The U.S. Postal Service Nears Collapse

Businessweek ^ | May 26, 2011 | Devin Leonard

[4buttons]

He is struck by how many USPS executives started out as letter carriers or clerks. He finds them so consumed with delivering mail that they have been slow to grasp how swiftly the service's financial condition is deteriorating. "We said, 'What's your 10-year plan?' " Herr recalls. "They didn't have one."

[muawiyah]

The post said “full retirement” and that was 40 years!

[Gaffer]

Maybe so, but it shouldn’t be. Doesn’t encourage any savings or planning. Just hanging on and living off others for the sake of it.

[muawiyah]

Whatever you want to think ~ but the Thrift Savings Plan is part of the retirement picture for Postal employees.

Employees also make contributions to the regular retirement plan ~ I made enough contributions that just accounting for interest and no matching assumptions I'd have to live to almost 200 years of age to draw down on the whole thing.

In short, I paid for my retirement ~ you didn't!

[Gaffer]

You have no idea what I paid for or not, you only know about your good deal.....regardless, you led everyone here to believe you get full retirement at 40 years; for many good-deal concerns this is generally a defined benefit plan that has very little to do with how minimally you contribute. Next time close the damned door on my mailbox if you’re so damned smart.

[muawiyah]

I never touched your mailbox in my life. BTW, mail recipients don't pay for the mail. That's done by the mailers.

And yes, I do know where postal income comes from, and they paid me, and I made contributions, and the actuaries worked out what I should get out of it.

You don't know beans buddy.

[Captain Kirk]

Fed Ex delivers everywhere in the U.S. I assume UPS does too. If you have information to the contrary please provide it.

A constitutional amendment would NOT be needed since the the Constitution merely authoritizes, but does not require, the Post Office. The Constitution DOES NOT authorize the current postal monopoly. IMHO, this monopoly is unconstituional.

BTW, if you want more on the sordid origins of that monopoly read up on Lysander Spooner who was so successfully at competing with the postal service (including lower prices and his own Sunday delivery!) that the government shut him down. For more on Spooner, see here.

[driftless2]

I never said they didn't. What I did say, please read carefully, if UPS or FedEx were given the contract to deliver letters and other first class mail, they'd run into the same problems as the USPS. Now as they are private companies, without a stipulation from the gov. that they have to deliver letters everywhere, they'd run into cost problems like the USPS. As private companies without the obligation, they can stop delivery of unprofitable mail i.e. letters. As they, like the USPS have union workers, they can go strike as UPS did in 1997. Without the USPS as a backup, billions of pieces of mail would have gone undelivered. The military, another government agency, would have had to deploy people to deliver the mail.

Now if you can come up to a solution to make sure the mail always gets delivered using private business with the possibility of strikes, decisions to cancel delivery of unprofitable mail, or the company simply ceasing operations period, (and after you've passed that amendment getting rid of the USPS), I'm all ears.

[SC_Pete]

Providing mail service does not mean we have to support an ineeficient bureacracy without an expiration date. I am sure that a constiutional alternative that’s superior to the current fiasco cold be devised.

[joelt]

I’m a WSJ subscriber,Barron’s, Observer of ZeroHedge and Seekng Alpha sites,,,, Dvr FastMoney daily. If you can post a link citing the near collapse of FEDEX or UPS in 2008 or them wanting a bailout I’d be happy to eat crow.

[muawiyah]

http://www.martindale.com/advertising-marketing/article_Manatt-Phelps-Phillips-LLP_751364.htm ~ one article among many.

[muawiyah]

Inefficient?

We increased postal productivity at 700% from 1970 to 2004 ~ and your productivity improvement in that period?

[muawiyah]

Let’s hear what your definition of a “full ride pension” is. Else we’ll just write that off as just more UPS propaganda.

[muawiyah]

Can't lay off workers ~ so much BS ~ so little time. I went through a good 20 REORGANIZATIONS in 40 years ~ and people were laid off.

You should study up on this stuff first.

[driftdiver]

UPS Propaganda!! LOL I hate those folks, they are even worse than USPS and that takes some work.

[driftdiver]

And yet you’re still losing money hand over fist

[Heart of Georgia]

“USPS is self-funding through postal fees as far as I know.”

You’re right, and Congress robs the profits.

[pnh102]

You should study up on this stuff first.

According to the linked article the USPS union contracts state that no workers can be laid off for economic reasons.

[Gene Eric]

What can I say, I like USPS. I’ve encountered a few lazy, nasty postal workers, but most of the time, the employees are pleasant and helpful. The key provision in my mind is the understanding that no tax dollars go to supporting USPS.

[muawiyah]

That depends on how you interpret "economic reasons". The law also says you can't shut down a post office for not making a profit.

What you can do is transfer work to another area and lay off the surplus people. You can wait on lightning to set fire to the post office and close it anyway. You can offer early retirement and simply dispose of the incumbent's previous job. You can also HOLD A RIF ~ a reduction in force.

It's just a matter of will.

[muawiyah]

Congress robs the employee retirement funds first ~ and that’s up to over $78 billion in overpayments by USPS to the government.