PRC ADVISORY OPINION ON USPS SERVICE CHANGES ASSOCIATED WITH STANDARD MAIL LOAD LEVELING
The Commission finds that the Postal Service’s Destination Sectional Center Facility (DSCF) Load Leveling Plan may provide a potential means of leveling DSCF Standard Mail daily delivery volumes. However, the limited testing is inconclusive regarding the effects of the plan on a nationwide basis. Accordingly, the plan appears to need further development. To that end, the Commission recommends certain actions for the Postal Service’s consideration
The Postal Service’s initial assessment is that the Load Leveling Plan will facilitate workload equalization throughout the week for processing and delivery of DSCF entered Standard Mail. Load leveling is accomplished by changing the 3-day service standard to 4-days for DSCF Standard Mail entered after Critical Entry Times (CET) on Thursdays and before CET on Saturdays.The Postal Service identifies potential benefits of the Load Leveling Plan as: a reduction in mail processing work hours and carrier overtime hours; earlier completion of carrier routes and return of mail collected on carrier routes; and an improvement in downstream operations and service for mail collected on carrier routes.
The Commission finds the Postal Service’s initial assessment and identification of potential benefits shows some promise, but cautions this evaluation is based on limited test information and sometimes anecdotal accounts. The Commission urges the Postal Service to undertake a more rigorous cost-benefit analysis, additional field testing and service performance analysis, and volume impact studies before committing to a nationwide rollout of the Load Leveling Plan.
The Commission is also concerned that the Postal Service has not generated more support within the mailing community for its plan. A Mailers Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC) with representatives from 18 different companies was formed to consider options for workload equalization. The committee was unable to come to a consensus that the Load Leveling Plan is the appropriate solution that will smooth workloads across days of the week. The absence of significant support is an indication that the Postal Service may not provide the level of service desired by its customers, and thus may negatively affect mail volumes.
The Commission provides the following recommendations to the Postal Service for consideration before proceeding with its plan:
- The Postal Service should perform a cost-benefit analysis at the national level to ensure that the Load Leveling Plan is cost effective, while providing the anticipated benefits;
- The Postal Service should assess the plan’s impact on volume and co-mailing/co-palletization activities;
- The Postal Service should perform additional field testing, since the results of the limited testing may not be representative at the national level;
- The Postal Service should further analyze the plan’s effect on service performance; and
- The Postal Service should conduct more extensive customer outreach to obtain a clearer understanding of mailers’ questions and concerns.
The inevitable layoffs are coming!
Beancounter is exactly right.
Instead of lowering service standards across the board and suffering all the potential consequences that such a change will undoubtedly have, I wish they would look at implementing “load leveling” through the basic economic method of pricing (and perhaps supplemental employee compensation) premiums for bulk and periodical mailings accepted that causes systematic super-saturation instead of setting on reduction timeliness or availability of service.
The current operational workforce has, is, and will handle “heavy days”. The willingness and capability is reasonably in place even if there is likely room for improvement in different aspects of that capability. However, heavy days are simply something that the postal service is not adequately expressing the costs of for routine “peak” mailing events to mailers, nor adequately encouraging mailers through the right discounts to mail on the “traditionally” less heavy days. Standard discounts for volume should be re-examined, and likely reduced, and instead coupled with a complimentary form of timeliness discount relative to a particular operational 24 hour clock window, and utilization discount or premium relative to a local facilities normal (scheduled) and maximum (scheduled and unscheduled but able to report) handling capacity and respective of delivery to the specific handling or delivery unit.
Whatever they do, the postal service should strongly consider a more dynamic pricing scheme with large mailers. Perhaps they can present dynamic pricing through a pseudo market-broker system, similar to a traditional exchange, much as commodities are handled. In this way mailers can negotiate among themselves for priority by securing slots from a delivery units capability bucket, leaving the task of delivery and longer term capacity planning up to the postal service such that not only would delivery standards be maintained but perhaps even improved (in the same vein that they hope new scanner devices will provide to the parcel side of the business: improved accuracy and precision with respect to parcel processing).
Lastly, before it is overlooked, it must be emphasized that localization of dynamic pricing is important to account for each processing and delivery units individual capability to absorb, and potentially expand capability with the current (and projected) supplemental work force that is often a phone call or more ideally a schedule away. Chicago’s ability to absorb is almost certainly always higher than a one route truly rural office which may struggle to maintain even one sub or pmr/pse for relief. In this way, those organized mailers can negotiate among themselves for the days they want and must contribute to the local load, without necessarily pricing or preventing delivery from or to anyone.
Duh…you want the standard price break? Spread the load out.
You want a specific time window each week….pay more.
Any other business would see an opportunity to increase revenue here.
Any other business is not the USPS.
They use ‘anecdotal’ information for their analysis?? Friggin’ amateurs!! All usps management knows how to do is bully, intomidate and harrass mail carriers. With all the daily data reports made about carrier performance, they still stamd behind carriers in the office and follow us on the streets: the problem is that the supervisors ‘organizations’ ( manager unions—
Hahaha…) are committing waste, fraud and abuse ( not using daily data collection; instead, following carriers around) to increase their ranks and waste time while they pretend to be fbi agents out to find 3 minutes a day the mail carriers may be ‘wasting’. Corporate fascism at it’s worst, supported by a few hundred mailing industry lobbyists who get bonuses($$$$$$$$) for endlessly whiming about postage rates (generally the least expensive in the world).
They gotta be kidding. This is a no-brainer!!!
Seriously?
That’s all I can say…
Another words, if you can’t meet a delivery deadline…change the deadline! The PRC knows whats going on, they just want the Postal Service to admit it! The current management (PMG) is going to run us into the ground..pretty soon the carrier pigeon will be better!!