GAO - Recommends Adopting Market-Based Compensation Systems for Postal Employees
GAO Comptroller General David M. Walker has laid out a list of priorities for oversight in the 110th Congress. Walker recommended that one of the priorities in the New Coingress should be to “Transform the Postal Service’s Business Model.”
Here is what Walker said about the Postal Service in his November 17, 2006 letter to lawmakers:
The U.S. Postal Service is under increasing financial pressure as the Internet, electronic bill payment, and growing competition from private delivery companies change the nation’s communication and delivery sectors and negatively impact mail volumes. These changes raise questions about the role of the federal government in providing postal services and whether the Postal Service can remain a self-financing government provider of affordable universal postal services in the 21st century. The Postal Service’s business model, established when it was reorganized in 1970, relies upon growth in mail volume to cover the costs of its ever-increasing nationwide delivery network to all homes and businesses. This business model is increasingly outmoded as First-Class Mail volume declines and the changing mail mix provides less revenue contribution, which has put the Postal Service’s financial viability at risk. The Service is working to cut costs, improve productivity, reduce its workforce, and make other changes under its existing authority. However, comprehensive postal reform legislation is needed to provide the necessary incentives and flexibilities needed for the Service to transition to a modernized business model so that it can continue providing high-quality, universal postal services.
Key Topics Needing Congressional Oversight
- Ensure that the Postal Service maintains services consistent with its standards as it implements changes to reduce costs related to providing postal services.
- Assess the Postal Service’s changes to its mail processing and transportation networks to ensure that they are reasonable, transparent, and coordinated with affected stakeholders, and that they achieve intended cost savings and efficiencies.
- Adopt flexible, performance-oriented, and market-based compensation systems for postal employees.
Suggested Areas for Oversight for the 110th Congress (PDF)
——–
Archive: “In April 2001, GAO designated U.S. Postal Service’s transformation efforts and long-term outlook as a high-risk area due to growing risk that the Service would not be able to continue providing universal postal service at reasonable rates while remaining self-supporting through postal revenues. This inclusion on GAO’s high-risk list was intended to focus needed attention on the dilemmas facing the Service before the situation escalates into a crisis, where the options for action may be more limited and costly.” PDF (1/25/05) (note: GAO is expected to update its high-risk list early next year)



November 21st, 2006 at 7:02 am
Why not just get rid of excess layers of useless management positions,excess supervisors, supervisor bonuses and wasteful management programs? DOH !!
November 21st, 2006 at 9:22 am
Yes, cut NYC and etc employee wages by 20% and the small town & rural areas by 50%. That would be a fair package only if mgmt gets a 25% raise undrer pfp for the savings accomplished.
November 22nd, 2006 at 5:07 am
Automation is the key to improved productivity. Significantly reduce the workforce by automating mail processing. More forward with the “Lights Out” mail processing facility concept. Lights aren’t needed because there will be no people. Contract out maintenance and transportation. Close or consolidate unproductive operations. Reducing the number of craft employees will reduce the number of EAS employees at the same time. Pay all postal employees on performance and structure pay to match market based systems. If you don’t perform at work, you don’t get paid. This should apply to craft and management alike.
Close small Post Offices and put kiosks in grocery stores, banks, etc, instead.
Tighten oversight on Carriers to ensure at least minimum performance on every route everyday. Pay Carriers based on performance, not hours worked. Go getters would have the opportunity to make big bucks. Poor performers could go to work for the TSA and check baggage at the airport.
November 24th, 2006 at 3:04 pm
Why not have the bulk mailers pay their fair share and correct their own business model? 2% of what they send out generates a reply.That means 98% is unwanted waste right from the start.If they would move away from pounding anybody and everybody with unwanted mailings everyone would be a lot better off.I don’t have a lot of sympathy for people who complain about postal costs when 98% of their expense goes straight down the drain.
November 26th, 2006 at 8:15 pm
Writing at 5:07 a.m. seems to compromise Robert’s lucidity. How are we paid presently if not according to the market? Or have negotitators and arbitrators fashioned our national agreement randomly, with happenstance the only explanation for labor agreements that have helped make the USPS the stable and successful enterprise it is today? Can change improve the Postal Service? Certainly. But not by following Robert’s “brand.”
November 27th, 2006 at 1:52 am
Has there ever been a worse business model than delivery to every address every day? It’s never been a good business model, but it is a good service model! Well look at that, it’s right in the name! Tha capitalist maggots that just want to carve it up to pillage the parts they can sell need to get out of this peoples government. RDS