Running Programs At A Loss

"Neither snow or rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds."

The above, of course, is the motto for the United States Postal Service, and, to some extent, serves as a motto for any other mail delivery service. I quote it here because the service forgot about one thing that could prevent all those noble objectives being achieved -- government meddling.

Now in the past I have had some issues with the postal service, particularly with the Canadian Union of Postal Employees, or its better known acronym, CUPW. 

My issue, however, extends beyond CUPW, and has to do with any public (as opposed to private) unions. To be specific, no public union should have the right to strike. In that three parties are involved -- management, union members and the public, it is the latter that suffers. As I phrased it once in a court hearing, this was a "slaughter of the innocents". Goodness, even school children have been held as ransom by over-zealous teachers' unions.

But I digress from the point I wish to make.

The government in its wisdom -- stop laughing, you elected these bozos -- wishes to cut postal service in Canada because, as a spokesman said, "It is running at too great a loss."

Let's stop right there, and think for a moment. First, ALL government programs run "at a loss". This is why we have taxes. Secondly, these programs all have service at their core, not profit*. Health care, as an example, is provided for all, but entails a huge fiscal loss. So does the maintenance of Canadian armed forces, as well as the provision of country-wide infrastructure in the form of roads, bridges, sewers and the like. All of these programs run "at a loss".**

In terms of the postal service, the question then arises, is the "loss" too great, particularly when the use of the service is in decline owing to technological advance, particularly e-mail.

This is a valid question.

The government's solution? Curtail door- to- door service, and create "hubs" where mail can be retrieved from personal boxes.

Yet it must be remembered that those who will be hurt most by this, individual posties and invalid seniors, had nothing to do with causing the situation. The only saving grace in this whole mess is that job loss will be through attrition rather than abrupt firing.

But it is a pity the government acted so hastily, since this would have been a fine opportunity to bring the public into the decision-making process. Could mail be delivered only twice a week? Could regulations be put in place that would ensure a proper privatization of the service?  Could there be a delineation of certain areas that the "hub" approach wouldn't work, for example, the rural north? Could there have been another way to bring costs down?

In one sense, then, the issue itself was a "loss".

--------------------------------------------------------------

*It is truly horrific that the profit motif serves as the foundation for U.S. health care. How on earth can U.S. citizens stomach those who make money from sick people? -- LSS.

** So does the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, but its service role seems to have totally disappeared into a Liberal Party black hole. --LSS.