• Reply to: A Future Mail Processing and Transportation Network   3 years 10 months ago

    Current legislation and the lethargic response from Congress is a more pressing issue than the size of the network. Here is a paper by the OIG that addresses the real problem: http://www.uspsoig.gov/foia_files/FT-MA-10-002.pdf

    142 Billion vs 2 Billion – I think we should fight the battles worth fighting first.

    This paper does not address the processing needs of Hawaii or Alaska.

    Reducing the size of the network has the potential to negatively impact service.
    Competitors are already taking advantage of our network by having the USPS deliver the last mile for their product. Our competitors profit from our subsidized network – This is another issue that doesn’t seem to be addressed often enough.

  • Reply to: What are we doing with your blog feedback?   3 years 10 months ago

    Having self serve mailing kiosks in major foot traffic areas, such as the grocery store, or mall should do very well, i agree

  • Reply to: A Future Mail Processing and Transportation Network   3 years 10 months ago

    There has always been tension between cost and delivery standards. Consolidating mail processing into central hubs restrained costs but increased the amount of time it took to deliver the mail. If one were to compare the overnight delivery arc of 1985 to that of today, the difference would be startling.

    It doesn't take a genius to realize that requiring a parcel that is mailed in RI to go up to Springfield, MA only to be returned to a town that is a few miles away from the point where it was mailed, will delay it's delivery. Further consolidation of the network will only add to the delay of mail and cause more people to look elsewhere for better service.

    Most, if not all of the people who comment on the USPS ignore the fact that the USPS has taken in and delivered enough mail to make a profit over the last several years. It hasn't because of the role that Congress plays in it's operation and costs.

    The solution is not to further destroy service to the public but to seek ways to improve it. The solutions put forth thus far do not do that.

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   3 years 10 months ago

    How about bringing stamps down to the community level. If states can have license plates, why not specialized state or local stamps.

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   3 years 10 months ago

    Couldn't disagree more. Extra sources of income can help keep consumer prices lower and service levels higher. As an ongoing enterprise, I like looking for other ways of funding.

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   3 years 10 months ago

    Advertising with sports teams seems to me to be a family oriented safe way to add revenue and support communities. Just a thought.

  • Reply to: We “Advertise” for You?   3 years 10 months ago

    How about linking with youth sports? There are always opportunities to sponsor or let youth teams advertise. The post office is a great gathering spot for these types of activities

  • Reply to: A Future Mail Processing and Transportation Network   3 years 10 months ago

    The biggest challenge is to get the strategic vision striaght. Right now the focus is on growing standard mail. With 4 pieces being required to make a profit for every piece of first class lost, the growth of standard required far exceeds its capabilities. The current strategy is like walking backwards thinking that everything will be fine. It won't be. Several things need to occur to right the ship. First, the number of employees have to be right sized quickly. The only way to do that is to offer an incentive which was larger than the last. If you don't recude the workforce in a sizable and quick manner, you cannot take real advantage of the PSE negotiated in the APWU contract. Second, mangement has to accept the fact that the quality of management up and down the line is far less than in any other organization. (If you don't believe me, look up the numbers for the percent of managers/supervisors that have bachelors and masters degrees, and compare them to ICA's percentage for City Managers, or compare them with any other federal or state agencies.) You have a stupid supervisory staff. The consequences of which is bad decision making and loss of productivity and effeciency. Reinstitute the Management Intern program for the next 10 years, with a goal of getting at least 15% of the new superviory staff from the Intern program. The third thing is to reognize the the ability for USPS to be viable means it must do what retail companies have been doing for years, to for nitches. It will no longer be an organization which is dominated by one or two classes of mail. It will have to provide electronic services, and seek out nitches to expand or glom on to. Utlitmately the organizational vision has to be one of providing communication services with an emphasis on the movement of physical prodcuts.

  • Reply to: To Award or Not to Award: What’s the Postal Service to Do?   3 years 10 months ago

    If any organization wants its growth then appreciation is necessary. Instead of scolding an employee for doing wrong, make him/her understand with patience and appreciate while doing good. It will not only boost up the employee but also increases your goodwill in his/her manner.

  • Reply to: Does the Postal Service Need International Service Centers?   3 years 10 months ago

    A particularly interesting post - Thank you very much I hope you will not mind me subscribing to your rss feed. I have found a few sites with similar , but not this interesting. Thanks ;-)

  • Reply to: How Can the Postal Service Reduce the Costs Associated with Postage Stamps?   3 years 10 months ago

    I think the postal service is truly in a tough spot. It has to deal with smaller revenue and yet balance continuing service and not raise rates to send away even more prospects. That is a tough juggling act.

  • Reply to: Decreased Volume. Increased Miles   3 years 10 months ago

    What about charging different fees based on the distance the mail has to travel? Perhaps one fee for in-state and a higher one for out-of-state? I think we, as consumers, need to get used to the fact that our Government infrastructure also needs to turn a profit. If it means those that use the service have to pay more, then that's what we have to do. Lest we all lose the service.

  • Reply to: Barriers to Change   3 years 10 months ago

    There is one area that appears to be slanted in your report. You assume that a "Post Office" has only one function that of being a "retail network" and hence should be modeled after all Retail Companies. Nothing could be further from the truth. A "Post Office" houses carrier operations clerk distribution opeartsion and a retail counter most of the work being accomplished inside a "Post Office" fall to the first two categories I list, In fact about 15% is the average time spent on "retai" in a post office. Do you close a post office because 15% of its work load might be shifted to alternate retail sources???? In addition a "Post Office" is the last link in the chain of the distribution model of the postal service. To move post offices further away from its main core of work is fulfilling a self desired result. Hence your report is flawed. Go to a post office and ask the customers what they want done with "their" post office. Most like the town name on the building and the convienence they now have. In addition a Post Office may not take in money in fact most do not. The bulk of USPS Revenue comes from mailing houses in major areas of the country. Yet the work load is spread through out the entire postal service. Should we close a Post Office that is small yet because it has a major banking facility within its domain and makes 30 times what it takes in? Yet close a larger post office because it does the same amount of retail revenue yet is missing that banking facility and therfore loses money????? WHAT NEEDS TO BE FULLY CONSIDERED IS THAT THE USPS IS PART OF THE US CONSTITUTION AND AS SUCH UNTIL CHANGED BY CONGRESS IS A 'SERVICE' PROVIDED TO THE PUBLIC.. not witholding to a monetary figure.

  • Reply to: To Award or Not to Award: What’s the Postal Service to Do?   3 years 10 months ago

    If a person has no quality but he has dedication towards his work then appreciation and giving award increases his passion towards work. So this is necessary.

  • Reply to: Postal Service Network Streamlining   3 years 10 months ago

    The post service of any nation should remain government property. Look at how the Royal Mail of the U.K. has declined since becoming privatized, yet still borrowing huge chunks of public money. Is that what this nation wants? Sometimes I wonder

  • Reply to: Automated Package Stations – Rapidly Expanding Service in Europe!   3 years 10 months ago

    Hope this is introduced into our county. This will help a lot in tracking down snail mails and prevent lost parcels from families and friends.

  • Reply to: A New Kind of Post Office?   3 years 10 months ago

    Very neat and futuristic looking - a bit cold though. Coffee shop is definetely a good idea.

  • Reply to: Training . . . Stay or Pay?   3 years 10 months ago

    I think the answer falls in the gray area. Companies, whether in the private or public sector, have to be prepared to experience loses in training. From an employees perspective, if you have trained me but your organization is below what I would consider a satisfy work environment (not challenging enough, or co-workers are less than favorable, or its too stressful, etc..), then i should have the right to leave with no strings attached. In this regard companies tend to have their training department play up all the great things about a company without pointing out some of the things may be deterrents to certain individuals. On the other hand, companies should have the right to "collect" on the investment of upper-level training but should be limited to only require that they work the amount of time it took to train them and not some empirical number of the amount they were expecting to profit from the trained individual.

  • Reply to: Training . . . Stay or Pay?   3 years 10 months ago

    Well, it's because CEU's are things that motivated people usually
    aquire in an effort to have more mobility in the workplace.
    From my observations, errrr, I mean through the eyes of a "casual"
    observer; the postal attitude is "I'll be here till I retire".

    Now, let's dissect the statement.
    I'll - I'm only interested in my world.
    be here- Like a tick on a dog. I'm not going anywhere...
    till I retire- Why apply myself? I'm never going any where else.

    Missing adverb between be and here - "working"

  • Reply to: To Award or Not to Award: What’s the Postal Service to Do?   3 years 10 months ago

    According to me, we should appreciate our employes this will give honor to them and they will pay extra attention towards their works.

  • Reply to: Training . . . Stay or Pay?   3 years 10 months ago

    I have often wondered why there is no continuing education for the clerk and carrier crafts. We are the ones that spot postage and mail-ability problems.

    Another thing to consider is the lost revenue of items being delivered without regard to proper postage, specially in small offices.

    I see it on a daily basis. Items mailed at Media rate receiving forwarding service without charge, parcel post items returned or forwarded without charge. BBM not being charged on return service. And now with the new parcel select regulation regarding forwarding of items and surcharges, without proper training and supervision, this service will not be handled right.

    It wouldnt take much to keep the employees informed on things. A half day or whole day of training for updating employees once a year, mandatory should do it. The cost to the post office would be small considering the revenue that is lost from ignorance in small offices around the country.

  • Reply to: The OIG Wants to Know How You Feel about Sick Leave   3 years 10 months ago

    Ive been reading a lot about this subject lately and i learned a little more from reading this, thanks for the post

  • Reply to: Decreased Volume. Increased Miles   3 years 10 months ago

    Yes, reviewing service standards is a must, but smart network management is another competence the Postal Service must seek. For instance, Deutsche Post will bypass outgoing processing at some originating plants (when volumes are low) and truck mail to other plants to consolidate outgoing volumes. In doing so, they save labor at the bypassed plants and benefits from economies of scale at the consolidation plants. Labor being more expensive than transportation (per unit worked or transported), this yields savings for them. The Postal Service's plant network is sufficiently dense that, by adopting a measure similar to that of Deutsche Post, service commitments would not suffer, even if unchanged.

    In recent discussions with a former executive at UPS, he informed me that the cost of data capture and management had risen dramatically in their organization, because they run their business in near real time (network distribution decisions, hub staffing decisions, transportation mode assignment). But the payback has been that (1) they can operate at 99% service performance, and (2) overall operational costs are down....

    As long as the current business model prevails at the Postal Service (i.e., one that makes up for cost contributions by increasing volumes, that are in a spiraling decline) there will be a compelling need to turn the organization into a knowledge-driven one. This is a difficult but necessary undertaking.


  • Reply to: Decreased Volume. Increased Miles   3 years 10 months ago

    The best way to reduce miles (and, more importantly, transportation costs) would be to allow Postal management some latitude in changing service standards. There are a few that are costly to maintain. Those should be downgraded, while others can be upgraded with minimal impact on costs. Current Postal service standards are based on outdated, decades-old, transportation options.

  • Reply to: Too Much Management Turnover?   3 years 10 months ago

    Lori - Thank you for your response on this subject. We appreciate you sharing the information.