• Reply to: Scaling Back Hours, Not Post Offices   4 years 11 months ago

    I think that the hours should be cut back. each office should be looked at as to the amount of business it has, and if it is short cut the hours. I am in a level 13 office that can very well be cut from 8 hours to 5-6 hours. This is a small community and there is no need to be open for 8 hours here.

  • Reply to: Reducing the Number of Prices   4 years 11 months ago

    I see 1 oz flats nightly with anywhere from $0.00 to $0.61 postage on them. The rate should be $0.88. Same thing with priority and certifieds, nobody checks the metered mail and a lot of business' rely on that. Management in my plant say it's not my job to catch short paid and not to worry about it.

  • Reply to: At the Post Office   4 years 11 months ago

    I don't understand why so many APC machines have been removed from high volume post offices with long lines. And even the few locations that still have them, they lock the deposit door so you can't put in your package. Very frustrating!

  • Reply to: Reducing the Number of Prices   4 years 11 months ago

    I think the problem with the DMM is not with the number of rate elements but with the high complexity of the regulations for mail preparation and the difficulties one encounters in trying to navigate through these regulations in the DMM.

    Taking Periodicals as an example, some have complained that there are too many rate elements (though other postal products have many more individual prices.) But consider the complexities involved in preparing a Periodicals mailing. There are regulations, involving various labeling lists, for bundle preparation at different presort levels, then for placing bundles in sacks or pallets at different presort levels. There are more regulations to assure that bundles, sacks and pallets are not too large, or too small, and still more regulations regarding documentation and where and at which times the mail may be entered. If a mailer succeeds in all this, then assigning a price to each outcome (e.g., each bundle, sack and pallet presort level) is a trivial exercise in comparison.

    So I think the focus should be not on the number of rate elements but on whether the instructions for mail preparation in the DMM can be simplified and whether navigating these instructions in the DMM can be made easier.

  • Reply to: Reducing the Number of Prices   4 years 11 months ago

    The OIG recently posted a survey regarding rate complexity which asked the questions: “Does the Postal Service need more than 10,000 prices for its products and services? Can the Postal Service significantly reduce the number and complexity of prices?” Proponents of rate simplification should know that complex rates aren’t necessarily a bad thing for mailers. Most large mailers calculate their postage by computer, not paper and pencil. The software programs that perform these calculations are quite robust. They easily handle 10 or 10,000 rate cells and are very good at making cost effective decisions on mail preparation. If your business uses a computer to calculate rates, complexity should be a non-event. And if the rate cells provide the proper pricing signals, you should be able to determine the lowest cost method to mail your products.
    A second important issue to consider is cost coverage. Let’s use Periodicals as an example, since their rates are among the most complex. In 2006, the PRC approved a new rate structure for Periodicals that recognizes the cost of processing containers, bundles, and pieces. By design, this new structure made the rates more complex. Its intent was to align rates with costs - in other words, pay for what you use. Unfortunately, the new rates did not pass through all of the costs, so that the pricing signals sent to mailers continued to be inaccurate. In spite of only partially improved signals, mailers and mail service providers reacted to the new rates. As a result, co-mailing, co-palletization, and drop shipping expanded and helped to reduce USPS costs. From FY 2004 to FY 2009 alone:
    •Periodicals pieces sorted to the most-efficient and least-cost Carrier Route level increased from 47 to 55 percent;
    •Periodicals pounds privately shipped and entered at a destination facility rose from 57 to 65 percent; and
    •The number of sacks – more expensive for the Postal Service to handle than pallets – declined by 65.9 percent, from approximately 110 million sacks in FY 2004 to 28 million sacks today.

    In the absence of more cost-based rates, these improvements never would have taken place and Periodicals class mail would have even lower cost coverage than its current 76%. In my opinion, given the dire financial situation of the Postal Service, providing pricing signals that drive out costs far outweighs the need for rate simplicity.

  • Reply to: Reducing the Number of Prices   4 years 11 months ago

    We need to make everything flat-rate. That way we can create a POS system with a picture of the item, and we'll be all set for the Target employees to take over as clerks.

  • Reply to: Brainstorm Ideas to Help the Postal Service   4 years 11 months ago

    I submitted an idea for the Postal Service 2000 "Ideas contest" to improve/save the Postal Service. As I am sure many thousand of others did. There should be a wealth of great suggestions, already archived. My idea was to have a computer in every Postal lobby, exclusively to order stamps, and mail order items for our customers, who either did not have, or did not want to use their credit card. They could order and pay the clerk at the window. The Postal Service would receive affiliate income from our "partners". Also increased revenue from parcels.

  • Reply to: Brainstorm Ideas to Help the Postal Service   4 years 11 months ago

    Something went wrong with submitting last comment. We try again:

    Smart phone apps increase sales of USPS hybrid postcards

    http://postalsanity.com/2010/06/smart-phone-apps-increase-sales-of-usps-hybrid-postcards/

  • Reply to: Brainstorm Ideas to Help the Postal Service   4 years 11 months ago

    You may want to read our latest suggestion for USPS at the following link:

    <a href="http://postalsanity.com/2010/06/smart-phone-apps-increase-sales-of-usps-hybrid-postcards/"Smart phone apps increase sales of USPS hybrid postcards

  • Reply to: Reducing the Number of Prices   4 years 11 months ago

    The Postal Service is approaching complications that mimic tha U.S. tax code. Mailers and employees alike don't fully understand the current pricing structure and mistakes in mail prepartation and verifications are likely leading to lost revenue and productivity. Simplify the rates and discount opportunities to provide the best customer service and use our underutilized infrastructure.

  • Reply to: Can the Postal Service Further Consolidate the Area and District Administrative Office Structure?   4 years 11 months ago

    The USPS is the most management heavy organization in the United States. While management slashes and moves around clerk and mailhandler jobs, almost no cutting is being done in management numbers. HOW MANY FEWER MANAGERS ARE THERE NOW THAN THERE WERE TWO YEArS AGO, COUNTING ALL THE "VICING" MANAGERS AT ALL LEVELS. Until there is a major restructuring of USPS management, recommended by an outside firm, the USPS is headed for imminent bankruptcy. The USPS is in a death spiral and unless there is serious cost cutting among management hours, it will die off.

  • Reply to: Scaling Back Hours, Not Post Offices   4 years 11 months ago

    i say get rid of all the money grabbing higher ups that dont even touch the mail. too many of them, even in my place of work outside of the po. thats where all the money goes! no postal service in 10 yrs anyway, too bad what a shame for all those people in it for years.but the higher ups will remain thats for sure right?

  • Reply to: Scaling Back Hours, Not Post Offices   4 years 11 months ago

    non-profit should be paying more for bulk mail 15.5 per letter doesn;t even cover our cost of handling it also automation mail saturation rate is way to low lets raise these rates

  • Reply to: Looking at the Bigger Picture   4 years 11 months ago

    There is still a place for the Postal Service in this modern world. I still prefer sending my packages via USPS then the alternatives.

  • Reply to: Scaling Back Hours, Not Post Offices   4 years 11 months ago

    Cut out third class mail , all mail should be first class.
    We have to pay to have junk mail delivered and then pay to have it put in the landfills , why do we have to pay for their free ride in our mail system.

  • Reply to: What Do You Think of the Priority Mail Advertising Campaign?   4 years 11 months ago

    The campaign works well but there are many other products we have to offer that are cheaper and more competitive than our competition that are not being addressed. How about an ad campaign that shows a side by side price comparison of these products and services. Lets get the word out with all the facts and figures. In today's world of instant communications, in the delivery business, the parcel is "king" and it can only be delivered by a person, not electronically.

  • Reply to: Can the Postal Service Further Consolidate the Area and District Administrative Office Structure?   4 years 11 months ago

    A year ago we were told that HQ was going to reduce the number of District Offices from 80 to 50. OK, so they elimated six districts -- when are they going to remove the other 24? HQ should have done all 30 at the same time. And why on earth do we need 8 areas? The Western Area already covers half of the US so why not just add CA & HA to them, draw a horizontal line across the middle of the eastern part and call one the Northeast Area and the other the Southwest Area?

  • Reply to: Scaling Back Hours, Not Post Offices   4 years 11 months ago

    they should start by giving customer the service they deserved, not the numbers and scores that to score points, real numbers and real services that people paid for, not any of the lies that managers fix to make them look good in internal report, u can fool customer for long that they will stop using your service.

  • Reply to: Scaling Back Hours, Not Post Offices   4 years 11 months ago

    At this point, changing the business model will be key. Each Post Office should be empowered to set the hours based off of their own market share. Example would be like quick service restaurants. Staffing is based off trends when customers frequent the establishment. Labor is an issue constantly, again based from sales (or lack of). Service will be the key. Understandably, the PO is not a restaurant, but the business principle is similar.

  • Reply to: Scaling Back Hours, Not Post Offices   4 years 11 months ago

    Customers want convenience, not a hassle. Cut hours (service) and your sure to lose in the end. Make fewer POs, but keep them within a reasonable distance with availability. Let's grow the business! Package services is a market ripe for the picking.

  • Reply to: Scaling Back Hours, Not Post Offices   4 years 11 months ago

    Post Offices are distribution facilities (houing not only the carriers but PO boxes) more than retail facilities. Thus one can intelligently discuss dealing with hours at windows and closing counters, vis a vis retail traffice. But whether retail income at any given post office "pays" for the whole post office is a silly and irrelevant comparision given the distribution function.

  • Reply to: Disappearing Collection Boxes   4 years 11 months ago

    I would say this is another stupid move from the postal service. Come on.. how much cost they could save?

  • Reply to: Looking at the Bigger Picture   4 years 11 months ago

    We don't need the postal service. do away with it. why not just put a letter in a bottle and put in the ocean and let the current take it. There is just as much chance of it getting to the right place as there is the postal service delivering it.

  • Reply to: Looking at the Bigger Picture   4 years 11 months ago

    The study commissioned by the PRC speaks directly to the issues confronting the Postal Service. The idea that the Postal service is simply a business entity and ought to be looked at only from the viewpoint of profit and loss is risible.
    No other business operates under anything like our universal mandate. no other business is required to provide preferential treatment ot non-profits and specific classes of product. Supposedly some of those disadvantages are counterbalanced by the 'mailbox monopoly" but the value of that monopoly is questionable at best.
    The USPS represents an integral piece of our national infrastructure and even with electronic diversion the ability to go to every address every day is significant. Rather than trying to be something it cannot be the Postal Service can find ways to preserve its structure and role in society by focusing on the asset value of its network.
    There are opportunities to cooperate with government entities at all levels,local,state, and federal for the delivery of services. Reimagining ourselves more appropriately as a national asset would allow the Postal Service to create a financially viable model that preserves our institutional value, integrity and mission.

  • Reply to: Brainstorm Ideas to Help the Postal Service   4 years 11 months ago

    Southwest Michigan has too many offices close together. On Red Arrow Highway starting from New Buffalo PO, drive 4 miles north you come to the Union Pier PO. Drive 1 mile!.. you come to Lakeside PO. Drive 2 miles you come to Harbert PO. From there you are only 1.5 miles from Sawyer PO. From Sawyer you are 2 miles from New Troy PO. It's insane! All of the mom & pop gas stations and grocery stores closed in this area 30 years ago because there was no population to support them. Now there are fewer people. (70% of homeowners in this area live and receive their mail in Chicago). The USPS is way behind on their office closings. If this is happening across the country, this could be the reason they are going broke. Plus they rent the buildings. When has it ever made sense to rent a house or car long term? NEVER!

Pages