Postwatch responds to the Delivery Exception consultation
The Universal Service Obligation (USO) requires Royal Mail to provide one delivery and one collection (at every delivery/collection point) ever working day of the week. There are of course occasions when mail is not delivered every day and they are classed as either USO failures or delivery exception cases. Postcomm recently conducted a consultation to review Royal Mail’s Universal Service Obligation for Delivery Services. We welcomed the opportunity to comment on this consultation.
Following publication of the consultation, our key concerns within the consultation were:
- 15 minute rule
- Health and Safety assessments
- Appeals process
The 15 minute rule defines whether an address along a private access road or track in poor condition should receive daily postal deliveries. If it takes more than 15 minutes for the round trip from the public road to reach the address, Royal Mail does not have to deliver to the premises, but will seek to agree an alternative delivery arrangement such as a roadside box.
We believe that the 15 minute rule should be retained but if there is any flexibility in individual circumstances, it should be weighted in favour of the mail recipients. We consider that it would be more beneficial for Postcomm to consider exceptions made under the 15 minute rule in a broader context, for example, looking at the geographical area that the exception is based in, and comparing it to deliveries made in similar areas.
Under the current policy, Royal Mail is entitled to continue to categorise addresses as long term health and safety exceptions if the condition of the access to the premises would present health and safety risks to Royal Mail staff if they carried out deliveries. Royal Mail may only make a long term exception or temporary suspension on health & safety grounds. This entails trained Royal Mail staff undertaking a health & safety risk assessment before reaching a long term exception.
We consider that the health & safety process needs to be more streamlined, with all three organisations, Postcomm, Postwatch and Royal Mail playing an equal role in deciding an exception. It should also take account of local circumstances, geography, weather conditions, custom and practice in the ways of working in the area.
We believe that Royal Mail’s estimated cost of delivering 3 times a week to excepted cases is not adequate. We consider that it would be beneficial for Royal Mail to employ a third party to deliver to these excepted cases that are more familiar with the area. This will benefit Royal Mail by ensuring its USO is not affected by stopping deliveries to these areas. We believe that the minimum delivery requirement should be raised to 3 times a week.
We see no reason why Royal Mail needs to have two stages for an appeal, when the exception is originally decided by the Delivery Office Manager. We agree that Stages 1 and 2 should be combined, and we believe that extending the time frame for Stage 3 will allow us to conduct a more thorough analysis of the case, which will prove to be more beneficial for all parties involved. Furthermore, we strongly believe it necessary for Postcomm to have a time limit for Stage 4 appeal, as this is fairer to the consumer. We believe that a three stage appeals process is more efficient and effective, with strict time limits and an improved definition, for each party to whom the appellant contacts, of their duties.
To read our full response, please click here.
Following publication of the consultation, our key concerns within the consultation were:
- 15 minute rule
- Health and Safety assessments
- Appeals process
The 15 minute rule defines whether an address along a private access road or track in poor condition should receive daily postal deliveries. If it takes more than 15 minutes for the round trip from the public road to reach the address, Royal Mail does not have to deliver to the premises, but will seek to agree an alternative delivery arrangement such as a roadside box.
We believe that the 15 minute rule should be retained but if there is any flexibility in individual circumstances, it should be weighted in favour of the mail recipients. We consider that it would be more beneficial for Postcomm to consider exceptions made under the 15 minute rule in a broader context, for example, looking at the geographical area that the exception is based in, and comparing it to deliveries made in similar areas.
Under the current policy, Royal Mail is entitled to continue to categorise addresses as long term health and safety exceptions if the condition of the access to the premises would present health and safety risks to Royal Mail staff if they carried out deliveries. Royal Mail may only make a long term exception or temporary suspension on health & safety grounds. This entails trained Royal Mail staff undertaking a health & safety risk assessment before reaching a long term exception.
We consider that the health & safety process needs to be more streamlined, with all three organisations, Postcomm, Postwatch and Royal Mail playing an equal role in deciding an exception. It should also take account of local circumstances, geography, weather conditions, custom and practice in the ways of working in the area.
We believe that Royal Mail’s estimated cost of delivering 3 times a week to excepted cases is not adequate. We consider that it would be beneficial for Royal Mail to employ a third party to deliver to these excepted cases that are more familiar with the area. This will benefit Royal Mail by ensuring its USO is not affected by stopping deliveries to these areas. We believe that the minimum delivery requirement should be raised to 3 times a week.
We see no reason why Royal Mail needs to have two stages for an appeal, when the exception is originally decided by the Delivery Office Manager. We agree that Stages 1 and 2 should be combined, and we believe that extending the time frame for Stage 3 will allow us to conduct a more thorough analysis of the case, which will prove to be more beneficial for all parties involved. Furthermore, we strongly believe it necessary for Postcomm to have a time limit for Stage 4 appeal, as this is fairer to the consumer. We believe that a three stage appeals process is more efficient and effective, with strict time limits and an improved definition, for each party to whom the appellant contacts, of their duties.
To read our full response, please click here.
posted by Anonymous at 3:42 pm
1 Comments:
OK, this is none of my business, but I used to be a postman so I have an opinion.
The 15 minute rule is a stupid rule.
I worked in Norway for a while - postmen there do not drive up long and winding farm tracks to deliver letters to the door. In fact, locked mailboxes are clustered together at the end of the street, so the postmen do not even have to go to each address.
I'm willing to bet that no other postal service in the world delivers to addresses.
The real question is the kind of service we want - and the kind of service that is affordable. There really is no need for a postman to be lugging 30 kg of mail up 300-odd addresses, each with individual flights of steps.
We need to get real - how much quicker would it be if each address had to have a mailbox on their boundary closest to the road? How much pointless time and effort would that save?
15 minutes? What nonsense. 15 seconds more like.
Post a Comment
<< Home