Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, upon notice, on 27 June 2012:

With reference to the Australia Post franchise in Coorparoo, Brisbane:

(1) Did the Coorparoo franchise close in 2011; if so: (a) what were the circumstances surrounding the closure; (b) did Australia Post relocate and re-establish the franchised PostShop; and (c) if there is a new, relocated site, how far is it from the original location.

(2) During two meetings, did the franchise management team in Queensland advise that Australia Post had decided to close the franchise due to the unavailability of suitable premises.

(3)At the second meeting, did the state franchise coordinator say that the decision to close the post office had been made by management in Melbourne, and that they had determined that the franchise model was no longer appropriate for the Coorparoo area.

(4) Can copies of any minutes or correspondence relating to the above meetings be provided.

(5) Was the franchisee advised that Australia Post had determined to operate a fixed term Licensed Post Office in the area.

(6)Can a detailed explanation be provided of what transpired in relation to postal services in Coorparoo.

(7)In what business format is the Coorparoo post office currently operating and, if this differs from the previous format, what was the reasoning behind the change.

(8) Was any definitive analysis undertaken by Australia Post of issues such as pedestrian traffic flow, accessibility, and any other pertinent matters relevant to the site, in relation to the current Coorparoo site prior to the relocation; if so, can the analysis be provided.

(9) Was this information shared with the franchisee; if so, when and what specific information was provided.

(10) Did Australia Post consult with the Coorparoo community in regard to this closure and subsequent relocation; if so, with whom and when did the consultation occur.

(11) Did the franchisee make numerous requests for documentation, which may have assisted them in making a decision about relocations, and was Australia Post in a position to supply such documents.

(12) Does Australia Post usually expect agreements to be entered into without availing the other party or parties an opportunity to view the contract.

(13) On what basis did Australia Post include in the Termination Notice for the particular franchise a clause whereby acceptance of the exit payment indemnified Australia Post from any further legal action, which may be open to this franchisee; and is this: (a) usual practice; and (b) mandated across all franchises in similar positions.

(14) Can a copy of the Termination Notice be provided.

(15) With reference to the document titled 'A PostShop Franchise: Your Key to Business Success', in particular p. 14 under the heading Franchise Advisory Council, which sets out the intentions of Australia Post, and given that this was supplied to the Coorparoo franchisee in the early stages of their expressions of interest in this model: (a) in what forum was the Coorparoo franchisee able to raise issues surrounding the closure of the Coorparoo franchise; and (b) given that the establishment of such a Council was indicated during the sale process, why has the Council not been established.

(16) Have any explanations and apologies been provided to the individuals who may have been induced, in part or in whole, to enter the franchise agreement based on this representation.

(17) Did any senior managers of Australia Post receive any correspondence from franchisees in Queensland raising concerns over the Coorparoo franchise situation and the action that was taken.

(18) Did Australia Post receive any ministerial direction regarding its franchise businesses; if so, what was the direction and when was it received.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows:

(1) (a) Australia Post relocated the Coorparoo Post Office in May 2011 in order to maintain postal services for local business and private customers. The relocation was forced by the shopping centre owner who wished to redevelop the centre where the post office was originally located. Under the redevelopment proposal there was no option for the Post Office to stay at the existing location.

(b) The Coorparoo Post Office was relocated as a Licensed Post Office. This change in business format was required due to the limited time available, the need to maintain customer service and the franchisee's decision to terminate their franchise agreement with Australia Post in lieu of relocating to the new premises.

The outlet was moved approximately 700 metres from its previous location.

(2) It was always Australia Post's intention to relocate the franchised post office subject to the availability of suitable premises. The franchisee declined the opportunity to relocate the franchised post office to the new premises which lead to the outlet being relocated as a licensed post office.

(3) Australia Post sought to relocate the Coorparoo Post Office as a franchised post office. The franchisee declined the opportunity to relocate the franchised post office to the new premises leading to the outlet being relocated as a licensed post office.

(4) Australia Post and the franchisee exchanged numerous pieces of correspondence relating to the proposed relocation of the franchised post office and their ultimate decision to terminate their franchise agreement with Australia Post in lieu of relocating to the new premises.

As this correspondence involves a party external to Australia Post and relates to our dealings under a commercial agreement, we are not at liberty to provide copies.

(5) Australia Post had extensive communications with the franchisee relating to the proposed relocation of the franchised post office and their ultimate decision to terminate their franchise agreement with Australia Post in lieu of relocating to the new premises.

It is understood that the franchisee was advised subsequent to electing to terminate their franchise agreement of the decision to establish a licensed post office at the new location.

(6) Refer to Response for Question 1 above.

(7) The Coorparoo Post Office was relocated as a Licensed Post Office. This change in business format was required due to the limited time available, the need to maintain customer service and the franchisee's decision to terminate their franchise agreement with Australia Post in lieu of relocating to the new premises.

(8) Prior to relocating, available sites in the Coorparoo area were assessed for suitability with consideration to a range of factors.

The current site was assessed by Australia Post as being the most suitable available premises.

Due to the redevelopment of the shopping centre there was no option to remain at the existing location.

(9) Australia Post maintained ongoing communication with the franchisee regarding the relocation with available information being provided regarding the proposed site and their options under the terms of the franchise agreement.

(10) During the period of relocation the Federal Member for the area was kept advised on our progress for locating a new site. Australia Post was sensitive to the community's concern over any potential closure of the Coorparoo post office and accordingly advised customers as soon as possible when the decision on the new post office location was made.

Due to the redevelopment of the shopping centre there was no option to remain at the existing location.

(11) Australia Post and the franchisee exchanged numerous pieces of correspondence relating to the proposed relocation of the franchised post office and their ultimate decision to terminate their franchise agreement with Australia Post in lieu of relocating to the new premises. Available information was provided to the franchisee regarding the proposed site and their options under the terms of the franchise agreement.

(12) Australia Post understands this question refers to its licensed post office and/or franchised post office agreements. With regard to these agreements, copies are provided to prospective operators during the course of the assessment/selection process in advance of the agreement being entered into.

(13) Australia Post understands this question refers to the Confirmation of Termination of Postshop Franchise Agreement notice provided by Australia Post to the franchisee.

This notice to the Coorparoo franchisee was issued in confirmation of their election to terminate the franchise agreement and provided details of relevant terms and conditions relating to this termination. It indicated that Australia Post would deem the acceptance of the exit payment as being, in respect to the franchise agreement, full and final settlement and constitute a release and discharge from all and any claims.

A notice consistent with that provided to the Coorparoo franchisee would be provided to other outgoing franchisees in the event of a termination of a franchise agreement in similar circumstances to Coorparoo.

(14) As this notice involves a party external to Australia Post and relates to its dealings under a commercial agreement, Australia Post is unable to provide a copy.

(15) (a) Advisory councils have the general purposes of enhancing communications between a franchisor and their franchisees and for the development and exchange of ideas for the betterment of the network as a whole. They do not act as a forum for resolving issues relating to individual franchisees.

Australia Post and the Coorparoo franchisee had extensive communications relating to the proposed relocation of the franchised post office and their ultimate decision to terminate their franchise agreement with Australia Post in lieu of relocating to the new premises. In addition to this communication directly with Australia Post, the franchisee also had available to them the dispute resolution process as provided by the Franchising Code of Conduct and specified in the franchise agreement.

(b) Australia Post advised prospective franchisees that a Franchisee Advisory Council would be established only when the number of franchised outlets in operation was sufficient to allow this forum to operate effectively. As Australia Post has not reached this number of outlets it believes the most effective way to manage its relationship with franchisees is through the current one-to-one interaction with their dedicated network manager.

(16) Existing Australia Post franchisees were advised during their assessment/selection process that a Franchisee Advisory Council would be formed only when the number of franchised outlets in operation was sufficient to allow this forum to operate effectively.

(17) Yes, Australia Post received correspondence from Queensland based franchisees regarding the situation with the Coorparoo franchise. Australia Post took steps at that time to address the concerns of these franchisees.

(18) No. Australia Post has not received ministerial direction regarding its franchise businesses.