12/2009
Agency Changes Communiqué (ACC)
Date: 11th December 2009
To: ACC Circulation list
From: Paul Inwood, Agents Contract and Policy Development
Manager.
Subject: Deployment of Post Office® operating models in cases of
summary termination and resignation to avoid summary termination.
1. Executive Summary
With immediate effect, Post Office Limited will notify agents
that fall into the above categories that the outcome of their
termination, or resignation to avoid termination, may include the
deployment of new operating models in the locality within which
the existing Post Office® operates. In all such cases, Post
Office Limited will then review the vacancy and deploy the most
effective operating model possible, taking into account whatever
implementation constraints exist.
2. Background to this change.
Historically, Post Office Limited has worked to develop and
deploy new operating models e.g. Community sub postmaster,
Satellite, Restricted Hours, Outreach within the communities it
serves.
We have also piloted the Post Office® essentials concept in
communities that either had a traditional Post Office® operating
model, or no Post Office® offer at all. Note that, for the next
phase of Post Office® essentials pilots, these will be branded
externally as Post Office® Local, however there are references to
Post Office® essentials in various documents. Should we decide to
continue with this model after the pilot stage, all references
and documents relevant to this model will bear the same name.
3. The change
For agents who have had their contracts summarily terminated by
Post Office Ltd, or who, in our opinion, have resigned to avoid
Last Communiqué: 10/2009 Process for Cancelled Recruitment Schedules and
Dormant Recruitment Cases
11/2009 Changes to Security Checks Consent Forms
affecting Temporary Subpostmasters, Spouses & Partners of
Applicants for Position as Subpostmaster and Agents’ Assistants
POL00075610
POL00075610
POL00075610
POL00075610
termination, it is important that we are open with them in
communicating the possible outcome of that decision in respect of
what type of Post Office® operating model, if any, we determine
is appropriate in the locality.
One of these outcomes may be the deployment of a different
operating model e.g. Post Office® essentials, to that currently
used.
For the avoidance of doubt, in such cases where the resulting
operating model is different to the current operating model, the
ex- subpostmaster will not be entitled to any recourse to the
Discretionary Fund, as the circumstances will not meet the Fund’s
criteria for eligible cases, or to any other form of compensation
from Post Office Ltd.
It is important to note here that subpostmasters do not have any
right of assignment of their Post Office® business, so any
enquiries in that respect should be managed using the normal
reactive lines i.e. should Post Office Ltd desire to fill the
vacancy, it will need to approve any suitable candidates.
Equally, the outcome of any modelling to determine the optimum
operating model will be without prejudice to any appeal lodged by
the subpostmaster within the terms of the subpostmaster contract,
and no work or decisions in this respect will be undertaken
before the outcome of any appeal is communicated to the
subpostmaster concerned.
There will be a clear divide between who decides the
subpostmaster’s contractual outcome, and who then decides the
optimum operating model for the locality, thus reducing the risk
of the former being seen as a forgone conclusion; responsibility
for the modelling will rest with the planning team, and the
decision regarding the determination of the subpostmaster’s
contract will rest with the contracts team. Existing checks and
balances will still prevail, in the form of the appeals process.
Any decisions to re-locate the Post Office ® offer will also be
subject to the conclusion of any public consultation period.
The NFSP have been informed of this change, and internal
stakeholders consulted with regard to the amendments to our
policy and communications here.
4. Process
The flowchart embedded, in Word and Visio format here, shows the
process to be followed by various teams, for either scenario
described above i.e. resignation to avoid termination, and
summary termination, in order that the most appropriate operating
model can be deployed.
You will also see that the flowchart identifies which letters to
use, when, and who should use them.
a
Flowchart word Flowchart visio
v8.doc v8.vsd
5. Enabling communications.
To enable this revised message to be communicated, we have made
some amendments to the existing suite of letters, embedded here;
Letter 2A Termination of agent’s contract
Letter 2A
Subpostmaster sum
Letter 2B Resignation to avoid termination
Letter 2B
Subpostmaster sum
Letter 2C Notification of non- receipt of response to letter
2a
Letter 2C
Subpostmaster sum
Letter 2D Request to ex-subpostmaster to provide information
regarding the premises
Letter 2D Asks
ex-Spnr to confirm d
Letter 2E Notification to ex-subpostmaster that the locality
will not be suitable for PO essentials
Letter 2E modelled
as non POe FINAL 03
POL00075610
POL00075610
POL00075610
POL00075610
NB. Note that at the point this letter is deployed, the process
will revert back to the BAU process, as the operating model
deployed will be one other than Post Office® essentials.
Letter 2F Notification to ex -subpostmaster of suitability
for PO essentials.
Letter 2F Suitable for
PO essentials. doc
With immediate effect, these letters should be used where
indicated to ensure that agents that fall into either category
described in the subject of this ACC are properly informed of
our position in this respect.
6. Contact.
If you need any further information or require clarification on
any of the issues raised here pl on the numbers
below, or by email; paul. inwood GRO