The Washington Post

Study: USPS could save $1.5 billion with slower mail

Think snail mail is too slow? Imagine if it got slower.

The U.S. Postal Service could save about $1.5 billion a year if it relaxed its two-to-three-day delivery schedules for first-class and Priority Mail deliveries by a day, according to a new study.

Postal executives are seriously considering the idea and are expected to announce plans regarding delivery schedules after Labor Day, according to USPS officials.

Currently the Postal Service advises customers that first-class and Priority Mail deliveries will arrive, on average, in two or three days.

But relaxing the schedule by a day would cut about $336 million in premium pay for employees working overnight and Sundays to meet current delivery schedules, according to the study. Adding one day to the schedule would put less emphasis on speed and allow the USPS to save at least an additional $1.1 billion by delivering some long-haul Priority Mail shipments by ground instead of air, consolidating mail-processing facilities and employing fewer workers, the study said.

The Postal Service’s inspector general commissioned the study, which was authored by the economic analysis firm Christensen Associates.

The study said the USPS spends about $2.5 billion annually on mail processing, transportation and other delivery-related functions. It estimates that first-class mail volume will drop to about 50 billion pieces annually in 2020, down substantially from the 78 billion pieces delivered last year. Volume for standard mail, a cheaper delivery option, is expected to remain flat at about 150 billion pieces annually.

The study’s authors acknowledge that even with households and companies relying more on online payment systems and
e-mail, the Postal Service maintains a reputation for reliable service, no matter the speed.

“Some of the Postal Service’s largest business mailers have stated that they value consistency over speed and they would tolerate slightly slower service to save costs,” the report said.

Ed O’Keefe is covering the 2016 presidential campaign, with a focus on Jeb Bush and other Republican candidates. He's covered presidential and congressional politics since 2008. Off the trail, he's covered Capitol Hill, federal agencies and the federal workforce, and spent a brief time covering the war in Iraq.

The Freddie Gray case

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!

Campaign 2016 Email Updates

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!

Get Zika news by email

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!
Comments
Show Comments
New Hampshire has voted. The Democrats debate Thursday. Get caught up on the race.
The big questions after New Hampshire, from The Post's Dan Balz
Can Bernie Sanders cut into Hillary Clinton's strength in the minority community and turn his challenge into a genuine threat? And can any of the Republicans consolidate anti-Trump sentiment in the party in time to stop the billionaire developer and reality-TV star, whose unorthodox, nationalistic campaign has shaken the foundations of American politics?
What happened in New Hampshire
Spending per vote
John Kasich is running one of the most cost-efficient campaigns, bested only by Donald Trump. Ben Carson, however, has spent a lot for a fourth-place finish in Iowa and eight-place finish in New Hampshire. Data is available through the end of December.
Upcoming debates
Feb. 11: Democratic debate

on PBS, in Wisconsin

Feb 13: GOP debate

on CBS News, in South Carolina

Feb. 25: GOP debate

on CNN, in Houston, Texas

Campaign 2016
What happened in N.H.

To keep reading, please enter your email address.

You’ll also receive from The Washington Post:
  • A free 6-week digital subscription
  • Our daily newsletter in your inbox

Please enter a valid email address

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Please indicate agreement.

Thank you.

Check your inbox. We’ve sent an email explaining how to set up an account and activate your free digital subscription.