PostalReporter News Blog

APWU Web News Article 079-2010, Aug. 5, 2010

The AFL-CIO adopted a resolution written by the APWU in support of retaining six-day mail delivery at its Aug. 4 Executive Council meeting. The motion to adopt the resolution expresses the labor movement’s opposition to the USPS proposal to eliminate Saturday delivery.

APWU President William Burrus urged the Executive Council to endorse the resolution and to go on record as “supporting the preservation of six days of postal services per week.”

“Denying Americans six days of mail delivery will weaken their confidence in the [Postal Service’s] ability to meet their personal and business needs and lead to the ultimate demise of this important government service,” the resolution states.

The motion to Save Saturday Servicewas unanimously adopted by the council, which is comprised of leaders from the 56 labor unions governed by the AFL-CIO.

source: AFL-CIO Adopts Resolution to Save Saturday Service.

Excerpts from PMG John Potter letter regarding Pilot test on Five-Day Delivery:

From an operational standpoint a pilot test conducted on a regional basis would increase some of our costs in the short term. For example, we either would have to make manual changes to mail processing sorting schemes and payroll or utilize information technology to program such changes for a limited time or geographic area. We believe that our information technology programming changes, estimated to cost $10 million-$12 million for a national, full-time implementation, would grow significantly to accommodate a test, as would administrative costs if we decided to forego programming changes in favor of performing manual processing for the defined test period. We also would have to communicate the pilot’s parameters to the public and employees. During such a test we would be unable to make the permanent, necessary changes to our delivery workforce, transportation networks, and mail processing operations that would yield the projected $3.1 billion savings. The largest financial impact of a pilot would be the fact that many career employees in the pilot area would have to be paid not to work or be relocated, white many of our non-career and part-time employees would see their wages reduced or eliminated. Any savings in wages that the Postal Service would realize during the test would immediately disappear at the test’s conclusion.

It may be helpful for me to offer a distinct example of the internal challenges that a test would present. In City Letter Carrier operations, full -time, regular City Carriers generally are assigned to a single delivery route that they service five days per week. These Carriers are scheduled to have Sunday off as well as one other day of the week. A category of full-time Carriers, known as Carrier Technicians. also are scheduled to work five days per week; but instead of servicing the same route each day, they cover the day off- and the route–of five different carriers. The five-day delivery proposal anticipates the reduction of approximately 25,000 full-time City Carrier assignments and $2.2 billion in annual savings in City Carrier operations. The savings are generated primarily by the fact that under a five-day delivery model, regular Carriers assigned to a single route would have Saturday and Sunday off, eliminating the need for the Carrier Technician and Relief Carrier assignments. We plan to transition full-time Carrier Technician assignments into Carrier positions (that cover a single route) that become available through attrition (a significant percentage of our current workforce is eligible for retirement between now and 2014). Under a pilot test we would be unable to carry out this Carrier alignment, and during the test itself, we would have a surplus of Letter Carriers for whom we would have to find productive work within their craft, and if unsuccessful, pay them to perform no work because our contract with the National Association of Letter Carriers guarantees full-time, regular Carriers a 40-hour work week. Under our national proposal for five-day delivery we Intend to preserve the employment of our career City Carriers.

read letter from Postmaster General John Potter submitted to the Postal Regulatory Commission

From National Public Radio:

For decades, the U.S. Postal Service has provided many communities of color with a reliable career option with steady benefits. But proposed budget and service cuts — including eliminating Saturday deliveries — threaten the livelihoods of many career postal workers. To get a sense of how communities of color will be affected by these proposed cuts, host Michel Martin speaks with William Burrus, president of the American Postal Workers Union. Also joining the discussion is Philip Rubio, the author of There’s Always Work at the Post Office: African American Postal Workers and the Fight for Jobs, Justice and Equality. click here to listen to the story

The Postal Regulatory Commision requested that USPS provide the following:
For each of the city carrier employee types indicated in Attachment 1 of USPS-T-7, please provide the distribution of total city carrier work years, indicated in the third column of the first table, by day of the week, for FY 2009.

Here are the charts:

USPS RESPONSE:
Time and Attendance Collection System (TACS) data for FY 2009 were obtained for the city carrier employee types listed below to determine the percentage of workhours by day of week, as shown in Table 1 on the next sheet. These percentages are applied to the “Work Year” and “Total FY Workhours” data
below (which is from my testimony, USPS-T-7, Attachment 1, page 2) and are reported in Tables 2 and Table 3 respectively.

From the Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC)

Schedule for Hearings on Postage Rate Increase

HEARINGS in Docket N2010-1:
July 14 at 9:30 am …
July 16 at 9:30 am …
July 20 at 9:30 am …
July 21 at 9:30 am
July 22 at 9:30 am /

 Billings Gazette

The least painful option

Al DeSarro, spokesman for the western area of the United States Postal Service, said surveys show that elimination of Saturday mail delivery is by far the most favored option for trimming the post office’s losses

Cutting Saturday delivery also wouldn’t be the first time the agency has tried that option. Back in 1957, according to CNN.com, the postmaster general implemented five-day service — but the change lasted just one Saturday. Public furor was so great that additional funding was immediately allocated and mail was delivered the very next Saturday.”

Down the road, and we’re talking years from now, we won’t need as many carriers because we won’t have to support that sixth-day delivery,” “It’s estimated that probably between 40,000 and 50,000 fewer carrier positions nationwide will be needed.”

From Postcom.org

The following is an extraordinary letter to the editor of the New York Times from long-time postal sage Murray Comarow:

The Postal Service’s proposal to switch to five-day delivery is complex and controversial. [New York Times article "Sides Form Over Threat to Saturday Mail Service," 7-6-10] Congress has therefore directed the Postal Regulatory Commission to study the issue; its recommendations are expected in October.

But Ruth Y. Goldway, the Commission’s Chairwoman, apparently has already made up her mind. The article quotes her as saying, “”The Postal Service in fact should be expanding its accessibility and delivery capability to meet those needs. The long-term future of the Postal Service may be limited by their interest in reducing service today.”

She is certainly entitled to her opinion, but it is safe to say that Congress expected a serious, credible study leading to recommendations by the PRC’s five presidentially-appointed commissioners. This shoot-from-the-hip comment by Mrs. Goldway is not exactly new and tends to undermine confidence in the Commission.

I don’t know how the other four commissioners feel about Mrs. Goldway’s pre-emptive remarks; perhaps the Times should ask them. I’d guess they would rightly say, “No comment until we report to Congress.”

Letter carriers union says fixing pension errors will solve USPS’ financial woes

WASHINGTON – NALC President Fredric V. Rolando issued the following statement today in response to proposed measures to solve the USPS’ budget deficit, including rate increases and cutting Saturday delivery:

“What is at stake here is finding a long-term, common sense solution to the financial problems plaguing the Postal Service. The answer does not reside with penny-wise, pound-foolish service cuts, as proposed by the USPS. Neither is it to be found by making false and misleading claims about postal labor costs to avoid a postage rate increase, as some mailers are now doing. Of the options under consideration to solve the Postal Service’s financial crisis, the smartest solution is to reform the congressional mandate to massively pre-fund future retiree health benefits.

“The Postal Service is mandated by law to meet an aggressive pre-funding payment schedule of future health benefits for retirees. No other American entity in the public or private sector is required to pre-fund retiree health benefits. The Postal Service has already set aside more than $35 billion, enough to cover retiree health benefits for 15-20 years.

“Additionally, the Postal Service has been overcharged by $50-$75 billion for benefits Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) benefits, according to the findings of both the USPS Office of the Inspector General and the Postal Regulatory Commission. Without these burdens, the Postal Service would have been profitable in three of the past four years. If these burdens were eliminated altogether, the Postal Service would be able to pay down its outstanding operational debt and focus on strengthening and adapting its business model.

“The Postal Service has reviewed its operations repeatedly over the past three years and has reacted quickly to the changing economic landscape. Jointly with the NALC, it has evaluated and adjusted letter carrier routes four times in the past 18 months. These hard-nosed reviews have saved the Postal Service over a billion dollars and have significantly reduced its workforce while it reached record levels of productivity. Indeed, the Postal Service now employs nearly 100,000 fewer career employees than it did before the recession began.

“To make this a labor issue ignores the larger financial issues at play. We are committed to making changes that are in the best interest of consumers. But to address the problem, we should not resort to knee-jerk reactions and criticisms. The long-term solution is to urge Congress to lift the inequitable pre-funding obligation and refunding CSRS over-payment burdening the Postal Service so it can operate profitably.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sens. Lisa Murkowski, Mark Begich, Daniel Inouye and Daniel Akaka today expressed their disappointment that the Postal Regulatory Commission is unable to schedule field hearings in Alaska and Hawaii on a Postal Service proposal to reduce mail delivery to five days a week.

The Commission has held hearings in seven cities in the Lower 48 on the proposal. In a letter last month to Ruth Y. Goldway, Chairman of the Commission, the senators said that mail delivery is different in Alaska and Hawaii, and that information gleaned from hearings in the Lower 48 “will bear little relevance to the concerns of the people of Alaska and Hawaii.” The lawmakers had asked the Commission to hold hearings in Alaska and Hawaii.

The Commission, which is reviewing a cost savings proposal by the Postal Service that would eliminate Saturday delivery, informed the senators this week that it would not hold hearings in Alaska and Hawaii, but invited the lawmakers to testify at commission hearings in Washington, D.C., later this summer.

Senators Murkowski, Begich, Inouye, and Akaka expressed disappointment in the Commission’s decision, but the lawmakers said they will continue to engage the Commission and the Postal Service on the possible implications of five-day delivery and encouraged all interested residents and business owners to share their views with the Commission at http://www.prc.gov.

Documents submitted by PostalReporter reader shows the Postal Service’s History of requesting 5-day delivery to relieve its financial woes.

The 94th and 95th Congresses
Representative Tom Corcoran stated at a congressional hearing that the Postal Service took its first formal step toward eliminating one delivery day per week in 1976 when it conducted a study to examine the possible effects of such delivery reduction.That study, according to Corcoran, was completed, but a formal proposal stemming from the study was not drafted. Instead, in 1977, the congressionally created Commission on Postal Service (created in 1975) submitted to Congress and the President a report that discussed the possibility of transitioning to five-day delivery. The members of the congressional commission were divided on whether to recommend eliminating a day of Postal Service delivery. The commission’s final report said that five of the seven commissioners reluctantly recommended the reduction in delivery, but did not say which day of the week would be the optimal day off.
A series of congressional hearings were held on six-day delivery from November 1977 through March 1978. According to Representative Patricia Schroeder, who opened the hearings, the Postal Service prompted the hearings by proposing a cut back in delivery service.36 Although the Postal Service had made no formal indication that it supported the elimination of one service day, one Member of Congress said that “statements made by postal officials indicate[d] they [were] leaning toward making such a recommendation.”In all, Congress held 12 hearings in as many cities with more than 500 testimonies offered between November and March. Those who testified included Members of Congress, union representatives, editors and publishers, the general public, and representatives of the aging. Most of those who testified did not support a reduction in Postal Service deliveries, finding such cuts a “disservice”38 that could result in “possible delay in the receipt of welfare, social security, pension checks, and so forth—the kind of mail that people receive … on weekends and through Saturday mail.”

In addition to concerns about mail delivery in general, much of the testimony framed the debate over six-day delivery as a tension innately embedded in the mission of the Postal Service: is it a profit-driven organization, or a public service? Representative Timothy E. Wirth stated at one hearing that the six-day service was a “social value,” and that cutting a day of service at a time when people were “losing some of their faith in what government can do for them” would exacerbate their disillusionment.

1977 House Report on Saturday Mail Delivery
Early this year, the Commission on Postal Service, a special study commission created by Public Law 94-421 to study the public service aspects of the Postal Service and other subjects, issued a report recommending that Saturday mal delivery be discontinuance of Saturday delivery service would reduce postal costs by $412 million annually. Through attrition, approximately 18,000 full-time positions would be eliminated. The Commission attempted to support its recommendation in part on the basis of a small survey of public opinion which showed that 79 percent of the individuals surveyed would be willing to give up Saturday mail delivery if such a reduction in service helped hold down postal costs.
Immediately following the Commission’s report on April, the Postmaster General summoned the leaders of major postal union to discuss the discontinuance of Saturday mail delivery.
The 96th and 97th Congresses
In 1980, the House Committee on the Budget was expected to propose an $836 million reduction in Postal Service appropriations for FY1981.42 According to Representative James M. Hanley, the chairman of the House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, the reduction in appropriations would have eliminated “all of the public service appropriations” and other subsidies for the Postal Service.43 At a March 26, 1980, hearing before the House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, then-Postmaster General William F. Bolger stated that eliminating Saturday delivery was one option the Postal Service was considering to ensure its economic stability in the face of the budget cuts. Bolger estimated the service reduction could result in the elimination of 15,000 to 20,000 Postal Service jobs, but would save the Service about $588 million.

The 1980 Task Force
On March 25, 1980, Postmaster General William F. Bolger established a task force to analyze the possible effects of moving from a six- to a five-day delivery schedule. The task force conducted a study, which consisted of telephone interviews of 320 major mailers and 13 selected industries and government agencies. It found that moving to five-day delivery could save $588 million in the first full year of implementation.85 The savings were estimated to “exceed $1 billion annually in future years.”With the cost savings, however, were predicted increases in other stresses for the Postal Service, like loss of patrons to private mailing services or adverse effects on “the levels of service provided to mail on the remaining delivery days.”87 In spite of the projected cost and fuel savings, the task force stopped short of endorsing a reduction in delivery service, saying “[t]he potential cost reduction is extremely attractive; but it is clear that the risks to service and future postal revenues are high.”

The task force recommended a 12- to 18-month planning period if any action to move to five-day delivery was to be made. No such planning period occurred. In addition, the task force suggested that if five-day delivery were to occur, Saturday should be the eliminated day because it “will not greatly affect the majority of … business mailers.”89
April-May 1980 Senate Hearing
There are, of course, a number of factors which have contributed to the operating deficit; however, inflation has undoubtedly been the great factor. The sharp rise could not have been foreseen when the 1970 law was enacted, and it has has a major impact not only on labor costs, which comprise 86 percent of the USPS budget, but on construction, materials and equipment, and operations in general. Also unforeseen was the relentless rise in the cost of energy. The USPS estimates that for every 1-cent increase in the cost of a gallon of gasoline, the transportation costs increase by $3 million.

Mr. Chairman, these hearings are taking place in concert with the Senate’s consideration of the fiscal year 1981 budget. There has been a great deal of discussion about reducing mail delivery delivery from 6 to 5 days in order to meet the anticipated cut in the postal budget. I am concerned that such a decision could exacerbate the current trend of mailers seeking alternate delivery systems and thus decrease further the revenues of the Postal Service.
The President’s Commission on the Postal Service
In 2003, the President’s Commission on the United States Postal Service, created by President George W. Bush, anticipated an “unstable financial outlook” for USPS.90 The commission, however, adamantly rejected any action that would reduce delivery days to five. The Commission firmly recommends continuing the Postal Service’s current Monday
through Saturday delivery regimen. While the Postal Service could save as much as $1.9 billion (less than 3% of its annual budget) by reducing its delivery schedule by one day a
week, its value to the nation’s economy would suffer. Beyond the universal reach of the nation’s postal network, the regularity of pick-up and delivery is an essential element of its
worth in the current climate. Elimination of Saturday delivery, for example, could make the mail less attractive to business mailers and advertisers who depend upon reaching their target audience on that day. In addition, given the volume of mail the nation sends each day, scaling back to a five-day delivery regimen could create difficult logistics, mail flow, and
storage problems.

While the report advised continuing six-day service, the commission noted that increasing use of electronic mail was leading to “a reduction in the demand for mail services” that could lead to a “relaxation of the six-day delivery requirement” in the future.

Documents

July1968SenateHearings

July1968SenateHrgsP81onward

May1976HouseHearingsMailCutback

1977HouseReportSatMailDelivery

April-May1977HouseHearings

March-May1977HouseHearings

May-June1977SenateHearings

Nov1977-Mar1978House6DayHearings

Apr-May1980SenateHearings (PDF)

ChIR_5_Q_2_Attach_complied

My Five-Day Experience, by Postal Pete

On the day I was born June 12, 1957:

“Postmaster General Summerfield today outlined for Congress a series of cuts in postal service which he plans to put into effect July 1 if his department is not given more money … The list, submitted at a closed meeting, was reported to include: Elimination of Saturday mail deliveries … (and) closing of 2,000 small fourth-class post offices.”

When I was almost five years old :

Feb 19 1962

The Kennedy administration has studied the discontinuance of Saturday mail delivery but fears any publicity might adversely affect its proposals for raising mail raise, Postmaster General J. Edward Day has told Congress …
(Day) said the (post office) department estimated it could save $100 million a year by ending Saturday mail delivery.

When I was eighteen:

Nov 24 1975
With the United States Postal Service losing more that $250,000 an hour, Postmaster General Benjamin F. Bailar is considering further economic moves such as discontinuing Saturday mail deliveries …. The Postal Service … ran up a $1.5 billion debt as of last July.

The year I took the postal exam:

March 29 1977

“The Commission on Postal Service … voted 5 to 2 to recommend elimination of Saturday delivery, a step that would save $400 million a year … Elimination of Saturday delivery is likely to be unpopular on Capitol Hill. Numerous legislators denounced the idea when the service said it was being considered a year ago.”

and so it continued throughout my postal career:

Feb 7 1981
Saturday mail deliveries, Amtrak train service and urban programs, survivors of last year’s spending cuts, face a new threat from President Reagan’s budget ax, according to internal administration documents obtained Friday … (The documents say), “The possible reduction of service to five-day delivery is a symbol of the seriousness of the fiscal austerity being imposed by reductions throughout the federal government.

December 15, 1987:

The Postal Service lost $223 million in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30 … Possible major effects … include … Seeking congressional permission to eliminate delivery on Saturdays … closing 10,000 to 12,000 small post offices, primarily in rural areas.

October 16, 1992:

Postmaster General Marvin Runyon said Thursday that he backs continuing Saturday deliveries but wonders whether home delivery could be cut from six to four days a week…

His suggestion was to eliminate Tuesday and Thursday mail for home deliveries, keeping deliveries on Monday, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday. Business deliveries would remain six days a week.

April 9, 2001:

The U.S. Postal Service is thinking about ending Saturday deliveries — and shutting down post offices in rural and remote areas, and raising the price of stamps even more … because it finds itself in almost exactly the position the railroads were in after commercial jet travel became commonplace…

Something quicker came along: regularly scheduled jets. We said we loved the railroads — but we headed to the airports. We gave the railroads our hearts, but not our money… This country will feel different — diminished — without Saturday mail.

But the country already feels different. Fax machines, privately owned overnight delivery services, and — most significantly — the huge growth in e-mail have transformed the way that we write to each other.

December 31 , 2008:

After thirty years of service I take the early out and talk of five day delivery resurfaces.

Postal Pete

Pete Countryman
Sectional Center Facility
Elizabethtown, Kentucky 42701
30 yrs USPS / APWU