Slashdot Mirror


US Postal Service Discontinuing Saturday Mail Delivery

Hugh Pickens writes "The Postal Service has been losing billions of dollars each year as Americans increasingly rely on online communications that drive down mail volumes. Now, Reuters reports that the Postal Service plans to drop Saturday delivery of first-class mail by August, saving $2 billion per year. 'The Postal Service is advancing an important new approach to delivery that reflects the strong growth of our package business and responds to the financial realities resulting from America's changing mailing habits,' says Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe. But the Postal Service is already facing some pushback for moving forward with delivery schedule changes. 'Today's announcement by Postmaster General Donahoe to eliminate six-day delivery is yet another death knell for the quality service provided by the U.S. Postal Service,' says Jeanette Dwyer, president of the National Rural Letter Carriers' Association. 'To erode this service will undermine the Postal Service's core mission and is completely unacceptable.' Package deliveries will continue under the new plan and were a bright spot in a bleak 2012 fiscal year, with package revenue rising 8.7 percent during the year. Donahoe says the changes would allow the Postal Service to continue benefiting from rising package deliveries as Americans order more products from sites such as eBay Inc and Amazon.com Inc."

19 of 582 comments (clear)

  1. Man, oh man! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If only there were some article of the Constitution that could be used as an argument to convince conservatives that the Post Office is a vital national service and that it is okay to pay for it in much the same way as it is okay to pay for a navy.

    I guess one can only wish.

    1. Re:Man, oh man! by hawguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If only there were some article of the Constitution that could be used as an argument to convince conservatives that the Post Office is a vital national service and that it is okay to pay for it in much the same way as it is okay to pay for a navy.

      I guess one can only wish.

      Why is Saturday mail delivery a vital national service? Will people die if they don't receive their Victoria's Secret catalog on Saturday?

    2. Re:Man, oh man! by hawguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What? Really? All I can say is finally! Waaaaaaaaaayyy less junk mail will get to me and everyone else now (99% of mail I get is junk -- goes right from my mail box straight into the recycling) Sure, there's probably some poor people who depend on this extra day of mail (I know we kinda did as I was growing up), but too bad...

      How will this affect the quantity of junk mail?

      It's not like the post office is going to throw away all of the mail on Saturdays instead of delivering it. Instead they will hold it and deliver it on Monday. So you'll still get the same amount of mail.

    3. Re:Man, oh man! by nedlohs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You can make this happen right now! I realize this will amaze you, but it's actually simple to implement. You can do it this week, it doesn't even cost anything.

      Are you ready for this amazing technique? It's used by the wealthy and powerful, but I'm exposing their hidden tricks. Again, at no charge to you!

      Don't check your mailbox on Saturday or Sunday.

      Mind blowing isn't it!

    4. Re:Man, oh man! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, but they could die (or at least suffer harm) if the mail was something like insulin or heart medication.

      Merrly being snarky does not make a convincing argument.

      Being dumb doesn't make a convincing argument either. You don't count on the mail for time / mission critical things. It wasn't designed for it and cannot support it.

      If you have prescription medications that are filled by mail order you're supposed to have a buffer supply. Shit happens. Even Saturday delivery doesn't change that.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    5. Re:Man, oh man! by mabhatter654 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Without junk mail you'd have to pay the mailman a lot more per envelope. Probably well over $1. Unlike Spam, junk mail PAYS the mailman to walk around to ALL the houses. Right now advertising is probably the only thing making per home delivery profitable.

      UPS and FEDEX certainly don't deliver to EVERY house, EVERY day.... And not for $.45

  2. It doesn't help... by moosehooey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It doesn't help that Congress is basically stealing $5 billion a year from the post office. They're making the USPS fully fund retirement plans over a very short time, and that money is going into government bonds, which ends up in the general fund. If it wasn't for the budget shenanigans that Congress pulled, the Post Office would be doing fine.

    1. Re:It doesn't help... by SydShamino · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Add to this that, without them having to spend the last few years in massive debt trying to figure out how to fund these pension plans, they might have been able to spend the time and money reinventing themselves as a common carrier capable of surviving in the internet age.

      I'm pretty sure that half of Congress - ironically the half that prefers a strict interpretation of the Constitution - wants the Constitutionally-mandated postal service to go bankrupt and go away because it interferes with the profits of several other private businesses. (The vote on the bill in the House in 2006 was done by voice, so there's no official record of who voted for it.)

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    2. Re:It doesn't help... by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, you're misunderstanding the purpose of that move by Congress: it wasn't about gaining $5 billion a year, it was about gutting the USPS. There are many people in Congress (mostly Tea Party types) that want the USPS to be a relic of the past, some because that would benefit FedEx and UPS and other companies, and some because their philosophy is that the federal government can't possibly do anything useful so the USPS must be by definition useless.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    3. Re:It doesn't help... by Algae_94 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What is the point you're trying to make. If the post office was not forced to pre-fund its pension plans, it would be making money. Regardless of the volume of first class mail, it would be making money.

    4. Re:It doesn't help... by XopherMV · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Prefunding retirement accounts for 70 years is NOT what businesses do. That would include prefunding the retirements of people who aren't even born yet! The point was to put this burden on the USPS in order to use the burden to justify shutting the USPS down. That's just ridiculous and stupid.

  3. Bout Time by slackerfilm · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I think this is way over due. Although, I like getting mail on Saturday, I don't see a point. It isn't like we can do business on Saturdays.

    Now if only Amazon would start letting us choose USPS over UPS for package delivery. As an apartment dweller, this would make my life much easier.

    --

    throw the baby out. The bathwater is cold

  4. Yet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We could eliminate the DOJ's yearly anti-terrorism funding and not only save Saturday delivery, but put the USPS back in good shape fiscally.
    Somehow I don't think expanding the TSA, buying millions of rounds of hollow-point ammo and giving them automatic assault rifles to fight boogeymen is helping anything.

  5. Re:one less day of junk mail by JeanCroix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Or people waiting for the next Netflix DVD...

  6. Not entirely true by Shivetya · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The post office was forced into this because their unfunded pension fund was a time bomb waiting to happen. They are only paying this increase till 2016 and have had it reduced when it was pressing. As of 2009 it was estimated their unfunded liabilities were over fifty billion dollars.

    No, where Congress gets a failing grade is similar to how base closings are done. Just like the military knows which bases are not needed the Post Office can tell you which sorting centers, distribution hubs, and which Post Offices, are not needed. When they go to close them then suddenly every Congressman becomes an expert and you end up with stories about how the PO wanted to close nearly 3000 offices and only got a little over a hundred.

    The PO operates under burdensome contracts combined with quickly shrinking sources of income. The number of pieces of mail handled has steadily declined but when the PO tries to downsize Congress interferes or their contracts block them. Trying to hire part time workers is another area they have difficulty with.

    So, no their problems don't stem from just having to pay for liabilities they should be paying for; if anything ask Congress why that rule ain't applied to the US as a whole; its from a myriad of items of which two largest are Congress and the unions.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:Not entirely true by sjames · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You fell for the numbers game. That 'unfunded liability' included projected pensions into the future for employees not even born at the time of the calculation (using the excuse that they were projected to need to hire those people in the next 50 years).

      That's like claiming you are $10,000 in debt right now because you have not yet fully funded your eventual funeral and any children you might have before that.

  7. Re:This isn't going to fix things. by Shagg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's really not much they can do about it. The main reason the USPS is down $16 billion is because Congress is intentionally trying to bankrupt them.

    --
    Unix is user friendly, it's just selective about who its friends are.
  8. Re:How about graduated scale or deregulation ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Cost to send a letter via UPS: $30
    Cost to send a letter via USPS: $0.46
    One of them's certainly more efficient, but it isn't UPS.

  9. Re:Who could have guessed? by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Imagine that: unions, affirmative action and compliance with well-intentioned government programs do make you anti-competitive after all.

    The USPS is the most efficient system for moving things from one place to the other on the planet. Seriously. Its private competitors cost far more to move the same amount of stuff in a similar amount of time, and its international counterparts don't come close to dealing with the kinds of requirements the USPS has to deal with. Their systems and procedures are designed so that practically anybody can get hired, follow the manual, and do the job correctly, and are also capable of working under a wide variety of conditions ranging from tiny towns in the middle of Alaska to lower Manhattan.

    It's not that they aren't competitive. It's that the demand for their entire industry has dropped, and their bosses are actively trying to screw them up.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/