BBC left wing bias in the One Show

In article ,
Woody wrote:
Better than that - anyone see Andrew Marr last Sunday? Had the
CWU leader on it giving every chance to show what a nice chap he
is, what a reasonable lot the CWU are, and how they are trying to
look after their customers. Anyone from Royal Mail interviewed?
Was there heck.

Seems to me that BBC presentation is getting more and more one
sided, especially as we get close to an election, with the left
being able to put their standpoint without converse comment from
anyone.

The news in general is full of government and RM spokesmen giving the
reasons why RM must be 'modernised'. You'd have to be pretty insular not
to have heard them. Can't say I'm familiar with the union's counter
arguments, though.
But I do know the service to my home has deteriorated over the past few
years with now only one delivery per day - and that now in the middle of
the day rather than early which was much more convenient. Without the cost
of posting having come down. And a big increase in junk mail.
And of all the state monopolies - or ex state ones - RM to me at least
provided a decent service.

--
*Forget the Joneses, I keep us up with the Simpsons.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

...snip...

The news in general is full of government and RM spokesmen giving the
reasons why RM must be 'modernised'. You'd have to be pretty insular not
to have heard them. Can't say I'm familiar with the union's counter
arguments, though.
But I do know the service to my home has deteriorated over the past few
years with now only one delivery per day - and that now in the middle of
the day rather than early which was much more convenient. Without the cost
of posting having come down. And a big increase in junk mail.
And of all the state monopolies - or ex state ones - RM to me at least
provided a decent service.

Getting a little political, the reasons for modernisation (meaning what?)
seem always to be that Royal Mail doesn't compete well with its opponents.
Sadly nobody mentions that....

1. No opponents are legally required to deliver almost anything anywhere in
the UK.

2. No opponents are legally required to provide and empty Post Boxes.

3. No opponents are readily accessible by any member of the public (when did
you as an individual send a Fedex package?)

It's not a level playing field so comparisons against the opposition are not
100% fair.

Paul DS.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Woody wrote:
Better than that - anyone see Andrew Marr last Sunday? Had the
CWU leader on it giving every chance to show what a nice chap he
is, what a reasonable lot the CWU are, and how they are trying to
look after their customers. Anyone from Royal Mail interviewed?
Was there heck.

Seems to me that BBC presentation is getting more and more one
sided, especially as we get close to an election, with the left
being able to put their standpoint without converse comment from
anyone.

The news in general is full of government and RM spokesmen giving the
reasons why RM must be 'modernised'. You'd have to be pretty insular not
to have heard them. Can't say I'm familiar with the union's counter
arguments, though.
But I do know the service to my home has deteriorated over the past few
years with now only one delivery per day - and that now in the middle of
the day rather than early which was much more convenient. Without the cost
of posting having come down. And a big increase in junk mail.
And of all the state monopolies - or ex state ones - RM to me at least
provided a decent service.

And why do the posties run everywhere, or is it just around here?

Are they on a bonus, or overworked?

No wonder they won't ring and wait to deliver a parcel.

--
Max Demian

Max Demian wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Woody wrote:
Better than that - anyone see Andrew Marr last Sunday? Had the
CWU leader on it giving every chance to show what a nice chap he
is, what a reasonable lot the CWU are, and how they are trying to
look after their customers. Anyone from Royal Mail interviewed?
Was there heck.

Seems to me that BBC presentation is getting more and more one
sided, especially as we get close to an election, with the left
being able to put their standpoint without converse comment from
anyone.

The news in general is full of government and RM spokesmen giving the
reasons why RM must be 'modernised'. You'd have to be pretty insular
not to have heard them. Can't say I'm familiar with the union's
counter arguments, though.
But I do know the service to my home has deteriorated over the past
few years with now only one delivery per day - and that now in the
middle of the day rather than early which was much more convenient.
Without the cost of posting having come down. And a big increase in
junk mail. And of all the state monopolies - or ex state ones - RM to me
at
least provided a decent service.

And why do the posties run everywhere, or is it just around here?

Are they on a bonus, or overworked?

No wonder they won't ring and wait to deliver a parcel.

It's called 'job and finish', one of the archaic industrial union practices
under which posties can go home and put their feet up as soon as they've
finished their round regardless of how little time it takes them.

"Norman Wells" wrote in message
...
Max Demian wrote:

And why do the posties run everywhere, or is it just around here?

Are they on a bonus, or overworked?

No wonder they won't ring and wait to deliver a parcel.

It's called 'job and finish', one of the archaic industrial union
practices under which posties can go home and put their feet up as soon as
they've finished their round regardless of how little time it takes them.

A good job they never did it with milk rounds, or they'd have put extra
batteries on and clattered around at 40mph.

--
Max Demian

In article ,
Norman Wells wrote:
It's called 'job and finish', one of the archaic industrial union
practices under which posties can go home and put their feet up as soon
as they've finished their round regardless of how little time it takes
them.

Hardly an archaic practice - but one which promotes efficiency. But
perhaps you'd prefer to wait for your mail while the postie walks at a
regulation pace?

--
*I took an IQ test and the results were negative.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

The news in general is full of government and RM spokesmen giving the
reasons why RM must be 'modernised'. You'd have to be pretty insular
not to have heard them. Can't say I'm familiar with the union's
counter arguments, though.
But I do know the service to my home has deteriorated over the past
few years with now only one delivery per day - and that now in the
middle of the day rather than early which was much more convenient.
Without the cost of posting having come down. And a big increase in
junk mail. And of all the state monopolies - or ex state ones - RM to me
at
least provided a decent service.

And why do the posties run everywhere, or is it just around here?

Are they on a bonus, or overworked?

No wonder they won't ring and wait to deliver a parcel.

It's called 'job and finish', one of the archaic industrial union
practices under which posties can go home and put their feet up as soon as
they've finished their round regardless of how little time it takes them.

My father used to be a postie. In rural mid Wales, if you got back too early
they sent you out again with another bag of mail to an area you probably
didn't know!

Until I heard it from an anonymous postie on PM this evening it
had never occurred to me the pros and cons of two deliveries.

The first delivery was for post that originated locally (and that
can be a large radius) or that arrived for sorting in the early
hours. The second delivery was for post that had a longer
distance to travel overnight and didn't arrive early enough to be
sorted in time for the first delivery.

The RM management decided a few years ago that ALL deliveries
should not start until the latest post had arrived and been
sorted. Result the second delivery became the first and only
delivery often in the early afternoon.

The side effect is that there is now too much for the postie to
carry in one delivery so much of the post, no matter when it
arrives for sorting, has to be left for delivery the next day,
and so a backlog builds up that they never have time to get
through. Conversely with two deliveries the postie could easily
carry the bag, and the bag for the second delivery was
consequently lighter and did not require a visit to every address
per se.

The irony is that both services - single or double delivery -
could still be handled within one shift. So what have the
management achieved by the changes other than disgruntled and
tired staff, and disgusted customers who will take their business
elsewhere?

As someone else said, management by jumped up idiots holding
so-called business degrees who have never worked on the shop
floor or had any contact with their customers making far reaching
decisions that will ultimately see the demise of their industry -
but they won't be out of a job, will they?

/rant mode off/


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com
--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

In article ,
Woody wrote:
The side effect is that there is now too much for the postie to
carry in one delivery so much of the post, no matter when it
arrives for sorting, has to be left for delivery the next day,
and so a backlog builds up that they never have time to get
through. Conversely with two deliveries the postie could easily
carry the bag, and the bag for the second delivery was
consequently lighter and did not require a visit to every address
per se.

I've not seen a postie with a bag for ages - all trolleys round here.

Wonder what they do about security when they can't take the trolley with
them - like perhaps a tower block?

--
*Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are (usually) unnecessary *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 11:13:01 +0100, "Paul D.Smith"
wrote:

Getting a little political, the reasons for modernisation (meaning what?)
seem always to be that Royal Mail doesn't compete well with its opponents.
Sadly nobody mentions that....

1. No opponents are legally required to deliver almost anything anywhere in
the UK.

2. No opponents are legally required to provide and empty Post Boxes.

3. No opponents are readily accessible by any member of the public (when did
you as an individual send a Fedex package?)

It's not a level playing field so comparisons against the opposition are not
100% fair.

Plus their opponents are allowed to dump mail on the local Royal Mail
sorting office and they have to deliver it for a token fee.