Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 86 posts

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#31

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

stingraycharles wrote: post #3

Genuine question: seems like this is mostly a political post without much relation to the typical content one would expect on HN. Is there some kind of “off-topic” policy at HN for these things, or is it fair game given that enough people upvote it? Edit: article seems to be flagged now, guess I have my answer.

HN has an off-topic policy, but it's enforced primarily by user flagging. In recent months, there's been a large influx of people who feel political activism is so important that it needs to happen everywhere, so posts tend to get upvoted faster than they can be flagged.

You'll note that this article now has a [flagged] tag next to it, which means enough users flagged it that it's removed from the feed.

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#32

Post by avmich »

HumblyTossed wrote: post #20
curiousgal wrote: post #5

> Trump himself has admitted to wanting to starve the postal service of funds so that mail-in voting will become difficult, as tens of millions of Americans are expected to vote by mail during the coronavirus pandemic. This is why I can't help but admire Trump, the fact he remains untouched proves how cunning him and his team are. Either that or how fragile the checks and balances system truly is.

Nothing "cunning" about this. He simply knows that his supporters are okay with it. What he is doing, though, is setting the bar lower and other politicians will do similar in the future. His supporters will then be all up in arms when a Dem does it.

Lowering the bar also invites others to lower the bar themselves, in their own way. Say, McConnell claims SC judges shouldn't be installed in the final year of the presidential term. Why then not to add a rule that SC judges (justices) can be suspended - not removed - by an executive order? Surely additional conditions can be invented, like a controversial judge selection or change in Senate majority? Everything flies, right?

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#33

Post by cs702 »

I posted this article.

To dang and the other moderators: I hesitated quite a bit before posting this, due to its possible interpretation as a "political post"... but after some thought decided to go ahead and post it, because I find it both important and interesting, in the sense described in the HN guidelines, so I felt it was on-topic. But if you judge the OP is off-topic or should be flagged to avoid unproductive commentary, please leave it flagged; I know it's a matter of judgment and I trust yours :-)

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#34

Post by aty268 »

USPS has been bound to fail for years. Isn't HN all about efficiency? What's so great about wasting money on a company that can't compete in the private markets and refuses to innovate?

Give it to the markets, but give them tax breaks or loans for offering services USPS offered. (Shipping to far away areas for a low cost, for example)

It's incredibly that some people still think we should have this cash burning & horrible service business alive.

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#35

Post by ceejayoz »

kube-system wrote: post #25
jorblumesea wrote: post #4

It's interesting to see that in America, some government services can run at a loss but others are expected to be solvent. No one complains that the military doesn't pay back the 700 billion a year it takes but if public transportation goes over budget or the post office, suddenly it's a big deal. I honestly don't get it. Most services in most countries run at a loss but they provide huge public benefits so it's wort…

That is due to their financial structure, not simply a cultural expectation. The USPS isn’t funded by taxes at all, so of course they need revenue from operations.

It doesn't have to be that way, though, right?

We could make up the shortfalls with a subsidy. There's a bill to do exactly that in the House right now.

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#36

Post by asabjorn »

HumblyTossed wrote: post #20
curiousgal wrote: post #5

> Trump himself has admitted to wanting to starve the postal service of funds so that mail-in voting will become difficult, as tens of millions of Americans are expected to vote by mail during the coronavirus pandemic. This is why I can't help but admire Trump, the fact he remains untouched proves how cunning him and his team are. Either that or how fragile the checks and balances system truly is.

Nothing "cunning" about this. He simply knows that his supporters are okay with it. What he is doing, though, is setting the bar lower and other politicians will do similar in the future. His supporters will then be all up in arms when a Dem does it.

I think Republicans are ok with there being no mail-in voting.

At least 50% of the population does not trust the large-scale move to mail-in-voting, so considering that people can stand in line at Home Depot and Whole Foods the loss of election trust does not seem worth it.

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#37

Post by adsjhdashkj »

convery wrote: post #16
badwolf wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Possibly due to those services charging fees and generating income tends people to envision them as a business instead of a service.

A service is just a specialized business though.

Yea but your critique-reply is to that of an explanation on why people are thinking illogically here. Of which, your reply seems unsound. Ie, people seem to be thinking illogically here but your comment seems to counter their illogical stance, which is already described as illogical, rather than supporting/countering what is being discussed - their pattern of thinking.

To the issue at hand though; much of America is embroiled in various angles of anti-taxation. There seems to be wide support for the idea that the government is incapable of doing anything right and any amount of money going towards them is viewed in a negative light.

I think government in America really needs to step up on the deliverables and communication of deliverables. Efficiency likely could be improved, i don't deny, but i also think that the lack of "Here's what you paid for, here's what you got" leads people to think they get nothing for their money.

Regardless of what your personal opinions are of taxes, i think it's safe to say that America has a problem with them - and doesn't know how to solve it. This infighting over mail delivery, a staple of communication, just highlights a deeply rooted issue.

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#38

Post by Scoundreller »

iron0013 wrote: post #21
Scoundreller wrote: post #2

> DeJoy instructed USPS employees to leave mail behind if it delayed carriers from their routes I mean, this does make sense. The more time you can spend doing the route itself, instead of waiting or coming back mid-way for whatever couldn’t be sorted in time in the morning is more “lean” efficient. While some mail would take an extra day, it results in more mail delivered per carrier-hour.

According to mail carriers, the actual result is an ever-growing backlog of undelivered mail. The first mail to be delayed may only be one day late, but as the backlog grows, the undelivered mail gets later and later on average.

It sounds like carriers are being given more than they could possibly deliver in a day.

If that’s true, it’s still better to leave with what you can first-thing in the morning, than wait at the depot or return to the depot mid-shift.

Trying to deliver something that arrived at noon today doesn’t make sense when you have stuff from 2-3 days ago still waiting.

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#39

Post by avmich »

stingraycharles wrote: post #23
avmich wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I remember correctly, HN is supposed to have information interesting and useful for thinking people. This example doesn't qualify as off-topic then.

Apparently the guidelines even explicitly say: “Off-Topic: Most stories about politics” I would certainly classify this as such.

Good exception. I think you're right... benefits of discussing can be outweighed by how easy it is to drop into a bad quarrel.

Re: US post office carriers "forced to work fewer hours," leaving "buckets of mail"

#40

Post by adsjhdashkj »

kube-system wrote: post #18
Scoundreller wrote: post #2

> DeJoy instructed USPS employees to leave mail behind if it delayed carriers from their routes I mean, this does make sense. The more time you can spend doing the route itself, instead of waiting or coming back mid-way for whatever couldn’t be sorted in time in the morning is more “lean” efficient. While some mail would take an extra day, it results in more mail delivered per carrier-hour.

But should the USPS operate that way? The purpose of a government-operated mail service arguably is to guarantee the quality and types of services that free-market competitors can’t or don’t want to offer.

The irony of so many anti-service people is that most of them turn around and hate big corporations just as much. It's like they envision a Comcast-esque corporation taking over USPS, but forget that they hate Comcast.

Disliking corporations and anti-competitive behavior of big corporations seems to be a non-partisan issue; and yet there seems to be much support for making everything ran by massive corporations. I don't understand their line of thinking here.

Post reply on HN