shops from Friday, or click here to get it delivered by post in the UK or worldwide.

Rugby League World - April 2014
League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Royal Mail privatisation


  • Please log in to reply
128 replies to this topic

Poll: Are you in favour of Royal Mail privatisation? (27 member(s) have cast votes)

Are you in favour of Royal Mail privatisation?

  1. Yes (4 votes [14.81%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.81%

  2. No (23 votes [85.19%])

    Percentage of vote: 85.19%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#81 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,144 posts

Posted 15 November 2013 - 10:33 AM

agree entirely. She did more good for the UK than god ever did. the sad thing is the she was not able to finish the job.

#82 Griff9of13

Griff9of13
  • Coach
  • 5,074 posts

Posted 25 March 2014 - 10:04 AM

Didn't take long did it? Royal Mail plans to cut 1,600 jobs


"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

#83 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 15,955 posts

Posted 25 March 2014 - 10:29 AM

The thing about all of this is that no-one asked the public what we want.  The Royal Mail was treated as a standard company rather than a national service.  It's the same with other organisations that have been privatised, profit before service.

 

If they'd taken the time to ask the public what they want then I really doubt that they'd have said "my number one priority is to allow them to compete more efficiently against other companies".  It'd be down about the bottom with "I want Royal Mail senior managers to be paid more".  It was sold at a seriously undervalued price, service isn't going to improve, jobs are being cut and the public go from being the primary focus of a state service provider to being the cash cow of a private company.

 

Anyway, how will this allow them to "compete" more effectively?  Will they be cutting consumer prices?  Will they be reinforcing their delivery promises?  Will they be returning a second post?  Hiring more posties?  I think the answer is "none of the above, we just want to increase the profit we make so we can get higher bonuses and make bigger dividend payments".


  • bearman and Larry the Leit like this

Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#84 Griff9of13

Griff9of13
  • Coach
  • 5,074 posts

Posted 25 March 2014 - 10:45 AM

The thing about all of this is that no-one asked the public what we want.  The Royal Mail was treated as a standard company rather than a national service.  It's the same with other organisations that have been privatised, profit before service.

 

If they'd taken the time to ask the public what they want then I really doubt that they'd have said "my number one priority is to allow them to compete more efficiently against other companies".  It'd be down about the bottom with "I want Royal Mail senior managers to be paid more".  It was sold at a seriously undervalued price, service isn't going to improve, jobs are being cut and the public go from being the primary focus of a state service provider to being the cash cow of a private company.

 

Anyway, how will this allow them to "compete" more effectively?  Will they be cutting consumer prices?  Will they be reinforcing their delivery promises?  Will they be returning a second post?  Hiring more posties?  I think the answer is "none of the above, we just want to increase the profit we make so we can get higher bonuses and make bigger dividend payments".

 

Spot on. And in the mean time the country finds it has 1,600 more "shirkers" to support on it's hands. But hey, the share holders will be making a nice return so all's well with the world. <_<


"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

#85 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,144 posts

Posted 25 March 2014 - 11:36 AM

Interesting that you always chose the negative not the positive: http://www.bbc.co.uk...humber-26725473http://www.bbc.co.uk...humber-25431317http://www.theguardi...overnment-boosthttp://articles.econ...over-freelander

 

The Royal Mail employs, I understand, 150,000 people.

 

The proposed job losses are mainly " management", something I though might be popular in "The People's Republic of the TRL Fans Forum"


Edited by JohnM, 25 March 2014 - 11:43 AM.


#86 Griff9of13

Griff9of13
  • Coach
  • 5,074 posts

Posted 25 March 2014 - 01:32 PM

And all welcome news, but they're not Royal Mail, the subject of this thread. :rolleyes:

 

And, for your information, I never think job losses are a good thing regardless of which strata of the workforce they are being lost from. 


"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

#87 dhw

dhw
  • Coach
  • 610 posts

Posted 25 March 2014 - 04:14 PM

No privetisation has ever resulted in either a better service for the customers or lower prices - be warned, coming soon to a Post Office near you, the £1 First Class stamp for post that arrives at the same time as a second class stamp.

Yes it has.


  • JohnM likes this

#88 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,144 posts

Posted 25 March 2014 - 04:19 PM

And all welcome news, but they're not Royal Mail, the subject of this thread. :rolleyes:

 

And, for your information, I never think job losses are a good thing regardless of which strata of the workforce they are being lost from. 

 

can't take it in isolation, though.  Although allegedly "The vast majority of employees impacted will be in the Group’s operational and head office managerial population. There is no impact from this initiative on frontline employees, including postmen and women, or the services Royal Mail provides to its customers."  maybe the Royal Mail will lose staff in the Humber region to take up possibly higher paid jobs in the renewable energy sector.



#89 Moose

Moose
  • Coach
  • 118 posts

Posted 25 March 2014 - 04:30 PM

Didn't take long did it? Royal Mail plans to cut 1,600 jobs


The article also says that 50,000 employers have left their employment since the year 2003, long before privatisation. Having being one of the recipients of their extremely generous voluntary exit settlements in that period and providing the status quo still exists (the longest serving employer wishing to leave gets first chance, not last in first out,) then IMO there will be a queue a mile long to accept redundancy.

#90 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 19,144 posts

Posted 25 March 2014 - 10:11 PM

The article also says that 50,000 employers have left their employment since the year 2003, long before privatisation. Having being one of the recipients of their extremely generous voluntary exit settlements in that period and providing the status quo still exists (the longest serving employer wishing to leave gets first chance, not last in first out,) then IMO there will be a queue a mile long to accept redundancy.

 

Oh, now you've done it!  You can't come on here posting stuff like that!  :)



#91 John Drake

John Drake
  • Admin
  • 7,131 posts

Posted 01 April 2014 - 09:57 PM

The business secretary, Vince Cable, has refused to apologise over the government's privatisation of Royal Mail, despite a scathing report from the National Audit Office, which said undervaluing the share sale had cost the taxpayer £750m in a single day.

http://www.theguardi...urgent-question

 

There's a deep rooted sickness in this country, and this is another fine example of it. This goes far beyond mere incompetence. It is corporate robbery.


John Drake
Site Admin: TotalRL.com
TotalRL.com
Email: john.drake@totalrl.com


#92 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 15,955 posts

Posted 01 April 2014 - 10:08 PM

The thing that's missed so far by most commentaries on this is that despite the public share of the sell off being vastly over-subscribed, the government withheld a substantial number of shares for investment banks and other institutional investors called "priority investors".  The excuse was that they were more likely to hold the shares and provide stability when in reality of the 16 priority investors, 10 sold up entirely within a very short period to cash in on the share price surge.  A bit of a nasty whiff about that one...


  • Tiny Tim likes this

Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#93 John Drake

John Drake
  • Admin
  • 7,131 posts

Posted 01 April 2014 - 10:14 PM

The thing that's missed so far by most commentaries on this is that despite the public share of the sell off being vastly over-subscribed, the government withheld a substantial number of shares for investment banks and other institutional investors called "priority investors".  The excuse was that they were more likely to hold the shares and provide stability when in reality of the 16 priority investors, 10 sold up entirely within a very short period to cash in on the share price surge.  A bit of a nasty whiff about that one...

 

Cable trusted the banks. I mean, for heaven's sake, he trusted the banks!!! For that idiocy alone he's proved himself unfit to hold office.

 

Anyone with any honour would resign after losing the taxpayer £750 million, that's if he was given long enough to make the decision himself before being sacked.

 

Honour. Now there's a dirty word these days.

 

Bumbling old Vince. Imagine the sanctimony if he'd been sat on the opposition benches and someone else had engineered this disaster. It's not as if the country is short of money or anything...


  • Tiny Tim likes this

John Drake
Site Admin: TotalRL.com
TotalRL.com
Email: john.drake@totalrl.com


#94 bearman

bearman
  • Coach
  • 2,127 posts

Posted 01 April 2014 - 10:36 PM

The Tories found a way of moving money into the hands of rich people
That's what they do, that's why they are Tories.
Blame the working class saps that vote for them thinking that the Tories will ever consider them.

Take the Olympics we needed to invest in improving our rowing venue. The National centre Holme Pierpoint in Nottingham needed some money spending on it to make it a central venue for the people of this country.
The Prime Ministers public school Eton also needed an upgrade in order that the children of the rich could have first class facilities. It's a no brainer give the money from the peoples Olympics to Eton.
  • Trojan and Just Browny like this
Ron Banks
Bears and Barrow

#95 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 19,149 posts

Posted 02 April 2014 - 05:45 AM

Is anyone surprised by any of this?

#96 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 14,693 posts

Posted 02 April 2014 - 07:27 AM

Is anyone surprised by any of this?

No since the people who advised the government as to what the price should be were the same people who were going to buy the shares. There was a guy on World at One saying it had been a great success, they'd sold all the shares.   The sort of success where if you go into the street and offer fivers for three quid, that type of success!


"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#97 Tiny Tim

Tiny Tim
  • Coach
  • 6,525 posts

Posted 02 April 2014 - 09:01 AM

The thing that's missed so far by most commentaries on this is that despite the public share of the sell off being vastly over-subscribed, the government withheld a substantial number of shares for investment banks and other institutional investors called "priority investors".  The excuse was that they were more likely to hold the shares and provide stability when in reality of the 16 priority investors, 10 sold up entirely within a very short period to cash in on the share price surge.  A bit of a nasty whiff about that one...

I never knew that but I am not entirely surprised by it.



The last government were convinced that we were there to do their bidding. They wasted vast quantities of our money in order to spy on us, intimidate us and needlessly over regulate us, whilst gold plating their own pensions and expenses. Their behind the scenes encouragement of, and turning a blind eye to, the kettling and harrassment tactics of the Police are a shameful episode in our history which we need to remember and address urgently. - Haloman


#98 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 15,955 posts

Posted 02 April 2014 - 09:22 AM

I never knew that but I am not entirely surprised by it.

Linky to one story on it.


  • Tiny Tim likes this

Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#99 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 15,955 posts

Posted 02 April 2014 - 09:24 AM

The old saying of "vote Lib Dem, get Tories" was never more apparent than in this sorry tale...


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#100 shrek

shrek
  • Coach
  • 5,712 posts

Posted 02 April 2014 - 10:56 AM

The thing that's missed so far by most commentaries on this is that despite the public share of the sell off being vastly over-subscribed, the government withheld a substantial number of shares for investment banks and other institutional investors called "priority investors".  The excuse was that they were more likely to hold the shares and provide stability when in reality of the 16 priority investors, 10 sold up entirely within a very short period to cash in on the share price surge.  A bit of a nasty whiff about that one...

This was mentioned alot to be fair on Radio 4's Today this morning.

 

Doesn't sit right at all, I've no problem with joe bloggs taking a punt with his 750 quid or whatever the cap was, good luck to them and if they've made a quick profit I'm pleased for them.

 

However, the conflict of interests of firstly advising on the top price and then scooping up a job lot as a "priority investor" really does need to be addressed.


On Friday 28th March I'm taking part in the Wigan Streetsleep, raising money for The Brick charity who try to ensure nobody in Wigan finding themselves homeless spends a 2nd night on the streets and providing help and support via a foodbank.  Every penny counts so if you can spare anything at all its much appreciated - this link will take you to my sponsorship page thanks.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users