• Reply to: 40 Years Ago   5 years 9 months ago

    The P.O. is in deep doodoo because of the requirement of promoting only those with sheepskins. You can be as dumb as a log, not know how to treat or talk to people, but have a diploma you can enter management. Complain to the PMG about a real bum of a manager i.e. Sr. Plant manager) and nothing happens. If you act like a senior manager you will be terminated. That is the real problem. Like the military: if something is wrong or happens go down to the lowest possible level to blame someone.

  • Reply to: Mystery Shoppers   5 years 9 months ago

    Here's a thought- The mystery shopper program as it stands is useless. Instead, just have the customers fill out an online survey, similar to how Home Depot does. Also, give the customer an incentive to fill out the survey- a gift card of some sort or maybe a roll of stamps to randomly selected participants. In the end, you will get the voice of the customer who counts, not the one who doesn't.

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   5 years 9 months ago

    The Postal Services own products, yes, others NO. It would take the unique quality away from the service.
    Maybe next we could sell ice cream from the back as they drive around the neighborhood's
    Geez...who is the brainchild behind that idea??

  • Reply to: Crime Takes No Holiday   5 years 9 months ago

    I work for a defense law firm and I will agree with the article that shoplifting is on the rise.

    Do not be tempted to shoplift! The district attorneys in the San Jose area are really coming down on this crime. Our clients are often shocked to hear that they can potentially receive a misdemeanor on their record for stealing a $10 item. If they get a criminal record for a stupid mistake, they will regret it for the rest of their life.

  • Reply to: The OIG Wants to Know How You Feel about Sick Leave   5 years 9 months ago

    Buy back all sick leave. If the workers have no sick leave, absenteeism would be minimal. Also, the imbecile managers could stop pretending to be leave administrators.

  • Reply to: Mystery Shoppers   5 years 9 months ago

    Mystery shopping programmes should be designed to enable staff members to improve their service levels, identify training gaps and also motivate them. Employers should definitely avoid staff members feeling like they're being controlled. The programme obviously needs to be re-evaluated to give staff more of an input.

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   5 years 9 months ago

    Why would the postal service pay someone else to sell space on their trucks. I am sure if the postal service can deliver a package anywhere in the world surely they are able to sell ads. People should buy ads showing the world how sorry congress is. After watching CSPAN I can see why all government agencys are in the shape they are in. It make me sick to see grown people act like 5 year old kids.

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   5 years 9 months ago

    The best company the Postal Service can advertise for is itself. Making a few bucks selling ad space on delivery vehicles only takes away from its own brand awareness - which is what is really important.

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   5 years 9 months ago

    We need all the advertising we can get ourselves. Seems it would make more sense to advertise our own products, services (i.e. free carrier pick-up), website, etc. rather than someone else's on our vehicles, and to replace outrageously costly TV commercials with this source of advertising.

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   5 years 9 months ago

    Selling space to advertise is a good way to increase revenue, we just have to have a better type of displayed used on the sides of vehicles. The last type of ad decals that were used caused a lot of damage to the paint on the vehicles when they were removed.

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   5 years 9 months ago

    Why not advertise our new banking services?

    USPS Banking please check out USPS.com.

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   5 years 9 months ago

    The revenue from ads on vehicles would be trivial compared to it's impact on the USPS brand.

    The USPS business model and regulatory framework needs fundamental change.

    This idea is superficial. What is needed is far deeper.

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   5 years 9 months ago

    I proposed this iedea last year thru my supervisiors and the USPS on-line suggestion program. It was never given a second thought. Imagine that.

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   5 years 9 months ago

    So I guess we can expect to see UPS and Fedex advertised on the side of Postal vehicles?

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   5 years 9 months ago

    Why not...advertise USPS products, ads for other goverment and state agencies, military, state lottery
    etc...

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   5 years 9 months ago

    Maybe UPS would become the first customer!

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   5 years 9 months ago

    I believe it is a great idea to advertise on Postal Service vechicles and in Postal Service facilities. Other government agencies do it and have great success. However, the Postal Service should think hard about who should manage the sale and delivery of advertising for two reasons. First, the current revenue situation dictates the Postal Service internally manage sales to maximize thier return on investment. However, the cost associated managing sales may be very high and may best be accomplished using an advertising agency. A cost analysis of in-house over contracting-out is needed.

    In reference to public image, many internet sites maintain contraints over additional company Webb site links on their Webb pages. Most are similar to thier own operation. I see no reason why the Postal Service could not also maintain certain constraints over what companies' advertising is acceptable.

    Concerning the Postal Service Accountability and Enhancement Act and nonpostal products, how would this type of advertising be different from publishing companies who print and publish magazine advertisments at DMUs for distribution? Too me, the only difference would be trucks carring the sales pitch on Postal Service vehicles and inside retail units, instead of printing advertisments in magazines and placing them inside contractor-operated or Postal Service trucks for delivery.

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   5 years 9 months ago

    Why not advertise our own products and services on the vehicles? We made clerks wear flat-rate box t-shirts to advertise, why not use the vehicles for our own advertising? Cheaper than other advertising methods, and if its our own products would sidestep the issues if we sell to others.

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   5 years 9 months ago

    You are missing the whole point on purpose. Stop covering for what will be done. The people running the USPS could care less about generating revenue. You are trying to project an image that the USPS management is looking under every stone to be a success. This leads people to think they are rational business people looking to cut costs everywhere while seeking new revenue. Dream on.

    The USPS has one frame of reference and only one. And that is: The only action needed to save the USPS is to go after Letter Carriers. All of these alternative strategies are just "pie in the sky". The only relevant solution is harass, berate, deny sick leave, and constantly lie to the Letter Carriers.

    I'll give you one example. For years backing up an LLV was considered a safety hazard and constantly briefed on the work floor to be careful. There is technology used today on vehicles using rear looking cameras so kids do not get run over. The USPS installs GPS to monitor Letter Carriers instead.

    Crushing kids and banging into vehicles might be a safety concern but lets get serious. What is really important? Harass Letter Carriers or prevent an accident that can get a Letter carrier fired.

  • Reply to: 40 Years Ago   5 years 9 months ago

    Hmm... 15% of revenue came from taxes in 1969. if that were true today, the Pstal Service would have received about $10-11 billion in payments last year, in which case, they would have been wildly profitable even in this very tough economy and with all of the mandated payments they much make.
    All in all, it seems the current USPS -- with record service and satisfaction -- is doing quite favorably compared to the '69 version

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   5 years 9 months ago

    If the sides of postal vehicles are to become mobile advertisements. So what's next for the federal government? Are we going to sell ad space on the steps of the US Capitol?

  • Reply to: 40 Years Ago   5 years 9 months ago

    The past, although very different, is important but with today's environment the Postal Service needs to change with the times. The Postal Service is suppose to operate like a business, right? Most businesses look to be innovative or provide cutting-edge products. The Postal Service doesn't exactly position themselves to do so. In addition to automation and streamlining the Postal Service should look into at least providing what is already available. Can the Postal Service be another Zumbox? And for those who want to hold onto to their Post Office so they can have somewhere to go. Maybe a local coffee shop can become the new internet cafe so you can meet and greet while reading your paperless mail. Just one of many ideas the Postal Service could look in to.

  • Reply to: Nationwide Wage Uniformity Part 2   5 years 9 months ago

    Does anyone know how much a new TRC is paid? I was just hired and forgot to ask at the interview. Before I accept the position I would like to know the pay.

  • Reply to: 40 Years Ago   5 years 9 months ago

    I started with the PO in 1969, and it was whole different world back then. The system was pretty much the way it was in Ben Franklin's time, but the mail got out. It was physically much harder than today and the PO was one of the lowest paying federal jobs. With congress controlling the purse strings there was no incentive for change. It seemed like there was an attitude of "if it was good enough for Franklin 200 yrs ago its good enough for us". AS a matter of fact PO management was anti-technology at all levels including HQ. I think the USPS was about the last gov't agency to get computers. I remember, a little over 20yrs ago, they installed computer terminals around the floor but they were never used and then removed.

    It all started to change after after the 1970 act kicked in. A lot of experimentation went on and some was disastrous and comical. Like the SPLSM and all the various cage type before they settled for the GPMC and ERMC. Before the MM tray and 775 tub ALL mail was shipped in sacks and pouches. There were no long haul over the road HCR's all the long trips were on trailers carried piggy-back on railroad cars. Since the railroad charged by the foot and not weight the "pigs" were loaded floor to ceiling. We even used to go to the railroad station and unload mail off of boxcars onto trucks.

    Today it is a lot easier, some of the newbies of today might not have been able to handle "the good old days". While all the new equipment of today has made things easier, it is not being used to its full potential. While management has got over their resistance to technology, they have not figured out how to manage it. They will short staff, run bad mail, and etc in order to make "the number". Almost like the old days practice of weighing in the same mail several times.

    While it is true that some cost cutting is needed it is not the only answer. There MUST be an increase in revenue. There seem to no real effort being put into trying increase revenue. All the emphasis has been on cost cutting, shorter retail hours and less services, they seem to be trying to drive business away. The upper levels (HQ, Area, & District) are not giving the installation level any incentive to increase revenue, they only pressure them to make their budget and numbers.

    Glad I took the incentive and got out!

  • Reply to: 40 Years Ago   5 years 9 months ago

    The problem today is obvious. Top management takes no responsibility in their failed projects, e.g. DPS & FSS. After spending billions upon billions of dollars where did the "savings" go?
    Another big problem is the lack of accountability on management's part. They continue to violate collective bargaining agreements' leading to hugh greivance settlements with no manager taking responsibility. EEO and MSPB awards are in the millions of dollars. The same people committing the same acts and yet are allowed to maintain their position causing more money to go down the drain. If the OIG was serious they would investigate the managers causing this loss.

Pages