Associated Mail & Parcel Centers Blog

Associated Mail & Parcel Centers (AMPC) members pay dues to support the organization’s efforts to support their businesses. The money pays for a staff to develop benefits, programs, discounts, research, education, and advocacy for the members. Joining AMPC is easy. To help us support your industry and business, go to www.ampc.org and sign up.

As reported here (http://shipp.in/g/1cf) on July 6th, 2010 the USPS requested a significant rate increase greatly exceeding the legal CPI-U based increase siting “extraordinary and exceptional circumstances.”

The Affordable Mail Alliance has submitted a Motion to Dismiss this request based upon the following reasons:

• The CPI Price Cap Of 39 U.S.C. § 3622(d) Is The Main Defense Established By PAEA Against Recovery of Excessive Costs From Users Of Market-Dominant Postal Products.
• The Exigency Exception of 39 U.S.C. § 3622(d)(1)(E) Is Narrowly Drawn.
• The Legislative History Of Section 3622(d)(1)(E) Confirms The Narrowness Of Its Scope.
• The Postal Service’s Projected Losses Could Be Avoided Through More Efficient And Economical Management.
• The Postal Service maintains an inefficiently large network of undersized and obsolete mail processing facilities.
• The Postal Service has an over-sized work force inflexible work rules, and low productivity.
• The Postal Service pays its employees above-market rates of compensation.
• The loss of mail volume to the Internet was not an unforeseeable surprise; the Postal Service had notice of this threat years before significant volume losses occurred.
• The Postal Service’s failure to cope effectively with the 2008-2009 recession is further evidence of structural inefficiency.
• The private sector, including the Postal Service’s competitors, responded quickly to the downturn by taking the painful austerity measures needed to return to break-even.
• The Postal Service has responded to the recession by letting its costs get further out of control.
• The Postal Service’s financial loss projections in this case assume no major improvement in cost control in FY 2011.
• The Postal Service’s alternative explanations for its losses are without merit.
• The Causes Of The Postal Service’s Losses Are Not “Extraordinary Or Exceptional.”
• The Postal Service Has Not Shown That It Needs An Exigent Rate Increase To Continue Providing Necessary Postal Services.

Under the Postal Regulatory Commission’s (PRC) rules, the USPS has seven days to respond to this motion. The PRC will make a decision on the rate increase by October 4, 2010.