Home| Postal News | Your Rights | PostalMall | Commentary |  Resources |  Links About  |  What's New Q & A Forum | Calendar |  Sitemap | Search| Letters to Editor

 

 Postal Reform - CRS Issue Brief for Congress

Below are snippets of the compete report . Full pdf report can be found by clicking  here


APRIL 25, 2005

Postal Reform

Updated March 25, 2005

Nye Stevens

Government and Finance Division

Congressional Research Service (CRS)

 

Causes of the Financial Crisis

Should the Postal Service Compete?

 

 

Causes of the (Postal Service) Financial Crisis

 

While there are differences among the stakeholders in emphasis, the following factors have been identified as being in part responsible for the financial crisis of 2001-2002, and the present precarious state of the enterprise:

 

! The economic slowdown that began in early 2001 cut into USPS revenues from the dominant business segment, and (temporarily, as it turned out) reduced advertising mail, which accounts for 25% of revenues. Costs continue to rise, however, since 1.7 million delivery points are added each year, built-in wage and cost-of-living increases add $2 billion per year, and USPS is particularly vulnerable to energy price spikes.

 

! The rate determination process is cumbersome and rigid, preventing USPS from aligning its offerings with the variable needs of its customers. Preparations for a rate case begin many months before a filing with the Postal Rate Commission (PRC) and USPS must estimate costs and demand nearly two years into the future. The adversarial process of contesting proposed rates and classes goes on for 10 months, with exchanges of tons of paperwork and hundreds of hours of testimony. USPS competitors are very active participants. The emphasis is on allocating stated costs among mail classes rather than reducing costs or encouraging demand. USPS complains that the process gives it no opportunity to respond to competition, to vary rates with the season or periods of low usage, to negotiate rates with big mailers, or to price products in accordance with demand, rather than costs of service.

 

! Three rate increases in an 18-month period drove some mailers to curtail volume in order to stay within set budgets, and made the comparative cost of alternatives — such as newspapers, television, and e-mail for advertising— more attractive.

 

! Competition from other providers and other media had begun to marginalize some of the services that USPS provides. E-mail, fax transmission, and cell phones without distance charges have become substitutes for written correspondence. The Internet is becoming increasingly popular as an alternative for financial billing and payment, which sustained USPS volume and revenue growth through the 1990s. USPS is already a secondary player in the overnight express and package delivery markets, except for the most difficult and costly routes to service in Alaska and Hawaii.

 

! Labor costs of its nearly 800,000 employees accounted for over three-fourths of USPS expenses, not much less than was the case decades ago. In contrast, labor costs are 56% of United Parcel Service’s expenses, and 42% of costs at FedEx, where only the pilots are unionized. Lagging productivity growth (11% in 30 years), a backlog of 146,000 pending or appealed labor grievances that are pursued “on the clock,” and binding arbitration of disputes keep labor costs high. Costly government annual and sick leave, early retirement, and health benefits are set in law and not negotiable.

 

! Facilities are not optimally located for efficient distribution, since USPS has been unable to close existing facilities and consolidate operations in new locations. USPS maintains that over half its 38,000 facilities do not generate enough revenues to cover their costs, and complains that political considerations prevent it from modernizing its retail and distribution system.

 

! The use of mail to deliver agents of bio-terror (anthrax, followed by ricin) imposed major new mail security and operational costs on USPS. Although USPS received some emergency funds to cope with the new demands in

FY2002, its requests for further funding to respond to the threat of bioterrorism through the mail have not been included in the President’s budget and have only partially been met by Congress.

 

The American Postal Workers Union (APWU) has been a vocal proponent of another ascribed cause for the postal financial predicament. The APWU told Congress in May 2002 that the “Postal Service’s financial crisis is directly attributable to the $12 billion in postage discounts it gives annually to major mailers and direct mail firms for pre-sorting their mail. The discounts equal significantly more than the costs the Postal Service avoids when it receives pre-sorted mail, and they amount to huge subsidies for the major mailers and direct mail firms.” APWU believes that at least some of this revenue could be recovered if the work were brought back in-house.

 

Should the Postal Service Compete?

 

USPS itself (in its Transformation Plan), its unions, and many mailers’ organizations believe that the survival of the Postal Service depends on the institution’s ability to compete in active or developing markets, because the services it provides under its statutory monopoly are a declining business. Another school of thought, however, rejects the notion that USPS should compete with private sector companies who are able to provide services within the market economy.

 

There are several thrusts to the argument. One relates to fairness. USPS has many advantages stemming from its governmental status. It pays no federal, state, or local taxes on its income, sales, purchases, or property. Unlike private sector companies, it is immune from most forms of regulation, such as zoning, land use restrictions, motor vehicle registration, parking tickets, and antitrust. It is also able to borrow money at the lowest possible rate because it does so through the U.S. Treasury. Companies facing competition from USPS argue that these factors put them at a great disadvantage (though they tend to ignore the statutory constraints and regulation by the PRC that USPS faces).

 

A second argument is based on concepts of economic efficiency. Because of its indirect subsidies such as freedom from taxation and regulation, and because its goal is to break even rather than earn a competitive rate of return, USPS has less incentive than private sector entities to use capital and labor resources efficiently. Subsidies make government products and service seem artificially cheap, resulting in an over-allocation of resources that could be used to produce greater benefits elsewhere in the economy. Economic theory maintains that such a mis-allocation reduces national economic welfare below that achieved by a competitive market. When private sector companies produce and sell a product or service, there is some benefit to society from the taxes that result, a benefit not gained when the government produces the same product or service.

 

Finally, there is substantial evidence that USPS is not a very adept competitor. GAO has issued several reports of failed commercial ventures by USPS. In 1997, for example, USPS had discontinued or was losing money on 15 of 19 new products, resulting in a net loss of $85 million. UPS and FedEx have both established profitable delivery networks in markets where USPS tries to compete but is now a relatively minor player.

 

One policy prescription leading from this diagnosis is that USPS should stick to its monopoly business and not seek to grow at the expense of private sector competitors. Indeed, some would like to see the postal monopoly reduced to “the last mile” of delivery, opening up collection, sorting, and transportation to market competition.

 

download complete PDF file