Formal Recognition. A lesson from the past.

I have been doing some research. I found the following article posted on the Parliament of Australia website to be very interesting. Thought if my article was posted on your website it may help potential and existing supporters clearly understand that unless they support the formation of a new body to represent them, nothing will change and Australia Post will simply continue on their merry way having “meaningful” discussions only with POAAL.

In Dec-1993 an alternative body formed in competition to POAAL, it was called the Association of Post Office Business Agents Limited (APOBAL). The name was later changed to Licensed Post Officers of Australia Limited. The company was de-registered on 25-Sep-2006.

Don’t let history repeat itself !

Information posted on the Parliament of Australia website[1] advises, the Minister for Communications and the Arts was asked a number of questions upon notice, on 7 December 1994. What I consider the more interesting questions and the response from Australia Post are as follows:-

(1) Has Australia Post refused formal recognition to the Association of Post Office Business Agents Ltd (APOBAL) and thus denied them the rights, privileges and other conditions enjoyed by the Post Office Agents Association Ltd (POAAL); if so, (a) why and (b) what conditions would need to be met for recognition to be given. Answer(in part): Information provided by APOBAL indicates its membership represents only about 10% of licensees, which is not considered to be representative. Furthermore, although APOBAL has limited membership in all States, membership is concentrated in one area of one State, which makes it difficult for APOBAL to provide a balanced national viewpoint on issues of relevance to all licensees. Should APOBAL in the future have much wider representation in both a numeric and geographical sense, Australia Post would reconsider the question of its formal recognition.

(3) Is the consultative agreement referred to in the Licensed Post Office Agreement available to licensees covered by the latter agreement; if not, why not. Answer: The Consultative Agreement was entered into between two parties—Australia Post and the Post Office Agents Association Ltd (POAAL)—on 3 March 1993. The agreement of both parties would be necessary for this Consultative Agreement to be released to a third party. Australia Post has no objection to the release of the Consultative Agreement to licensees.

(8) Does the Board of Australia Post acknowledge the existence of APOBAL and its attempts to enter into formal agreement with Australia Post. Answer: The question of formal recognition of APOBAL has been a matter for Australia Post's management and has not been considered by the Australia Post Board at this time. Future requests may appropriately be brought to the attention of the Board only if the circumstances changed in the way outlined in (1) above.