Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    626 points xbryanx | 17 comments | | HN request time: 0.541s | source | bottom
    Show context
    jordanb ◴[] No.44532900[source]
    I went on a deep dive on this scandal about a year or so ago. One thing that struck me is the class element.

    Basically, the Post Office leadership could not understand why someone would buy a PO franchise. It's a substantial amount of money up front, and people aren't allowed to buy multiple franchises, so every PO was an owner/operator position. Essentially people were "buying a job".

    The people in leadership couldn't understand why someone would buy the opportunity to work long hours at a retail position and end up hopefully clearing a middle class salary at the end of the year. They assumed that there must be a real reason why people were signing up and the real reason was to put their hands in the till.

    So they ended up assuming the postmasters were stealing, and the purpose of the accounting software was to detect the fraud so it could be prosecuted. When the accounting software started finding vast amounts of missing funds, they ignored questions about the software because it was working as intended. I bet if the opposite had happened, and it found very little fraud, they would have become suspicious of the software because their priors were that the postmasters were a bunch of thieves.

    replies(16): >>44532976 #>>44533020 #>>44533158 #>>44533278 #>>44533786 #>>44533975 #>>44534079 #>>44534542 #>>44535515 #>>44535532 #>>44536140 #>>44536170 #>>44536440 #>>44536933 #>>44537531 #>>44540144 #
    1. XTXinverseXTY ◴[] No.44533158[source]
    Forgive my indelicate question, but why would someone buy a PO franchise?
    replies(9): >>44533228 #>>44533262 #>>44533268 #>>44533291 #>>44533318 #>>44533340 #>>44533600 #>>44534821 #>>44535676 #
    2. trollbridge ◴[] No.44533228[source]
    People buy into all kinds of money-losing businesses... Edible Arrangements, Nothing Bundt Cakes, various multi-level marketing type of schemes.

    And yes, a lot of people are willing to go into debt to effectively pay to have a job.

    replies(3): >>44534710 #>>44539647 #>>44541643 #
    3. ◴[] No.44533262[source]
    4. ◴[] No.44533268[source]
    5. skywhopper ◴[] No.44533291[source]
    Some folks like running a small shop, being their own boss, and serving their neighborhood community.
    6. loeg ◴[] No.44533318[source]
    Nevermind sibling comment about money-losing businesses, there are many small business operations like this where a substantial amount of capital buys a relatively moderate paying retail job. Think things like Subway franchises, or gas stations.
    7. jordanb ◴[] No.44533340[source]
    1) The franchise actually does represent a decent amount of stability and financial security for the franchisee. Well-run locations typically could clear a modest profit for the owner. These were not money losing franchises for the most part (until the prosecutions started of course).

    2) The post offices were geographically distributed pretty evenly throughout the UK so there were positions in far-flung locations well outside London. In many of these communities it was a good and stable job compared to what else was available.

    3) Many of the postmasters reported liking working retail positions where they get a lot of face time with customers. In many small towns the post office was a central part of the community.

    replies(3): >>44533660 #>>44534827 #>>44535150 #
    8. swarnie ◴[] No.44533600[source]
    Its in OPs comment

    > a retail position and end up hopefully clearing a middle class salary

    Normal retail work is below the poverty line.

    Beyond that i think it might be the social/community aspect. I simply can't use the post office in my town as its used as a social club for everyone over 70. Some people are just in to that kinda thing i suppose.

    9. OskarS ◴[] No.44533660[source]
    I bet number 3 on your list there is super-appealing to many people. It sounds lovely to be the kind of person in a smaller community that everyone knows and says hi to, that helps you out with paying your bills or whatever it is. I’m guessing you’re also often the closest contact to the state in a smaller village, so there’s probably all sorts of applications and permits you’re asked to help out with.

    Especially if you’re on the older side, it sounds like an absolutely wonderful way to spend your time. Assuming the post office doesn’t try to ruin your life afterwards.

    10. rwmj ◴[] No.44534710[source]
    Running a pub is a time-honoured way to lose money in the UK. They're essentially scams to steer the life savings of the working class into the accounts of large breweries.

    Edit: A timely news article: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg8llxmnx7o

    11. carstout ◴[] No.44534821[source]
    Historically it wasnt a bad thing since it was an add on to an existing shop. The general idea being that I would come in to pick up my pension/tv licence or various other things the PO used to be the source for and then spend it in the other part of the shop.
    replies(1): >>44535893 #
    12. mgkimsal ◴[] No.44534827[source]
    My inlaws ran a rural UK post office for a time (70s, maybe early 80s?). I'm not sure how they got in to it, but seemed to enjoy it while they did it. Small village, low volume of foot traffic, etc. I got a sense it almost felt like a civic duty, but I may be reading too much in to the earlier conversations.
    13. zerkten ◴[] No.44535150[source]
    It might not be fully clear to the reader, but many of these Post Office franchises are co-located with a Spar, or other shop. People have to go to the Post Office (IME to a greater extent than here in the US where I now live) and they then shop for other items. Obviously, other businesses tend to cluster around as well.

    There are situations where franchisees don't offer other services. These folks tend to be older and for most of the life of the franchise haven't had the need for additional income earlier in the life of the franchise. They don't have the energy and don't want to take on the risk of expanding now. When they retire, they'll probably close up shop as their children have other jobs.

    The rural Post Office where I grew up in the 80s and 90s was accessible to a wide area just off the main road. It served a wider area than the current one. The Postmistress' family also farmed. When that closed the natural place to setup was in the closes village because that was projected to grow in population. That development would result in the old Post Office building being knocked down to make way for a dual carriageway. Eventually a few more Post Office franchises appeared with their shops in that part of the county.

    People can read more at https://runapostoffice.co.uk/.

    14. vkou ◴[] No.44535676[source]
    Why would someone buy a Subway franchise?

    Demand for postal services is, on a long horizon, generally more consistent than demand for any particular junk food.

    The better question is: why the hell would the government sell a PO franchise?

    15. gowld ◴[] No.44535893[source]
    Pick up a TV license! Something else no sane person would do.
    16. wiether ◴[] No.44539647[source]
    > And yes, a lot of people are willing to go into debt to effectively pay to have a job.

    That's the same _class_ element that OP was talking about, no?

    I guess most of the people on HN don't see issue with people going into debt to get a degree, which is supposed to get them a job.

    So how is it different to people going into debt to buy a franchise?

    It's even a more straightforward way to actually get a job, while a degree, if it goes out of fashion on the job market, would have absolutely no use, and you'll have to flip the same burgers as the lad with no degree and no student debt.

    17. HPsquared ◴[] No.44541643[source]
    It's not much different from going into debt to get a degree to get a job. Especially if your chosen field has only a single employer. In fact the college degree is often more speculative and risky, and a worse deal.