IAN and Danni Kennedy and ProDrive CEO Peter Gallagher are awaiting the Judge's decision
Te Awamutu couple Danni and Ian Kennedy find out tomorrow if their bid for an injunction to stop NZPost terminating their rural delivery contract until their issues can be sorted in the Hamilton High Court, is successful.
The Kennedys are fighting to save their half million-dollar investment in what should have been one of the busiest and more lucrative rural delivery runs in the country.
They accuse NZPost of taking mail and parcels off their run to feed competing couriers.
Danni and Ian objected, and now NZPost wants to fire them. The Kennedys have taken NZPost to court seeking an injunction preventing them from being fired.
The community response to a flyer dropped to the RD3 Tamahere-Matangi community informing customers of the situation has “gobsmacked” the Kennedys’ advocate, Prodrive CEO Peter Gallagher.
“We dropped a flyer explaining the situation and asked RD3 customers in the Tamahere-Cambridge community to tick the box that said we’d be taking their support through to the Government via Taranaki/King Country MP Barbara Kuriger, who has agreed to be proactive in her constituents’ case.”
MP for Waikato Tim van de Molen, whose electorate the area is in, has been notified.
“Within a matter of days, more than 500 signed flyers have been returned to us – certainly more than we expected and it shows quite clearly, the level of anger the community is feeling,” Peter said.
“The issue is exacerbated by NZPost, who, without engaging in contractually required consultation, or offering reasonable compensation to the Kennedys, intends replacing them with an entirely different and untested Multi Courier Business (MRB) model pilot and an expanded use of Courier Post.”
He said the model incorporated a principal franchisee who employed a number of minimum wage-paid couriers, into what was supposed to be a rural delivery operator’s exclusive contracted area.
The changes were being made with no consultation with the rural delivery contractors, without their knowledge, agreement or any other action that could have been reasonably expected from NZPost – considering it was the rural delivery contractors’ livelihood and investment that was being directly affected.
NZPost has earlier refused comment, saying the matter is before the court.
For two years, NZPost denied using other couriers within RD runs, or that it intended to do the same through the MRB model, Peter said.
But in a submission to the High Court in Hamilton last month, it claimed NZPost had no exclusivity obligation in any of its delivery contracts, and that it would not work in its business model.
Yet, the rural delivery contract speaks of exclusivity and boundaries.
“Why else would people pay so much money if their runs were not exclusive?” Peter said.
“To graphically illustrate, their contract states: “They must sort process, uplift, and deliver all mail and other items …
“NZPost appears to consider that all, does not in fact mean, all.”
