Poll: Is Cutting Mail Delivery Necessary?
Amid plans to slash first-class mail services, tell us what you think about the Postal Service's plans.
In the face of looming bankruptcy, the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) is floating ideas for how to save the country's mail delivery system. Chief among those ideas is cutting back sharply on first-class mail services.
A piece of the proposal will "for the first time in 40 years, eliminate the chance for stamped letters to arrive the next day," according to The Huffington Post.
Forty-two percent of first-class mail currently reaches its destination within a day. First-class mail is supposed to hit its intended mailbox in one to three days for the continental U.S. But the plan would push that to two to three days, according to The Huffington Post.
USPS is facing a serious financial crisis and a projected $14.1 billion deficit next year.
"The things I have control over here at the Postal Service, we have to do," The Huffington Post quoted Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe as saying. "If we do nothing, we will have a death spiral."
What do you think? Should USPS cut services as a way to save money or is there another way?
Vote in the poll and share your thoughts in the comments section.
Schu
4:42 pm on Sunday, December 4, 2011
Not only eliminate next day service, also stop Saturday and Friday post, cut 25% of their workforce, re-negotiate contracts have current employees to pay more for their healthcare and pensions.
Luke Murry
5:05 pm on Sunday, December 4, 2011
Get rid of the obsolete postal service, use internet for bill paying and communications, private companies like DHL, UPS, FedEx for packages... win!
Uncle Frank
6:28 pm on Sunday, December 4, 2011
Raise the rates for junk mail.
anne stevens
8:29 am on Monday, December 5, 2011
The stop and go of mail delivery is perfectly suited to hybrid vehicles with regenerative braking systems. As the fleet of inneffecient delivery vehicles is replaced, they should be replaced with hybrids...saving lots of fuel and tons of emissions everyday.
Arch Fisher
8:39 am on Monday, December 5, 2011
My initial thoughts turn to eliminating Saturday delivery. A Monday - Friday schedule will reduce payroll and associated costs.
Also, if this organization truly wants to compete with the others, they need to re-structure and become lean.
Porterincollingswood
12:29 pm on Monday, December 5, 2011
Delivering mail to rural areas is inherently inefficient. It only works in high-density areas with good infrastructure. Unfortunately, a lot of America is rural...and they all have their own post office (which mean jobs). If you privatized it, which may or may not be unconstitutional, the cost to "middle America" would soar. And they'll never allow that to happen.
The USPS should raise the cost of a stamp to reflect the cost of the service, which is what it is supposed to do in theory. And they should hammer away at the business usage products because UPS is miserable and Fed Ex is expensive ( making headway in this).
And when I get catalogs from places I haven't shopped at in a decade, then the cost of that piece is too low.
Mary S.
12:41 pm on Monday, December 5, 2011
A lot of good ideas and all should be used to the degree they can be beneficial. Just like most of us do in our own budgets, cutting here and there adds up and helps us survive.
frank gilanelli
2:50 pm on Monday, December 5, 2011
There are two major reasons why the Postal Service is having financial problems. The first is that unions got incompetent government bureaucrats to agree to ludicrous pensions and benefits. Now there is no money to continue paying for these programs. Unions destroyed the auto industry, public education and are wreaking havoc on everything they touch.
And the second reason the USPS is hurting is because it's run by the government. Can you name one successful business run by Uncle Sam? The Postal Service needs to be privatized and the sooner the better. Look at the efficiency of FedEx and UPS. Sadly, because the unions are so powerful, it will be hard to get the private sector interested in taking over this bloated monster.
Porterincollingswood
5:06 pm on Monday, December 5, 2011
That sounds good to say, but you are missing the most critical point - the service is obsolete. Email and texting and social media killed the consumer business. Fed Ex and UPS killed the business part, which was the most profitable.
The USPS has a killer combo of reduced revenues and fixed / rising costs. And no legislator - Republican or Democrat - will kill off many of the local post offices that drain money. Those are jobs, and unemployment is high. And the remaining USPS business is used overwhelmingly by the people most likely to vote - seniors.
If you privitized the USPS, no one would bid on rural American mail delivery. You couldn't get HS interns to turn a profit on this business model. But for the sake of a huge voting bloc we'll continue to suck it up.
One road town
2:35 pm on Wednesday, December 7, 2011
1) 80% ,,, That is the percentage of the post office revenue going towards the current and retired employees benefits, health care & payroll. For anyone owning a business you know that number does not allow you to stay in business. 2) The post is not part of the government, rather just recognized as an agency that operates itself internally but abiding by Congress. 3) While they lose & have lost billions due to electronic communications, this is not why they are failing as a entity, they are failing because they cannot restructure their operation without the government getting involved. The PO has over 570,000 current employees at 31,000 locations & just like their retired brethren, they expect a prefunded retirement package. The PO has already for the past decade and half raised it's prices, without solving the issue, borrowed money from congress, without solving the issue and now on top of the other nonsense ideas, they want to cut delivery; which will only fool the casual newspaper reader. If FedEx & other delivery services can make money in this era, so can the PO, but not having their cost per employee dwarf that of it's competitors like FedEx. The PO can fiddle around with every obscure number they want to & take suggestions, I even saw someone mention hybrid cars here (lol) but even if they 'balance the budget', they will be right back to being in debt 5 years form now if they do not restructure their business model.... 80% employee revenue, that is the problem.
Porterincollingswood
2:41 pm on Wednesday, December 7, 2011
"If FedEx & other delivery services can make money in this era, so can the PO..."
But Fed Ex doesn't charge as little for their service as the USPS does. They charge much more. And they would never take on a loser like rural mail delivery - you cannot make money off it without charging a lot more. Think airlines, you pay more to fly into Paducah than NYC.
And one could argue that the USPS deflates what they could charge if people had no other option.
One road town
4:08 pm on Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Those living in rural America, are still Americans and are entitled by law to receive mail just as an American living in an urban environment. ....Again, the PO is not in debt because they deliver to any one specific area, it's an offset too, to the convince of delivering in a highly dense area, it works both ways. And the PO is the one setting the rates remember, the same rates they keep hiking up and up and up, even in rural areas. .....The PO is in debt for one reason and one reason only, because of the employee disproportional revenue balance. The example of PO vs FedEx was cited because the per cost per employee is grossly out of spec and as is out of spec with every other distribution model. The PO cannot stay in business by raising costs, that has already been done, they cannot stay in business by cutting services to offset current expenditures, as they will only rise again, and prices needing to be raised again. What will the post office cut the next time they go surfing for change in the sofa? They eventually will run out of services to cut or have themselves cut literally out of business. It's the way they distribute and allocate revenue is the problem, as with all government and union strangle holds. The employees must face facts and pay like everyone else for their retirement packages and lose the pensions. Health benefits must be equal to those in the private sector, at least 50%. Having a lopsided business model is a failure.
Arch Fisher
5:47 pm on Monday, December 5, 2011
There are alternatives... Franchising?? There are mail box stores of different descriptions - they might be able to incorporate personal mail services. I am certain there are people working on solutions... we'll see it come to fruition soon.
Jeff
5:55 pm on Monday, December 5, 2011
You can thank a 2006 lame duck GOP majority Congress for passing the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 (PAEA). Forcing the USPS to prefund its future health care benefit payments to retirees for the NEXT 75 YEARS in only a ten-year time span! It had to put aside BILLIONS of dollars to pay for the health benefits of employees it hasn’t even hired yet. 75 YEARS?! Some of them have NOT EVEN BEEN BORN YET! Something no other government or private corporation is required to do.
If this POISON PILL of a bill was never enacted, USPS would actually be facing a $1.5 BILLION SURPLUS TODAY! Change the terms of this bill, and this problem is no longer a problem.
This crisis was MANUFACTURED by politicians who want to destroy yet another union and privatize everything they can sink their hooks into.
Porterincollingswood
6:16 pm on Monday, December 5, 2011
The USPS, at this stage of its life cycle, is a red state (rural) entitlement program. And Susan Collins realizes it now, despite voting for that piece of legislation. That's why she is leading the charge to save her post offices and jobs. And every Senator that represents a low-population state will make sure that the USPS is propped up and 'saved'.
Possibly via tax subsidies?
Arch Fisher
3:09 pm on Wednesday, December 7, 2011
A good analysis Gary B.
Having a total payroll cost equaling 80% of revenue IS unsustainable. Management of this company IS lacking as evidenced by the borrowing and raising of rates, etc and no progress toward stability. Also... another example of what happens when the government gets involved in a "business".
Porterincollingswood
3:51 pm on Wednesday, December 7, 2011
And if BMW charged as much as Hyundai, they'd be "unsustainable" too. As it turns out, it's one of the most successful auto brands in the market.
Why does no one want to address it? If we do what I want done, privatizing it, do you really believe that you'll be able to mail anything for under 50 cents? Stop it.
Porterincollingswood
4:33 pm on Wednesday, December 7, 2011
"They eventually will run out of services to cut or have themselves cut literally out of business."
My point is that they did that around 1992. That bridge has been crossed.
Can you cite data that shows benefits are the primary culprit...as opposed to:
1) The fact that the USPS is an obsolete business with...
2) ...declining demand, most notably for its most profitable products (business)...
3) ...and a lower user base (gets lower daily) it can never replenish...
4) ...while charging a low-ball rate for its most popular products...
5) ...at a time when it employs a huge and inefficient structure of post office / employee distribution...
6) ...when electronic alternatives are easier to use, take less time, and cost much less (often nothing at all)...
The employee costs are part of it, but in my opinion it doesn't matter. Costs of labor didn't kill off the blacksmith, the car did.
And if the USPS priced its product along the lines of free market capitalism, as UPS and Fed Ex do, it could easily reduce labor costs to the national average (40% - 45% of operating costs).
I'll ask again - do you really believe that Fed Ex would take over mail delivery of rural America and keep the rates flat? Do you think pricing would remain low to reflect what people CAN pay? Or would a profit-driven model rise to meet the costs of delivery and reflect what people WILL pay?
Porterincollingswood
4:36 pm on Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Here is another question, I don't know the answer. When the government mails out checks, notices, etc...do they compensate the USPS?
If so, in a privatized system (fed ex for example) I suppose we may need to add those costs onto everything. That means higher taxes.
Porterincollingswood
4:39 pm on Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Sorry...if they don't compensate the USPS they'd then have to add the costs of postage for a privatized provider. In theory.
Arch Fisher
7:40 pm on Wednesday, December 7, 2011
According to you Porter... it matters not! Our tax dollars would pay one way or another. The USPS is a business and it should act like one. If rates need to go up then so be it.
The government should not be in business... That is plain and simple! Our government was not designed to be in business nor was it meant to control business. Business will succumb to the demands of its market.
By the way... comparing BMW and Hyundai is like comparing apples and oranges. They are not the same and they serve different markets.
One road town
8:39 pm on Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Porterincollingswood, with all due respect, you are asking a lot of questions to yourself from yourself. A suggestion would be to brush up on the Post Office, it's operation, how allocation of revenue is done and why it's done. The entire community here could give you your own asked questions answered, but sadly, I doubt that you would either A) believe it and or B) hear it. Understanding the PO's business practice and their operation, and the government's involvement, will greatly assist :) ....You seem to have a lot to say about this and care, which is great don't get me wrong, but you seem to be just circling the wagons and throwing stuff against the wall....
Porterincollingswood
7:50 am on Thursday, December 8, 2011
Arch, I don't use the PO and I don't want to be forced to pay for it with my tax dollars to ensure that people who do use it get cheap postage. You may be entitled to mail, but not daily / not cheap mail. Those last 2 are not a "right". You want to use the USPS, pay for it. Leave me and others who have embraced alternatives out of it.
And Fed Ex is as different from the USPS as BMW is to Hyundai for the very reasons you cite. Totally different core product base. Totally different customer base.
Porterincollingswood
8:01 am on Thursday, December 8, 2011
Gary - those points I make in regard to the problems facing the USPS are, in fact, real. As is yours. My question was the degree you were claiming. Your statement that employee costs were the "sole" cause was what seems off to me. It's not. You think the USPS needs to fundamentally re-structure, while I think it is too late to do so. That's pretty much where we disagree. Which is fine.
Ask a travel agent, it wasn't their fees that cost them their jobs.
Porterincollingswood
8:23 am on Thursday, December 8, 2011
And Gary - I agree with you that a company like Fed Ex could make it work (in theory). But my take is that they couldn't maintain the same USPS pricing structure. Perhaps my point was obscured and came off as too confrontational.