IOM Post Office Profits down 66 percent

[Stu Peters]

18 managers for a business with many departments, a turnover of almost £25m and 300+ staff doesn’t seem unduly high to me. Given the constant efforts to increase efficiency, I don’t think there are any ‘favourite nephews’ there that lick stamps for £50k a year. But I’m genuinely happy to be educated by experts as my own business only turned over £1m with 3 managers (inc. me).

[manxman1980]

8 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

 many departments

How many departments? 

According to the careers website there are 11.

When you say managers what do you mean? Directors? De Facto Directors? Heads of Department?  Team Leaders? Supervisors?

 

 

[TheTeapot]

I think if I were in a senior position, like Chief Operating Officer, for a distribution company earning the best part of £100000/yr and I somehow lost a contract resulting in 21 redundancies, I think I'd probably accept that I'm not terribly good at my job and resign in shame.

[Cueey Lewis And The News]

8 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

18 managers for a business with many departments, a turnover of almost £25m and 300+ staff doesn’t seem unduly high to me. Given the constant efforts to increase efficiency, I don’t think there are any ‘favourite nephews’ there that lick stamps for £50k a year. But I’m genuinely happy to be educated by experts as my own business only turned over £1m with 3 managers (inc. me).

Turnover is irrelevant though. Any other business that turned over £25M and struggled to make a profit of £500K would be having very difficult conversations with its shareholders about right sizing and cost savings. Which is all that’s happening here. 

[TheTeapot]

14 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

I think if I were in a senior position, like Chief Operating Officer, for a distribution company earning the best part of £100000/yr and I somehow lost a contract resulting in 21 redundancies, I think I'd probably accept that I'm not terribly good at my job and resign in shame.

I also think that if I sat on the board of a government owned but arms length distribution company that had recently somehow lost a major contract resulting in 21 redundancies I'd be asking some pretty hard questions of the senior management including 'why haven't you resigned yet?'

[Non-Believer]

18 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

I think if I were in a senior position, like Chief Operating Officer, for a distribution company earning the best part of £100000/yr and I somehow lost a contract resulting in 21 redundancies, I think I'd probably accept that I'm not terribly good at my job and resign in shame.

Some might even ask how an IT middle manager from Zurich gets the gig as CEO of a logistics operation such as the Post Office? 🤷‍♂️

[Banker]

31 minutes ago, Cueey Lewis And The News said:

Turnover is irrelevant though. Any other business that turned over £25M and struggled to make a profit of £500K would be having very difficult conversations with its shareholders about right sizing and cost savings. Which is all that’s happening here. 

So with MUA losing £Ms i assume you want everyone sacked? Don’t know how you’re an expert as a low level clerk whose never run a business in their life bit like all your alter ego’s 

[Cueey Lewis And The News]

12 minutes ago, Banker said:

So with MUA losing £Ms i assume you want everyone sacked? Don’t know how you’re an expert as a low level clerk whose never run a business in their life bit like all your alter ego’s 

Another non believeble post from someone who seems to have more alter egos than anyone on this forum 😂

[Banker]

18 minutes ago, Cueey Lewis And The News said:

Another non believeble post from someone who seems to have more alter egos than anyone on this forum 😂

It’s strange you’ve appeared after others who posted similar rubbish to you have disappeared/been banned! Seems to happen every 6 months or so have you been offshore with Brit & friends 😀

[WTF]

57 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

Some might even ask how an IT middle manager from Zurich gets the gig as CEO of a logistics operation such as the Post Office? 🤷‍♂️

something to do with a goat at a guess

[Cueey Lewis And The News]

19 minutes ago, Banker said:

It’s strange you’ve appeared after others who posted similar rubbish to you have disappeared/been banned! Seems to happen every 6 months or so have you been offshore with Brit & friends 😀

Really you seem to have a long history of making stuff up and are as angry as Jack White. I’d pretty much non believe anything you say. 

[Roger Mexico]

13 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

18 managers for a business with many departments, a turnover of almost £25m and 300+ staff doesn’t seem unduly high to me. Given the constant efforts to increase efficiency, I don’t think there are any ‘favourite nephews’ there that lick stamps for £50k a year. But I’m genuinely happy to be educated by experts as my own business only turned over £1m with 3 managers (inc. me).

I hope you read internal IOMPO documents more closely than my posts.  I didn't say IOMPO had 18 managers, I said that according to page 33 of the Annual Accounts 2022-23 (downloadable from here) as signed by a certain Stu Peters MHK, there were 18 employees paid £50,000 or more:

(Which incidentally shows that the Chief Operating Officer is almost certainly paid more than £100,000 rather than the best part of it.  It's also an achievement of sorts to claim that you've reduced the 'senior management team headcount' by one while the number paid over £100K went up from 2 to 3).

All 18 are presumably managers, but that doesn't mean that these are the only managers that IOMPO employs.  The most recent figures I could find were from August 2018, which showed 34 managers (including 3 Directors) as against 315 non-managerial staff (NMS) (FTE 292).

We know from an FoI (Ref 2398493) that the total number of employees was reduced from 349 to 310:

and there is a big shift to part-time and casual workers.  You can even see this in a drop in the total paid out in wages.  Whether this is reflected in a corresponding drop in management numbers would be easy to find out, providing no one is hurriedly reclassified as NMS (which of course includes non-postal staff as well anyway).

Edited November 8, 2023 by Roger Mexico
Remove duplicate image

[Cueey Lewis And The News]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

I hope you read internal IOMPO documents more closely than my posts.  I didn't say IOMPO had 18 managers, I said that according to page 33 of the Annual Accounts 2022-23 (downloadable from here) as signed by a certain Stu Peters MHK, there were 18 employees paid £50,000 or more:

(Which incidentally shows that the Chief Operating Officer is almost certainly paid more than £100,000 rather than the best part of it.  It's also an achievement of sorts to claim that you've reduced the 'senior management team headcount' by one while the number paid over £100K went up from 2 to 3).

All 18 are presumably managers, but that doesn't mean that these are the only managers that IOMPO employs.  The most recent figures I could find were from August 2018, which showed 34 managers (including 3 Directors) as against 315 non-managerial staff (NMS) (FTE 292).

We know from an FoI (Ref 2398493) that the total number of employees was reduced from 349 to 310:

and there is a big shift to part-time and casual workers.  You can even see this in a drop in the total paid out in wages.  Whether this is reflected in a corresponding drop in management numbers would be easy to find out, providing no one is hurriedly reclassified as NMS (which of course includes non-postal staff as well anyway).

Ironically none of those 18 people on over £50K, or the CEO on over £100K, or any of the 34 managers seem to be able to come up with any cost cutting ideas either. 

[Non-Believer]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

I hope you read internal IOMPO documents more closely than my posts.  I didn't say IOMPO had 18 managers, I said that according to page 33 of the Annual Accounts 2022-23 (downloadable from here) as signed by a certain Stu Peters MHK, there were 18 employees paid £50,000 or more:

(Which incidentally shows that the Chief Operating Officer is almost certainly paid more than £100,000 rather than the best part of it.  It's also an achievement of sorts to claim that you've reduced the 'senior management team headcount' by one while the number paid over £100K went up from 2 to 3).

All 18 are presumably managers, but that doesn't mean that these are the only managers that IOMPO employs.  The most recent figures I could find were from August 2018, which showed 34 managers (including 3 Directors) as against 315 non-managerial staff (NMS) (FTE 292).

We know from an FoI (Ref 2398493) that the total number of employees was reduced from 349 to 310:

and there is a big shift to part-time and casual workers.  You can even see this in a drop in the total paid out in wages.  Whether this is reflected in a corresponding drop in management numbers would be easy to find out, providing no one is hurriedly reclassified as NMS (which of course includes non-postal staff as well anyway).

I hope @Banker is reading this....they claim to like facts 😂 😂😂😂😂

Edited November 8, 2023 by Non-Believer
Typo

[Andy Onchan]

IOMPO only made an operating profit of £165K, which is entirely different to the £542K (which includes interest received) as published by the media. And it doesn't stop there. They even had to revalue some fixed assets to cover a "Remeasurement of net defined benefit pension asset" (a loss to you and me) and that brought the final "comprehensive" income  to £430K. Without the asset revaluation the comprehensive profit would only have been £18K.