Newsagents need to cast a wide net when looking at how to respond to the new newspaper distribution contracts sent out last week. The contracts are too complex and the ramifications too considerable (personally and network-wide) for newsagents to make a decision without thorough research and discussion.
While others are looking at the contracts from a legal and strategy perspective, I have been hunting around online to find out how newspaper distribution contracts are handled elsewhere and have found some interesting US recent history: here, here, here and here.
Not directly related but interesting nevertheless. The question about what makes someone an employee versus a contractor is interesting in the US context of newspaper carriers. This made me think about the level of control Australian newsagents have to operate a newspaper distribution business. That’s a blog post for another day.
By the way, in my searching, I also came across a Fairfax Q&A from June 1999.
It would be interesting to see what would happen if Publisher ‘A’ allowed Newsagents to charge a higher (fairer) price for home delivery than Publisher ‘B’. I would certainly be tipping my customers over to Publisher ‘A’ at every opportunity.
mmm
Baz
baz, The customers would be happy and newspaper sales would NOT be lost. If only publishers trusted newsagents.
The big joke about this contract is, I am required to have the paper deliverd by 6.30 am. On a good day, the papers arrive to me at 6am, on a Sat 6.30 to 7.45. So how do I manage to do a run that takes 90 minutes and get the last customers paper to him by 6.30. Which makes the conract impossible to comply with, unless they can do there job better. Like most contracts, there is never one size fits all, and there is always a breach by both parties in some way. It all depends on how the lawyers can twist it around and who paid the most for the lawyer wins.