View Full Version : Post Office Closures, Delayed!
fireneck
01-06-2012, 03:43
Found this on the USPS website (http://about.usps.com/news/national-releases/2011/pr11_1213closings.htm).
The U.S. Postal Service, in response to a request made by multiple U.S. Senators, has agreed to delay the closing or consolidation of any Post Office or mail processing facility until May 15, 2012. The Postal Service will continue all necessary steps required for the review of these facilities during the interim period, including public input meetings.The Postal Service hopes this period will help facilitate the enactment of comprehensive postal legislation. Given the Postal Service’s financial situation and the loss of mail volume, the Postal Service must continue to take all steps necessary to reduce costs and increase revenue.The Postal Service receives no tax dollars for operating expenses and relies on the sale of postage, products and services to fund its operations.
Sierra Echo
01-06-2012, 08:13
Thats old news.
Dose anyone have a list of proposed POs closings that are typically used by hikers on the AT?
Dose anyone have a list of proposed POs closings that are typically used by hikers on the AT?
Fontana Dam (heard the Village is going to give the PO a free lease, so they won't close)
Montebello
Glencliff
Caratunk
Chaco Taco
01-06-2012, 10:17
Glencliff had a public hearing in October. They are going to push the issue through til next summer. The people I have spoken with don't foresee this upcoming hiking season being affected by the closures. I think they are going to just limit the hours to a few weekday mornings once the issue gets resolved. That was from an employee I spoke with at the PO back in Oct. I also spoke with the regional guy for the Postal Service for NH, VT , and ME and a lot of the closures are being pushed to a later date.
4eyedbuzzard
01-06-2012, 10:38
Fontana Dam (heard the Village is going to give the PO a free lease, so they won't close)
Montebello
Glencliff
Caratunk
As noted, there is a lot of political posturing going on. But a lot of the same politicians yelling right now about closing small offices are the same ones who won't vote to raise the price of postage. And there are a whole lot of people complaining that all government services and employment should be cut - well except their own little PO. :rolleyes:
Giving a PO a free lease isn't likely to change anything (underlying problem of running small offices being a money losing proposition). And let's be reasonable, thru-hikers don't even show up on the radar as a reasonable business concern. The problem is that in an office that's an 11 or 13 (PO's are given numbers related to the customer base they serve/#'s of boxes rented/deliv routes, mail volume, etc) which are typically single person offices where the Postmaster is only person except for their PMR (part-time substitute), many don't make enough revenue to even pay the Postmaster's salary and benefits. And that's before operating expenses. Throw in rent, utilities, maintenance, etc and very few small office are even break even.
Should small offices stay open as a public service, with the cost underwritten by other operations? Postal execs say no. There is some merit in their reasoning - there are some 3700 small offices ultimately slated to be closed, probably all of which run in the red or are close enough to other offices so that their mail (and delivery routes) could be absorbed thus cutting expenses. It would probably be closer to what private industry would do if trying to run a business at a profit. But how this decision fits in with the concept of "universal service" or overall societal economics is debateable. Yes, times have changed, we are more mobile as a society, but what is the ultimate economic cost to society if more people are driving longer and futher to get to their local PO?
Another, big issue is the slated closing of many processing centers. This is actually more likely to become a mistake as it will add at least another day or more to delivery times in many if not most areas, and have the expected negative spin-off effect on local businesses and economies that happens when any major employer closes a plant. Add that any savings here could well be eaten up by trucking mail longer distances to bigger central facilities to sort it and then trucking it back longer distances. Running trucks isn't cheap.
The sad thing is that a large part of the short-term revenue shortfall driving all this was created by a mandate to change the way future funding of retirement and benefits are calculated. This mandate increases funding for current employees but also actually forces current funding for anticpated future employees who haven't even been hired yet, something that just doesn't make business sense. The bottom line is that if they raised the price of a 1st class stamp to .50 the shortfall would be elimated just by letter volume. If they split the increase throughout the different classes it would be even less. But all that requires an act of Congress. . .
We tend to keep on top of this - Mrs. Buzzard is a USPS employee.
At first I thought that maildrops would pay for places like Glencliff. However, even 100 maildrops at $25 each would only yield about $2500. Now the P.O. probably makes money shipping stuff back home for hikers or bouncing maildrops up the trail. But I'm sure that does not pay the post master's salary. I hope that the hostel in Glencliff starts taking in maildrops as that is a critical spot on the trail. And there is not much close by as far as resupply goes.
Blissful
01-06-2012, 20:56
The Hikers Welcome Hostel does take drops.
http://hikerswelcome.com/Contact_and_Directions.html
Still don't understand why very low volume post offices are not contracted out. Is it correct that in Alaskan villages the post office is contracted out? I wonder if Fontana Village would like a little extra revenue to accept a few packages each day?
fireneck
01-07-2012, 02:10
Still don't understand why very low volume post offices are not contracted out. Is it correct that in Alaskan villages the post office is contracted out? I wonder if Fontana Village would like a little extra revenue to accept a few packages each day?
I have friends that live in Hooper Bay, AK (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooper_Bay,_Alaska). The PO is not contracted out, however I have no clue for any of the other villages in Alaska.
Hooper Bay is a big village of over 1000 people. I was thinking about some of the 50 to 200 person villages. Watching flying wild Alaska the other day they delivered the mail to a general store. The Fontana village area is about that small if hotel rooms are not counted.
Still don't understand why very low volume post offices are not contracted out. Is it correct that in Alaskan villages the post office is contracted out? I wonder if Fontana Village would like a little extra revenue to accept a few packages each day?
I have friends that live in Hooper Bay, AK (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooper_Bay,_Alaska). The PO is not contracted out, however I have no clue for any of the other villages in Alaska.
Chillfactor
04-13-2012, 15:01
Dose anyone have a list of proposed POs closings that are typically used by hikers on the AT?
Glencliffe will be closed. I called that PO and the clerk told me they were schedule to close in May. He sounded very sad. The Glencliffe hostel will accept drops but I believe they must be UPS or FedEx. Hanover PO might be a good alternative for you.
Caratunk is on the possible close list. I tried to call today and got no answer or message and will try next week.
The man at my local PO told me to call the 800 number. 800-275-8777