What has happened to the U.S. Postal Service?

[StarThrower]

In 2 words - it stinks.

That's bullshit.

[ejp626]

They just raised the prices on April 2nd.

Here are the new prices. http://www.royalmail.com/prices-2013

I just checked and, interestingly, Amazon UK haven't raised their delivery charges for either UK or foreign sellers. Yet.

MG

They definitely will though. I'm glad I just put in an order or two, and I might put in one more this week (for a few DVDs). I'm sorry the good times are ending, but I certainly did stockpile a huge amount of goods back when the shipping was cheap.

[Scott Dolan]

I've never had a problem with the USPS.

Not one.

And after talking with a buddy of mine over in India about their postal system, I appreciate ours even more.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

I've never had a problem with the USPS.

Not one.

And after talking with a buddy of mine over in India about their postal system, I appreciate ours even more.

I bet it's even worse in Africa

You're right, we complain that things are a bit less than perfect. What would we be like if things were REALLY fucked up?

MG

[Scott Dolan]

Seems like those who have it the easiest tend to whine the loudest, doesn't it?

[medjuck]

Nothing like having used the Canadian post office for 37 years to make you appreciate the USPS, but I remember living in the UK when there were 2 deliveries a day!

[Blue Train]

The "gas thing" is one of the harshest back door inflations that any company fielding a fleet of vehicles could have to deal with. The USPS included. It may not be the primary culprit, but to dismiss it as no real issue is wrong.

Considering on top of prefunding for 75-years anyone currently working.....they're setting aside $5 billion a year just to prefund benefits for 75-years for people not even hired, or born for that matter.....the gas bill really isn't close to the issue in comparison.

Edited April 11, 2013 by Blue Train

[.:.impossible]

I've never had an issue.

[JETman]

The "gas thing" is one of the harshest back door inflations that any company fielding a fleet of vehicles could have to deal with. The USPS included. It may not be the primary culprit, but to dismiss it as no real issue is wrong.

Considering on top of prefunding for 75-years anyone currently working.....they're setting aside $5 billion a year just to prefund benefits for 75-years for people not even hired, or born for that matter.....the gas bill really isn't close to the issue in comparison.

I'd sure be interested in finding out how they're prefunding benefits for 75 years, or for people that have not even been hired yet. This would surely constitute overfunding, which the Internal Revenue Code contains very strict regulations against doing and still obtaining legal maximum tax deductions. Besides that, an actuarial determination of funding requirements can NEVER be based on a projected demographic, and can only be calculated based on current population. Is it possible that what you read has pointed out that the Defined Benefit Plan for postal workers is "so well funded" that it would equate to not having to make a contribution to the fund for the next 75 years?

[Don Brown]

A case in point; I ordered a CD set from Avid in England on Sunday, April 7th, it was shipped on Monday, April 8th, and I received it here in Toronto today. Meanwhile I'm still waiting for two items that were shipped from importcds in Irvine, California over a month ago. I've found importcds to be a very reliable company and such delays only began happening in the last few months or so, therefore I assume the problem must be with the USPS.

[Chuck Nessa]

Might we be in "black helicopter" territory now?

[Larry Kart]

The problem with the postal service is that for some stupid reason Congress passed a bill in 2006 that gives postal workers something that no other Govt union/employee has....fully prefounded benefits for the next 75-years. They're even diverting $5 billion a year to prefund benefits for people who they haven't even hired yet. No matter how often they raise prices....they're constantly in the red as a result.

They're cutting hundreds of post offices and thousands of employees, which has effected how quickly things are delivered. You can't even get next day delivery anymore using first class postage. Before the most recent cuts....40% of first class mail was delivered the next day.

Noj:

They're backing off cutting Saturday because they need Congress to approve that....and they won't let them.

I ask in genuine innocence/ignorance, how does these stories below jibe with the above?:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-22/u-s-postal-service-will-suspend-contributions-into-employee-pension-fund.html

e.g. "The U.S. Postal Service, facing insolvency without approval to delay a $5.5 billion payment for worker health benefits, will suspend contributions to an employee retirement account to save $800 million this year."

http://www.federaltimes.com/article/20110825/DEPARTMENTS02/108250303/USPS-health-retirement-plan-proposal-met-skepticism

e.g. "The U.S. Postal Service's proposal to pull out of federal health care plans would shift the bulk of nearly a half-million retirees' health care coverage onto Medicare."

[ejp626]

This is the text of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/hr6407/text

Go down to Sec. 8909a. Postal Service Retiree Health Benefit Fund

I guess it is arguable whether this is literally pre-funding the benefit fund for 75 years in an accounting sense, or it is just some crazy numbers that the GOP pulled out of the air (was about to say something different, but Jim wants us to keep it clean). But no question, this is a heavy, heavy burden on USPS, when Congress won't let them do all kinds of other things, like close rural post offices, that might help them close the gap. So really the USPS has kind of the worst of both worlds.

Sadly, this is happening more and more frequently, particularly with state colleges where state funding is slashed to the bone but legislative meddling is as high or higher than ever.

[Larry Kart]

A post on the subject (or at least I think it is) from a postal worker:

"Yup. Post Office is a private plan funded by agency and employee contributions and investments. The only money they get from the government (read: YOU) is what's required to cover the cost of federally mandated programs and subsidies. The rest comes in one stamp, one magazine, one package at a time. Where it gets confusing is, the plan is ADMINISTERED by the same federal agency that handles federal employee retirement plans. And the Post Office pays them to do it.

"And yes, it IS a better plan than many in the private sector, but that's because they still have union representation. Even so, the average postal worker earns at best lower middle class wages, and are willing to settle for that due to the better benefits attached.

"Just to set the record straight on Social Security -- the only time a postal employee under the old retirement system qualifies for that is if they've earned credit from other employment. Even then, there IS a matching offset against their postal pension, so it's a no gain situation more times than not. Under the new system, it's social security and their version of a 401K based on their contributions ... no different than most decent private sector jobs, and once again, no federal dollars spent."

[Tom 1960]

The problem with the postal service is that for some stupid reason Congress passed a bill in 2006 that gives postal workers something that no other Govt union/employee has....fully prefounded benefits for the next 75-years. They're even diverting $5 billion a year to prefund benefits for people who they haven't even hired yet. No matter how often they raise prices....they're constantly in the red as a result.

Stupid, HELL YEAH! I work for the Postal Service as a letter carrier and don't understand why Congress doesn't admit they f***ed things up and correct it. It's said the losses we are presently incurring would be dramatically reduced by changing this one thing. As for the the dramatic overseas rate increases, I've dealt with that first hand when I sent out a shipment recently. I don't know, maybe we are destined for failure.At this point, I'm just hoping to make it to retirement.

[JETman]

This is the text of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/hr6407/text

Go down to Sec. 8909a. Postal Service Retiree Health Benefit Fund

I guess it is arguable whether this is literally pre-funding the benefit fund for 75 years in an accounting sense, or it is just some crazy numbers that the GOP pulled out of the air (was about to say something different, but Jim wants us to keep it clean). But no question, this is a heavy, heavy burden on USPS, when Congress won't let them do all kinds of other things, like close rural post offices, that might help them close the gap. So really the USPS has kind of the worst of both worlds.

Sadly, this is happening more and more frequently, particularly with state colleges where state funding is slashed to the bone but legislative meddling is as high or higher than ever.

Did you actually read my post above?

You cannot "prefund" a defined benefit pension plan, private or governmental. Pension calculations done in an "accounting sense" only apply to publicly traded companies.

I just read that the 75 years of prefunding applies to projected post-retirement medical costs. The postal service is required to fund health benefits for the next 75 years within the next ten years. This is ok since the same stringent laws that apply to pension plans do not apply to health benefit plans, which are never required to be "prefunded".

Pension plans ARE required to be funded. Each year an actuarial calculation is done for pension plans where the employer MUST make an annual contribution within the funding corridor (a number which is between the minimum funding requirement and the maximum tax-deductible contribution). If this is not done, the plan is at risk for disqualification under current pension code (ie., other than massive fines, any contributions made are no longer considered tax-deductible).

Given all of this, it would seem that one way for the USPS to save boat loads of money would be for them to effectively chuck the post-retirement medical benefits as most private employers have already done. These are hugely expensive to provide, especially if the employee share of the cost is 0.

[Tom 1960]

A case in point; I ordered a CD set from Avid in England on Sunday, April 7th, it was shipped on Monday, April 8th, and I received it here in Toronto today. Meanwhile I'm still waiting for two items that were shipped from importcds in Irvine, California over a month ago. I've found importcds to be a very reliable company and such delays only began happening in the last few months or so, therefore I assume the problem must be with the USPS.

I've dealt with the same issues recently and never had problems with importcds in the past. I have no idea if that's a postal issue or something going on with importcds?

[Scott Dolan]

I've recently received packages from California, New York, Kentucky, and Georgia. All within the last two weeks.

Absolutely no delays, or problems.

[ejp626]

Did you actually read my post above?

You cannot "prefund" a defined benefit pension plan, private or governmental. Pension calculations done in an "accounting sense" only apply to publicly traded companies.

I just read that the 75 years of prefunding applies to projected post-retirement medical costs. The postal service is required to fund health benefits for the next 75 years within the next ten years. This is ok since the same stringent laws that apply to pension plans do not apply to health benefit plans, which are never required to be "prefunded".

Pension plans ARE required to be funded. Each year an actuarial calculation is done for pension plans where the employer MUST make an annual contribution within the funding corridor (a number which is between the minimum funding requirement and the maximum tax-deductible contribution). If this is not done, the plan is at risk for disqualification under current pension code (ie., other than massive fines, any contributions made are no longer considered tax-deductible).

Given all of this, it would seem that one way for the USPS to save boat loads of money would be for them to effectively chuck the post-retirement medical benefits as most private employers have already done. These are hugely expensive to provide, especially if the employee share of the cost is 0.

You seem to be getting all hung up over the tax implications of pre-funding pensions as if the USPS were a normal company, when it manifestly is not. It is also very clear that governments have routinely not contributed enough for their state employee pensions (and health care plans), and this is a huge problem. Regardless of what any law says, many states face a huge gap in pension funding. Illinois is one of the very worst.

So in a sense, it is good that USPS is clearly making payments towards these future medical costs, but it isn't clear to me that the numbers that the GOP came up with and put into the law are appropriate. They may be far too high, esp. as the USPS is downsizing the number of postal employees, so the required pension and health care costs may be vastly inflated.

[Tom 1960]

Just like to point out that those complaining about the service live outside the country.

I don't live out of the country - New Mexico is still a state last time I checked.

Our service is terrible. Mail delivered at night, mail in wrong box, etc., etc.

Maybe it's a local problem.

As in a problem to all localities? Maybe, because I experience the same problems. Fewer employees may be the cause. The internet really affected the USPS. Now, one can even send greeting cards directly to email inboxes for free.

Staffing is definitely as issue, at least in our office. Most times we don't have enough people to deliver the mail. That's when people like myself who have placed themselves on the overtime desired list, find in addition to delivering there own route they must also deliver a piece of another route. Of course since you're not the regular carrier and sometimes not familar with the territory, screwups can occur. It happens, but I really do the best I can to get the people the right mail. A great example is tomorrow/Friday. I heard before I walked out the door that there would be 2 1/2 open routes. It's going to be a very long day! One other thing to add, since we are so understaffed I find myself in most cases working 6 days a week. That would include my day off at time and a half pay.

[JETman]

Did you actually read my post above?

You cannot "prefund" a defined benefit pension plan, private or governmental. Pension calculations done in an "accounting sense" only apply to publicly traded companies.

I just read that the 75 years of prefunding applies to projected post-retirement medical costs. The postal service is required to fund health benefits for the next 75 years within the next ten years. This is ok since the same stringent laws that apply to pension plans do not apply to health benefit plans, which are never required to be "prefunded".

Pension plans ARE required to be funded. Each year an actuarial calculation is done for pension plans where the employer MUST make an annual contribution within the funding corridor (a number which is between the minimum funding requirement and the maximum tax-deductible contribution). If this is not done, the plan is at risk for disqualification under current pension code (ie., other than massive fines, any contributions made are no longer considered tax-deductible).

Given all of this, it would seem that one way for the USPS to save boat loads of money would be for them to effectively chuck the post-retirement medical benefits as most private employers have already done. These are hugely expensive to provide, especially if the employee share of the cost is 0.

You seem to be getting all hung up over the tax implications of pre-funding pensions as if the USPS were a normal company, when it manifestly is not. It is also very clear that governments have routinely not contributed enough for their state employee pensions (and health care plans), and this is a huge problem. Regardless of what any law says, many states face a huge gap in pension funding. Illinois is one of the very worst.

So in a sense, it is good that USPS is clearly making payments towards these future medical costs, but it isn't clear to me that the numbers that the GOP came up with and put into the law are appropriate. They may be far too high, esp. as the USPS is downsizing the number of postal employees, so the required pension and health care costs may be vastly inflated.

The USPS must fund its pension plan just like any other company. When a pension plan falls into "debt", annual contributions are increased. Debt does NOT mean that contributions have not been made at all. If this were to occur, the pension plan becomes disqualified. Debt in this case means that plan experience does not match up well with the assumptions being used to calculate the liabilities. It just so happens that the USPS defined benefit plan currently has a huge surplus, which means that the USPS can decrease its annual contributions to the plan (possibly to $0 in any given year).

The medical costs to which the USPS is being held accountable are not REQUIRED medical costs. Post-retirement medical benefits are a huge privilege for anyone to have. These benefits are not guaranteed in any way, shape or form. In other words, the USPS does NOT have to provide them, and should surely consider reducing them, if not eliminating them all together. At this point in time, since companies have finally realized that these types of benefits are a huge hit to their books, most people in America do not receive such benefits. Maybe its time for the government to realize that it's biting off more than it can chew by continuing to provide them. So, contrary to what you think, it is NOT a good thing that it is prefunding benefits that they are not required to provide. This is a BAD thing which is putting them further into a hole from which they'll never be able to escape.

[JETman]

Did you actually read my post above?

You cannot "prefund" a defined benefit pension plan, private or governmental. Pension calculations done in an "accounting sense" only apply to publicly traded companies.

I just read that the 75 years of prefunding applies to projected post-retirement medical costs. The postal service is required to fund health benefits for the next 75 years within the next ten years. This is ok since the same stringent laws that apply to pension plans do not apply to health benefit plans, which are never required to be "prefunded".

Pension plans ARE required to be funded. Each year an actuarial calculation is done for pension plans where the employer MUST make an annual contribution within the funding corridor (a number which is between the minimum funding requirement and the maximum tax-deductible contribution). If this is not done, the plan is at risk for disqualification under current pension code (ie., other than massive fines, any contributions made are no longer considered tax-deductible).

Given all of this, it would seem that one way for the USPS to save boat loads of money would be for them to effectively chuck the post-retirement medical benefits as most private employers have already done. These are hugely expensive to provide, especially if the employee share of the cost is 0.

You seem to be getting all hung up over the tax implications of pre-funding pensions as if the USPS were a normal company, when it manifestly is not. It is also very clear that governments have routinely not contributed enough for their state employee pensions (and health care plans), and this is a huge problem. Regardless of what any law says, many states face a huge gap in pension funding. Illinois is one of the very worst.

So in a sense, it is good that USPS is clearly making payments towards these future medical costs, but it isn't clear to me that the numbers that the GOP came up with and put into the law are appropriate. They may be far too high, esp. as the USPS is downsizing the number of postal employees, so the required pension and health care costs may be vastly inflated.

And, fwiw, downsized employees who have accrued vested pension benefits are STILL entitled to those pensions. So the inflation in the numbers that you're imagining does NOT exist. Also, fwiw, excess monies already contributed to the USPS defined benefit plan CANNOT be willy nilly taken out and placed into the post-retirement medical pre-funding ridiculousness.

[jlhoots]

A case in point; I ordered a CD set from Avid in England on Sunday, April 7th, it was shipped on Monday, April 8th, and I received it here in Toronto today. Meanwhile I'm still waiting for two items that were shipped from importcds in Irvine, California over a month ago. I've found importcds to be a very reliable company and such delays only began happening in the last few months or so, therefore I assume the problem must be with the USPS.

I believe importcds is now using DHL Global Mail which slows things down even more.

On the upside you do get a tracking number.

[Scott Dolan]

The USPS also has tracking numbers.

[Stefan Wood]

Yes, but try to do that for international shipping and the costs becomes even more prohibitive. The rising costs, especially where overseas is concerned, has killed my ability to sell items overseas.