Friday, January 30, 2009

Mail Snafu

Did you all see the article a couple days ago about the Postmaster General suggesting to only deliver mail 5 days a week, due to the USPS being in the red?

I for one was instantly irked. I can’t say why my emotions were so heated, but I think it boils down to tradition. I can’t imagine how an agency that’s been running for years can suddenly be so put upon that they have to change their integral “code”. I mean what’s one thing you can count on? The mail being delivered through rain, sleet or snow…except on Sundays, the day of rest.

Yes, I can see his point about there being less mail. But what about all the people who’ve dutifully been paying those outrageous stamp and postage rates because the USPS had to increase prices. What happened to all the money? Has it been spent on new technology like nifty sorting machines?

Also, why can’t they do a study about where the wasteful spending is going? If they have less mail due to online bill pay, online greeting cards, etc. then why not…I regret in saying this, downsize? If they don’t have as much mail, doesn’t it make sense that they don’t need as much personnel?

Is it just me, or does it seem ironic, that now they’re saying they have too little mail, but on big holidays (Christmas, Thanksgiving, Mother/Father’s Day) they’re saying they have too much?

I for one think of going to the mail box as a daily ritual, just like my postman/woman who delivers it. Sure, I could do without Tuesday’s mail so it would be one less day I receive a bill, but would it really make that much of a financial difference?

And what about those people who live by the mailbox? The people waiting for contracts, contest returns and submission information to name a few. Should the agony really be postponed? Yes, I know some agents/publishers/chapters are going partially paperless, but there are still those few who are stuck in tradition…like me.

So what do you think? Is cutting Tuesday’s mail a good idea?

Technorati Tags:, , , , ,
Flickr Tags:, , , , , Tags:, , , , ,
Furl Tags:, , , , ,

No comments: