US Postal Service will be broke by Oct

[CycloWizard]

It was in the OPs link I am guessing you did not even open...

"Despite cutting 230,000 positions in recent years"

Damm union not letting them cut any jobs... oh wait.

That doesn't say anything about the unions having little power. It says that they are trying to convince the union to allow a pay cut. They have laid off plenty of people in the last few years, but it's obviously not enough. IIRC, the desk clerks make $60-65k to be surly and useless (at least at the local post offices here). It's a completely unskilled job that a high school dropout could do with about an hour of training.

 

[Vette73]

That doesn't say anything about the unions having little power. It says that they are trying to convince the union to allow a pay cut. They have laid off plenty of people in the last few years, but it's obviously not enough. IIRC, the desk clerks make $60-65k to be surly and useless (at least at the local post offices here). It's a completely unskilled job that a high school dropout could do with about an hour of training.

Its a Fed Union. They are only allowed to bargin for things that the Gov allows which is not much. You also said they could nto get rid of people even though that was near the top of the orignal story.

I should know how weak unions are, I am Fed HR in DC. HR is part of the MGT side. Unions can't strike or ask for a lot of things as congress cut that off a LONG time ago. Give ya a hint, look back to Carters time when the retirement plan system was being changed for Feds.

 

[rudder]

Not by congress but some panel that handles that.

The problem is the panel can't let them raise prices as they use an inflation rate by the fed gov that looks at food and other things that matter little to the PO and downplay fuel cost as most people spend more on food than gas.

So the PO is screwed as they don't get tax money but have to run as they they do. UPS and Fed-Ex make money as they set their rates and when the haul based on demand. The PO can;t even think of doing any of that. The current person running the PO is doing the best he can and has cut billions in cost from the PO and worked with the union. But he can only do so much with what he is allowed to do.

Why is the govt even competing with UPS and Fedex? UPS and Fedex can deliver an overnight package more efficiently than the postal service... why does the USPS feel it needs to offer overnight delivery? It would be a decade before the USPS could put in a package tracking system such as the private companies. IF USPS was run like a business and did not receive bailouts... they would be a lot more expensive than UPS. Those bailouts make the USPS seem more competitive than they really are.

The post office is bloated and needs to be scaled back.

 

[Vette73]

Why is the govt even competing with UPS and Fedex? UPS and Fedex can deliver an overnight package more efficiently than the postal service... why does the USPS feel it needs to offer overnight delivery? It would be a decade before the USPS could put in a package tracking system such as the private companies. IF USPS was run like a business and did not receive bailouts... they would be a lot more expensive than UPS. Those bailouts make the USPS seem more competitive than they really are.

The post office is bloated and needs to be scaled back.

WTF are you talking about. The USPS is self funded and does not get tax money.

 

[OutHouse]

If they could cut certain service they could be in the black forever. Problem is as of now they HAVE to haul mail to EVERYBODY in the US 6 days a week.

I think going to .50 and 3 days haul would help right away and would not be much a issue.

i hope you dont mean only 3 days for mail service.

 

[bfdd]

Marlin is right. IMO USPS should be spun off into a private company.

 

[CycloWizard]

Its a Fed Union. They are only allowed to bargin for things that the Gov allows which is not much. You also said they could nto get rid of people even though that was near the top of the orignal story.

I should know how weak unions are, I am Fed HR in DC. HR is part of the MGT side. Unions can't strike or ask for a lot of things as congress cut that off a LONG time ago. Give ya a hint, look back to Carters time when the retirement plan system was being changed for Feds.

Yes, as everyone knows, you are in federal HR. You obviously know a lot more about all of that stuff than I do, even though I'm in the same union. Since you're all-knowing in this field, you should be aware that postal workers are in a different union, have different benefits, and are more or less isolated from the rest of us federal riff raff. They can't get rid of enough people to balance their budget. I know this because they can't balance their budget. If you've been to a post office in the last... ever, you'd know that most of the workers there aren't doing much of anything at a given time. The line is out the door, but two of the three employees are at "closed" windows gossiping rather than servicing customers. I don't have that same experience at UPS or FedEx. So you tell me: why the difference?

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

USPS is an antiquated business. It has been replaced, in all practicality, by private companies that operate more efficiently and at a higher profit. The USPS essentially exists to give jobs to people who have trouble getting them anywhere else, to the point that paying these people is far more expensive than using automation. The problem is that the USPS is a government-run job program instead of a for-profit company.

 

[alkemyst]

No idea why congress wouldn't logically allow it, it's not like anyone gets mail 6 days a week that can't wait a day, and if someone needs to send something next day their are other options available.

It's about postal workers that dont get paid.

 

[BoberFett]

Eh, some of you are too harsh on the postal service. They are good at what they do, they're simply hampered by regulation and a changing electronic world. Some solutions such as raising rates and cutting delivery days are good starts, but there's a lot of politics in the way of those things.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Bulk mail killed the postal system . In other words Big business killing them .

 

[rudder]

WTF are you talking about. The USPS is self funded and does not get tax money.

Sure they do. How do you think the post office gets reimbursed for reduced rates for non-profits? And if they run a deficit, or run out of money by say October... where will that money come from?

$20 billion lost between FY2007 and FY2010.

What company other than GM can operate like that?

Where do you think that money to stay afloat come from? They are going to owe $15 billion and no longer be allowed to borrow. That money comes from the U.S. Treasury. Thanks to money FROM THE U.S. TREASURY... the post office is still operating.

Explain to me how the post office is going to dig themselves out of this hole. I guess the USPS can raise rates to generate more revenue... that's the ticket.

Another great union product. Where else can the average employee earn $51,000 + nice benefits for largely unskilled work.

 

[Nemesis 1]

One of their Vision aid sorters broke down , I got called in to recalibrate the camerias . You would fall over if you new what they had to pay me,

 

[BoberFett]

Bulk mail killed the postal system . In other words Big business killing them .

That's just plain foolish. Bulk mail is keeping the postal service alive. Without junk mail, the USPS would lose half it's revenue. Do you honestly think they could function on the $0.44 that Grandma spends once a year to send a $5 bill to little Timmy? Even B2B mail has dropped significantly, it has been dropping since the adoption of the FAX. Everything has gone electronic.

 

[rudder]

Eh, some of you are too harsh on the postal service. They are good at what they do, they're simply hampered by regulation and a changing electronic world. Some solutions such as raising rates and cutting delivery days are good starts, but there's a lot of politics in the way of those things.

The post office does serve a purpose. But you cannot maintain a business and pay the types of salaries the USPS is paying to a very large workforce. Not to mention the pension liabilities then cannot hope to ever cover through operating revenue.

If they raise rates do you honestly think that would generate enough money to run the post office and pay pensions? You raise rates and people use other services... revenue declines.

this is a government bureaucracy that cannot compete totally with private companies. The unions fed at the trough and created a situation that will require a MASSIVE taxpayer bailout.

 

[BoberFett]

The post office does serve a purpose. But you cannot maintain a business and pay the types of salaries the USPS is paying to a very large workforce. Not to mention the pension liabilities then cannot hope to ever cover through operating revenue.

If they raise rates do you honestly think that would generate enough money to run the post office and pay pensions? You raise rates and people use other services... revenue declines.

this is a government bureaucracy that cannot compete totally with private companies. The unions fed at the trough and created a situation that will require a MASSIVE taxpayer bailout.

Don't get wrong, the situation is FUBAR. If the USPS were a private company, there would be massive upheaval and quite likely a brand new business model being evaluated. So yes, because it is a government monopoly, there's no need to look to new ways of providing service, simply dig into the general fund and bail out a failing model rather than fix it. It's not the unions fault entirely, as is usually the case they're just one piece of the puzzle.

 

[Zebo]

Bulk mail killed the postal system . In other words Big business killing them .

LOL fail on two levels.

Bulk mail is what's paying their bills
Bulk mailers are small business predominately.

 

[Zebo]

Eh, some of you are too harsh on the postal service. They are good at what they do, they're simply hampered by regulation and a changing electronic world. Some solutions such as raising rates and cutting delivery days are good starts, but there's a lot of politics in the way of those things.

Not really. We pay 400 billion in Federal retirements and growing. So-called "self funded" USPS is in that.

Good start is elimination.

Look horse and buggy went and so do antiquated services who's business has evolved into delivering trash. I already have to pay to take trash away I don't need more.

 

[BoberFett]

Not really. We pay 400 billion in Federal retirements and growing. So-called "self funded" USPS is in that.

Good start is elimination.

Look horse and buggy went and so do antiquated services who's business has evolved into delivering trash. I already have to pay to take trash away I don't need more.

I've been giving this some thought recently and discussing it with more rational people than those that inhabit this forum. Modern society is beginning to form a habit of abandoning old systems completely. I'm sure this is partially to do with the geometrically increasing pace of technology. If there's a new, better, faster, more efficient system, why maintain the old one, right?

Sometimes I wonder though if we aren't kicking out our legs from underneath ourselves when we do that. Sure, we've got new hover chairs so we won't fall. But what happens when the hover chair fails? The USPS is a good example, as is the POTS system. Yes, we could eliminate the USPS and save money. Let private enterprise handle first class mail, they might be able to do a better job. More and more people are going to wireless phones exclusively. It's conceivable that someday the old POTS system could be retired completely.

But what's our fallback when new systems fail? As you are well aware, our current economic situation is untenable. Who knows what the straw that breaks the camels back will be, but it could happen at any time. If we've eliminated these old systems, what happens when our fragile new systems fail during a time of economic turmoil? If we eliminate the USPS, what happens when the price of oil skyrockets and private carriers raise rates and eliminate service to unprofitable areas as a result? Same with phone systems, if customers can't afford cell phones and the expansion of those system stops, maybe with towers in less profitable areas being decommissioned. If the POTS system was abandoned simply because it's "old" technology, where does that leave those who can't get other service?

Now don't take this as an endorsement of propping everything up on the taxpayers dime. It's simply an observation, and something to think about.

 

[Zebo]

I see where you're coming from. But seriously their waste they bring pisses me off on lots of levels. Besides holidays I get probably one legit piece of mail every two days but the stack is 1 inch thick everyday.

 

[bruceb]

Yes, there was a proposal in 2010 to raise the rate. It was turned down by regulators.
Yes, the Post Office intends to cut service, most likely no Saturday mail, which should be starting later in 2011 or in 2012 ... this info is on the USPS web site.
Also the Post Office will be closing some branch offices which do not see much use. Which ones I do not know (and they probably don't yet either)
Yes, at some point, except for my magazines, which I prefer in print, I would expect regular mail service and the Post Office to come to an end. You can get and pay all your bills on line. A lot of people do this already (but I still like to send a check myself)

http://www.usps.com/strategicplanning/cs10/CSPO__12_2010.pdf

 

[CycloWizard]

I've been giving this some thought recently and discussing it with more rational people than those that inhabit this forum. Modern society is beginning to form a habit of abandoning old systems completely. I'm sure this is partially to do with the geometrically increasing pace of technology. If there's a new, better, faster, more efficient system, why maintain the old one, right?

Sometimes I wonder though if we aren't kicking out our legs from underneath ourselves when we do that. Sure, we've got new hover chairs so we won't fall. But what happens when the hover chair fails? The USPS is a good example, as is the POTS system. Yes, we could eliminate the USPS and save money. Let private enterprise handle first class mail, they might be able to do a better job. More and more people are going to wireless phones exclusively. It's conceivable that someday the old POTS system could be retired completely.

But what's our fallback when new systems fail? As you are well aware, our current economic situation is untenable. Who knows what the straw that breaks the camels back will be, but it could happen at any time. If we've eliminated these old systems, what happens when our fragile new systems fail during a time of economic turmoil? If we eliminate the USPS, what happens when the price of oil skyrockets and private carriers raise rates and eliminate service to unprofitable areas as a result? Same with phone systems, if customers can't afford cell phones and the expansion of those system stops, maybe with towers in less profitable areas being decommissioned. If the POTS system was abandoned simply because it's "old" technology, where does that leave those who can't get other service?

Now don't take this as an endorsement of propping everything up on the taxpayers dime. It's simply an observation, and something to think about.

The flaw in your analysis is that you think the new systems are somehow more fragile than the old systems. In fact, the opposite is true: the modern systems are generally more robust than their old-fashioned couterparts. There are no wires to be severed in a cell phone network (excepting those relatively robust power lines powering the towers themselves). The hover chairs are only likely to fail if the laws of physics change such that the principles governing their motors or battery designs break down.

There is a scenario in which you could be right and newer technology fails due to some large-scale cataclysmic event. However, if such an event were to happen, not being able to use your cell phone isn't going to be a problem because whoever you were going to call is probably dead from the massive asteroid impact or nuclear detonation causing the problem in the first place. The only time this becomes a long-term issue is when all of the large population centers are wiped out, eliminating large stores of knowledge and infrastructure to design and build modern electronics. Under such circumstances, you may indeed see a revival of the Pony Express, but only until two days after someone runs a new telegraph wire out to the wild west.

 

[BoberFett]

During something as simple as a power outage local POTS line still works. Anybody with phone service from their cable provider is out of luck. We've seen cell towers jammed during emergencies and massive numbers of dropped calls. You can pretend that new technology is more robust, but that simply isn't true. It may have different weaknesses, but it still has weaknesses.

 

[JS80]

lol left thinks you can just solve revenues by raising rates. Postal rates. Tax rates. Go ahead, please raise rates, you will see the revenues don't go up, in fact you may see it decline.

 

[Fern]

I've been giving this some thought recently and discussing it with more rational people than those that inhabit this forum. -snip-
Sometimes I wonder though if we aren't kicking out our legs from underneath ourselves when we do that. Sure, we've got new hover chairs so we won't fall. But what happens when the hover chair fails?

Yeah, I also wonder about this fairly frequently.

And I'm not buying that the new tech is more robust.

Fern