I have never liked the concept of industrial action such as strikes; it always seems to me that there must be a better way to reach an agreement than holding a gun to the heads of businesses and their customers. Unfortunately for the participants, the current postal dispute is unlikely to be popular with consumers because, whatever the facts, it is perceived to be about a greedy union trying to get a pay increase for its members from a nationalised industry at a time when the rest of us are having to tighten our belts.

On the other hand, I have never had much time for Adam Crozier, Chief Executive of the Post Office. Back in the days when he was head of the Football Association, he always came across (to me at least) as something of a bully; someone who expects to tell, rather than discuss, to demand obedience to his orders, rather than seeking consensus.

To be fair, this could be a totally false impression, because according to one website he was consistently described by co-workers and journalists as "well mannered, affable, and low-key in outward demeanour but a tough change agent underneath who valued fairness, pragmatism, and success." Mind you some people might say the same about his fellow Scott, Gordon Brown.

So what is the postal dispute really about?
Whatever the personalities involved, it is difficult to be totally confident that management is completely free of fault in this case. It is impossible to get a clear and independent picture from television interviews, but there could be a degree of intransigence on both sides. Unions seem desperate to give the impression to members that they are doing something to justify their subscriptions; management appear equally determined to retain the right to manage.

Undoubtedly there are faults on both sides and management may have made some errors in the past over trying to achieve too much specialisation, which has now come back to haunt them. Sounds like the time-and-motion people got it wrong.

How does this affect us?
Of course, we could all end up with a loss of Christmas cards and other – perhaps more critical and time sensitive – mail. More importantly, it could harm those businesses that rely on the post to receive and fulfil orders.

But ultimately, it could damage the Post Office itself, if businesses find more reliable alternatives. And that would be a shame, because the Post Office has been around for a long time and could, so easily, help rejuvenate our withering villages and small towns. If management had sought creative alternatives to closing thousands of Sub-Post Offices throughout the UK and made them more attractive to consumers, then the entire business might have been in a stronger condition today. And better able to cope with the challenges it faces.

As ever, when it comes to looking after our retirement planning and investments, vigilance and professional advice are essential. If you are wondering what to do contact Robert Bruce Associates for individual assistance.

NOTHING IN THIS ARTICLE SHOULD BE SEEN AS GIVING INDIVIDUAL FINANCIAL ADVICE.