Talk:United States Postal Service/Archive 4

Title in persons name

 * Seraphimblade Can you please add his title back as President, as that is his official title for the Union and by standards “You should only capitalize president as a title before an individual’s name or when directly addressing a person in that role (e.g., President George Washington.” This is not an error as you state as it is proper english. This is reference to the USPS --Galendalia (talk) 19:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)Galendalia (talk) 12:54, 25 April 2020 (UTC)


 * NALC is not the modifier, it is the organization of which he is president. The MOS you linked states “When followed by a person's name to form a title, i.e., when they can be considered to have become part of the name: President Nixon, not president Nixon” If that was the case then wouldn’t we be saying United States president Obama? --Galendalia (talk) 19:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)Galendalia (talk) 18:42, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

New PMG to take office in June 2020
Louis DeJoy will assume office in June 2020 https://federalnewsnetwork.com/agency-oversight/2020/05/usps-board-names-logistics-executive-as-new-postmaster-general/
 * So when he takes up the position is the time to update the PMG details. ww2censor (talk) 15:35, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * That is why I put it here as a reminder :) Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 16:03, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm sure you will remember. BTW, no need to ping me because this page is on my watchlist. ww2censor (talk) 16:14, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

5 year plan - Deletion of section?
HI - I noticed you removed an entire section I have been working on with a GOCE editor. You stated puffery as the reason in which you removed the entire section that has been there for quite some time. Can you please point out specific examples of the puffery, please? I would like to start this discussion so I can put the information back in as that section has always been there, it just needed updating to the 2020-2024 version. Thank you and I look forward to a great, civil discussion to resolve this. *Also note, the person I am working with got back to me late last night with a change they wanted me to make. Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 16:31, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The five year plan is just a long list of goals quoted from primary sources with no third-party critical analysis. Inevitably it is written in promotional language and is meaningless unless it can be supplemented by specific targets, facts and figures, criticism etc. . . Mean as custard (talk) 18:25, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your input, for something like this there is no third-party analysis to be done, as these are goals. I had not finished the section yet. There are no specific targets as it is a date range and affects everyone in the US and around the world. As this is a plan, there are no facts and figures as this was just created recently. The promotional language I was going to work on today, however, you blanked the section so I did not want to edit war with you. I am sure if I look back at the last 5-year plan I can find stats and figures since that plan is past the 5-year mark (only if they are available). As I said, the section existed prior to my edits using the last 5-year plan which is now outdated. The feedback I got last night was as follows: " I think I'd convert it into a single sentence, something like: "The plan's stated goals are to improve the way the U.S. Postal Service acquires new customers, to help them select the products and services they need, to improve the way it collects customer feedback, and to improve the way it deals with complaints". Feel free to use that if you wish." and to change all "we" to him, her, she, etc. I have not been able to make those changes. I feel you should have made the changes you see fit and not just blank out a section that has been there for years (IMO) in the case of WP:Bold. Thanks Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 18:35, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Clean up Universal service obligation and monopoly status Section
This section is long overdue for some editing (SEE 2011 cites). The section and it's title are seemingly POV, as it implies various opinions as to how the "status" could somehow be "perceived" as a monopoly. A solution would be a consensus to make it an opinion section with notable viewpoints. DN (talk) 04:20, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Free Matter missing
Missing is any mention of "Free Matter for the Blind or Handicapped". https://faq.usps.com/s/article/What-is-Free-Matter-for-the-Blind-or-Other-Physically-Handicapped-Persons and https://pe.usps.com/Archive/HTML/DMMArchive20030810/E040.htm Rectapedia (talk) 18:22, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

USPS crisis article
I believe that it would be advantageous to have a separate article covering the controversy surrounding Trump targeting the USPS, to prevent mail-in ballots from being processed.  D ÅRTH B ØTTØ ( T • C ) 18:17, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I had thought about that too. Someone has started an article called United States Postal Service Delays of 2020 but I think that is too narrow a focus. There is material already in the United States Postal Service article that could be used to expand it. I was thinking more about an article along the lines of Mail balloting in the 2020 presidential election. -- MelanieN (talk) 18:46, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That article has been renamed as 2020 United States Postal Service crisis, a much better name, and "crisis" is the word that Reliable Sources are starting to use. Now that Congress is jumping into it, that's not too narrow a focus after all. -- MelanieN (talk) 15:07, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Updated during the election cycle
Hi, I'm curious how this page will be getting updated during the 2020 cycle and the need for mail-in ballots along with threats of being defunded? CollinTheGoatDavissimo (talk) 07:06, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

USPS is not a creature of the "executive branch" (article II)
C'mon. The post is one of the few explicitly denominated functions in the (albeit way overrated) U.S. Constitution. It's in Article I, the legislative provisions. In practice, it functions as its own business, though with a couple of Congressional appropriations such as for "Free Matter for the Blind," and postal inspectors. The president is pretty limited in their capacity to boss around the USPS. I realize that the P'master Gen. is appt'd by the prez, but the same could be said of the Librarian of Congress, the Architect of the Capitol (and, in practice, the President of the Senate)--that alone doesn't commute it out of Article I. 2601:140:D:7838:2113:2D5E:F4CE:EFD4 (talk) 03:35, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The USPS is, by law, a part of executive branch. See the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970. The Postal Clause may be an enumerated power in Article I, but Congress used this very authority to make the USPS a part of the executive branch. What's more, it's predecessor was a cabinet department.Poguetry (talk) 05:20, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, the fact that Article I gives Congress the power to do something does not mean that the agency that carries that something out is part of the legislative branch. Article I gives Congress the power to levy taxes, but this does not mean that the IRS is part of the legislative branch. Poguetry (talk) 05:26, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Please anyone have an idea of what it costs to mail a 5 ounce package overnight may cost?
Fed ex tried to charge me OVER $112.00 to supposedly overnight a 5 ounce package. That actually would take 48 hours because there mail was already picked up yo be sent out. With in the United States!! FL to MT.! WTH?? Does the US post office still offer this service at a reasonable price? I only have one kidney as is!! Call me ignorant i just want to mail this gift! i know what i went through for the past 15 hrs plz respond 146.113.234.44 (talk) 07:38, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 * You can look it up yourself here: https://postcalc.usps.com/ ww2censor (talk) 10:15, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Postmaster vs. Postmaster General
Hey there! I'm Jonathan, a United States Postal Service employee who has come to this Talk page to request a few improvements to the article. If you would like to know more about my COI, please see my user page. My first request is a technical one. There are a few instances in this article where postmasters general are referred to simply as "postmaster." That usage is incorrect. A postmaster is head of a city or region's postal operation. The postmaster general is the singular head of the national postal system. It's a small but meaningful distinction. You can see, for instance, in recent New York Times coverage of the Postal Service, they always refer to current postmaster general Louis DeJoy by his full title.

So that other editors don't have to go hunting for them, here are the sentences where "postmaster" is used when "postmaster general" would be the accurate term (emphasis mine): Due to my COI, I can't make these edits directly. Would another editor mind jumping and handling them? If you need further clarification, I'm happy to help. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 22:53, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) S.1486, also with the support of Postmaster Donahoe, would also allow the USPS to ship alcohol in compliance with state law, from manufacturers to recipients with ID to show they are over 21.''
 * 2) In May 2020, in a controversial move, President Trump appointed a new Postmaster General, Louis DeJoy, the first postmaster in the last two decades who had no prior experience within the United States Postal Service.
 * 3) DeJoy—until 2014 CEO of New Breed Logistics (a controversial Postal Service contractor), and until 2018 a board member its new parent, XPO Logistics, whose postal contracts expanded during DeJoy's postmaster role—was a major donor and fundraiser for the Republican Party (from 2017, a deputy finance chairman of the Republican National Committee, until appointed postmaster, and later million-dollar donor to the 2020 Trump campaign while postmaster).


 * I'm going to wave at User:Beland here, because they recently made some substantial edits to the page and might be interested in addressing this request. If not, no big deal, but I thought I would ask. Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 23:36, 13 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the clarification! I have made the requested changes with some phrasing tweaks. I also noticed there seems to be a preference for lowercase and tweaked some instances at United States Postmaster General. I'm not entirely sure capitalization is correct in all instances, so feel free to point out anywhere on either article that should be tweaked. -- Beland (talk) 02:50, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * in normal prose usage postmaster general is lower case unless specifically referring to a person's title. Beland's edits look good to me. ww2censor (talk) 14:53, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * User:Beland and User:ww2censor: thank you for giving my request a thorough review. If either of you are interested in making similar fixes on current PMG Louis DeJoy's article, there is one instance where "postmaster" is used, and a few others where the title is incorrectly capitalized. It might be a good idea to standardize usage across multiple Wiki articles.
 * I would also like to point out that I have an active edit request on the Postal voting in the 2020 United States elections Talk page. I know that ww2censor is aware of this, and that they typically don't field COI requests, but Beland, perhaps you want to take a look? I won't to get into the weeds here, as I don't want to take this USPS Talk page conversation too far off-topic, but I'll link to the request here. If you have feedback or questions, we can have a discussion over on that Talk page.
 * Again, I really appreciate the help from both of you. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 22:43, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I updated the usage of "postmaster general" on Louis DeJoy. I can take a look at the postal voting edit request, though it may take me a day or two to get to. -- Beland (talk) 00:52, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Awesome! Thank you, User:Beland. If there's anything I can do assist your review  of the postal voting request, let me know. Cheers! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 17:56, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I updated the usage of "postmaster general" on Louis DeJoy. I can take a look at the postal voting edit request, though it may take me a day or two to get to. -- Beland (talk) 00:52, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Awesome! Thank you, User:Beland. If there's anything I can do assist your review  of the postal voting request, let me know. Cheers! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 17:56, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

128.8 or 128.9 billion mail volume
The article mentions the USPS "delivers 128.8 billion pieces of mail annually" citing https://facts.usps.com/size-and-scope/. However, on the website this figure is "128.9 billion mail volume". Maybe I looked at the wrong fact. I could not find the article's number in the archived copy either. Could someone confirm, and fix the article if need be?

If this figure is an average, I believe that needs to be made more clear, as of now it appears to only pertain to the year 2021. 47.151.146.79 (talk) 00:42, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Postal Service vs. Post Office
Hello again! I'm back to request a change similar to my Postmaster General vs. Postmaster one. There are numerous instances in this article where the Postal Service is referred to as the "Post Office." I know some people use the latter as synecdoche, but given that this is an encyclopedia, I think it might be best to make the language as precise as possible. I would suggest that instances of "Post Office" (or "post office") that refer to the agency be changed to "Postal Service" or "USPS." I won't cite every example in the article, but here are a few (emphasis mine): It's possible I'm being too picky. At the very least, could we change instances of "United States Post Office" (see example 3 above) to "United States Postal Service" or "USPS"? Because obviously there's no "USPO". Anyway, I'll let non-COI editors weigh in here. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 18:27, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) The House of Representatives voted to include an emergency grant of $25 billion to the Post Office to facilitate the predicted flood of mail ballots. Trump conceded that the post office would need additional funds to handle the additional mail-in voting, but said he would oppose any additional funding so that "universal mail-in voting" would not be possible.
 * 2) Relaxing access to the mailbox would also pose security concerns, increase delivery costs, and hurt customer service, according to the Post Office.
 * 3) Security for the individual is in this way protected by the United States Post Office... It is seen by some as a dangerous step to extract the universal service principle from the Post Office, as the untainted nature of private communications is preserved as assurance of the protection of individual freedom of privacy.
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: Please establish a consensus with editors engaged in the subject area before using the Request edit template for this proposed change. This is an interesting request, but having had a look at the article's history and the subject's history, there appears to be a precedent for the use of Post Office, at least historically. Please start a discussion with the USPS editing community and see if they agree with you first. PK650 (talk) 22:47, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: Please establish a consensus with editors engaged in the subject area before using the Request edit template for this proposed change. See my comment at USPS. PK650 (talk) 22:47, 11 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Post Office remains in common use: for example in headlines: * "Jan 11, 2022 — Following a successful holiday delivery season, the Post Office is preparing for a new challenge: delivering 500 million at-home test kits ." [headline in Newsweek "* 'Jan 19, 2022 — Free At-Home COVID Tests Now Available Online Through Post Office' (CBS News) * 'Each household is entitled to 4 testing kits through this program. These rapid antigen at-home tests can be ordered from the U.S. Post Office at COVID Home....' (official website state of Massachusetts) * 'Post Office COVID-19 Modifications for Certified Mail and Effect on Rule 4 Service' (Lawyers Mutual newsletter) ' COVID-19 response at Post Office USPS' (INDEED, job finding service) * And the best of all: 'Just because the Post Office can't do it efficiently doesn't mean private industry can't,' Roberts said.' [Chief Justice Roberts oral arguments in a Supreme Court case. see quote online at CNN Rjensen (talk) 20:02, 23 June 2023 (UTC)"

Coronavirus pandemic and voting by mail updates
Hey there! This request is very similar to the one I've made above. I'm looking to improve the USPS article by making a few updates to the Coronavirus pandemic and voting by mail section. Within a subpage of my user space, I've uploaded the current version of the section and a revised version, with blue highlighted text indicating places where my revised draft alters existing language, and green highlighted text indicating brand new information that I believe should be added to the section. Editors can view the current vs. revised section comparison by following this link. Here's a table that describes my proposed changes item-by-item. From left to right, you've got the current text of the section, my revised draft language (plus any new sourcing), and then notes on what I'm trying to accomplish with each edit.

Okay, those are all my proposed changes for this section. I'll now ask other editors to review and evaluate them. As ever, I'm here if anybody has questions or constructive feedback. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 19:17, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * See my edit here. I trimmed the information about the bill including the info about Trump in the article; ultimately the bill never passed, and thus in the overall history of the USPS (versus in a sub-article) merits a little bit less information.  Spencer T• C 04:49, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Appreciate the help, User:Spencer! You addressed all three of the edits I was asking about, so I marked my request as answered. Above this post, there's a request for updating the Under the Trump administration subsection. If you'd like to tackle that, go right ahead. If not, thanks for handling this one. Cheers! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 16:19, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Much improved. Please drop all the excessive footnotes. Normally one is enough instead of five. Rjensen (talk) 18:59, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

During the Trump administration updates
Hello again! I'm back with a request for updates to the During the Trump administration section. Within a subpage in user space, I've uploaded both the current version of the During the Trump administration section and a revised version that contains several edits I'm proposing. You can view the current vs. revised sections by following this link. You can easily spot differences between the current and revised versions by looking at the highlighted passages. Language that I have rewritten is highlighted in blue, and sentences I've moved are in yellow. My goal with these revisions is to improve the overall coherence of the section, and to clarify a handful of events described within it. Editors may expand the table below to review my proposed changes item by item. Going left to right, you've got the current text of the section, my revised draft language (plus any new sourcing), and then notes on what I'm trying to accomplish with each edit.

I understand these proposed changes give editors a lot of consider. If I can be of any help, in terms of providing further clarity or answering specific questions, please let me know. Thanks in advance! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 21:06, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Asking User:Coolcaesar if they would like to review this edit request and/or the one below, since they contributed some good information about S&DCs a couple months ago. Caesar, if you've got any interest, please take a look. If not, no worries. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 16:57, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I am sorry, but due to the section's very sensitive nature, I am declining this request. Quetstar (talk) 00:54, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Hey User:Quetstar! First, I'll say thanks for reviewing my request. I appreciate your taking the time.
 * I know this is touchy material and I have a COI, which is why I've been careful to put forward claims that hew very closely to what the cited sourcing says. I've obviously exercised a degree of editorial discretion, in terms of how I've organized the information in my proposed edits, but my main aim is to accurately summarize events as they were reported in large national news outlets, so that the section has solid facts and is easy to understand.
 * With that said, I get where you're coming from. If you believe that a COI editor simply shouldn't be giving input on this kind of content, that's a reasonable concern.
 * Would you at least consider implementing that last suggested change? The one about the House "considering a bill rolling back all of the changes." There's no judgment call to make there. The sentence I'm looking to fix is just incorrect. The House was going to consider rolling back some specific operational changes such as the decommissioning of sorting machines and ending overtime pay, not all of the changes that the Postal Service had (then) recently instituted. I don't want uninformed readers of this article to get the impression that the scope of the House's skepticism was broader than it actually was.
 * Anyway, thanks again for your input. I'll await your response. Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 13:27, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm OK with the last one, but i will leave it up to other editors for further review. Quetstar (talk) 19:01, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Appreciate the feedback User:Quetstar! To build further consensus, I'll tag in User:Rjensen, who has done a lot of work on the article recently, and User:Beland, who has weighed in on USPS matters in the past. Of course, other editors are welcome to review as well. Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 21:05, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Looks ok to me. I would reduce the introduction of DeJoy--just say he was a GOP political donor with lots of delivery experience and details belong in his own article. Rjensen (talk) 21:43, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 * For the first change: While it's true the Board appoints the PG, the President appoints the Board. Some of DeJoy's fundraisers directly benefitted Trump, who attended, so dropping mention of Trump seems like it's trying to sweep that under the rug. The second and fourth changes seem OK, but the third one drops mention of the fact that the changes were stopped, which also seems like it's trying to sweep that under the rug. -- Beland (talk) 00:56, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Hey User:Rjensen and User:Beland, thanks for jumping into this so quickly! I think Beland's criticisms are fair. I wouldn't object to keeping mention of Trump in there on the first change. The main thing I'm trying to correct is the assertion that the former president appointed DeJoy directly. I also wouldn't mind keeping the mention that mailbox removals were paused until after the election, if you think that's relevant context.
 * If either of you want to implement a version of my proposed changes, please do so. And thanks again! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 21:10, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I think we need a reliable source saying that Trump himself picked DeJoy to reward his $$$ help. Rjensen (talk) 22:22, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Hey, User:Rjensen! To clarify, my initial proposal at the top of this thread was to change this passage:
 * In May 2020, in a controversial move, President Trump appointed Louis DeJoy, the first postmaster general in the last two decades who had no prior experience within the United States Postal Service.
 * To this:
 * In May 2020, the bipartisan USPS Board of Governors appointed Louis DeJoy postmaster general. He became the first postmaster general in nearly two decades who had no prior experience within the United States Postal Service.
 * You can see all the relevant sourcing in the first row of the table above. I was suggesting that Trump be removed from the passage, because he did not select DeJoy. The USPS Board of Governors did. User:Beland was counter-proposing that some mention of Trump be kept in the passage, since he appointed the USPS Board members and DeJoy did some fundraising in October 2017 that benefitted Trump and the RNC. Maybe the compromise passage could be something like:
 * In May 2020, the bipartisan, Trump-selected USPS Board of Governors appointed Louis DeJoy postmaster general. He became the first postmaster general in nearly two decades who had no prior experience within the United States Postal Service.
 * Let me know if that works for you. I totally understand that this is a community of volunteer editors, and as you say, I'm a USPS employee doing this as part of my job. I'm not trying to make extra work for you, just looking for help reviewing the quality of my suggested edits, since obviously I shouldn't be editing the USPS article directly. Thanks for your time! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 17:54, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I recommend dropping the "inexperience" of DeJoy--he actually had a lot more delivery experience than anyone else--it was in the private sector which he used repeatedly. Rjensen (talk) 18:27, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
 * User:Rjensen, thanks for fixing that passage so it's more clear on what type of experience Mr. DeJoy brought to the job. Can I ask what you think about the first sentence? I think it's a good compromise between what I initially proposed and User:Beland's suggestion that some mention of Trump should remain. But obviously your opinion as an independent editor holds more weight than mine. Let me know! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 17:52, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm going to ask User:Beland if they have any thoughts on my proposed compromises above. I'm particularly interested in either removing or revising the clause that states "President Trump appointed Louis DeJoy" as that's strictly untrue. Again, I think Beland's insistence that Trump should be kept in the sentence is fair. But it would be incorrect to say that a president appointed the PMG, as that's just not how the process works. I'll slightly rephrase my suggested "compromise sentence," to reflect Rjensen's recent edit:
 * In May 2020 the bipartisan, Trump-selected USPS Board of Governors appointed Louis DeJoy, the first postmaster general in the last two decades who did not emerge from the postal bureaucracy.
 * If Beland has no further thoughts, or doesn't think we should go ahead with the change above and/or any of the other changes I suggested in this request, I'm going to drop this issue. I want to improve the article, but I also want to be respectful of editors' time. I know Wikipedia runs on volunteer effort and consensus. Perhaps that isn't reachable here. That's okay. I still very much appreciate everybody working through this stuff with me. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 20:29, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * You can see all the relevant sourcing in the first row of the table above. I was suggesting that Trump be removed from the passage, because he did not select DeJoy. The USPS Board of Governors did. User:Beland was counter-proposing that some mention of Trump be kept in the passage, since he appointed the USPS Board members and DeJoy did some fundraising in October 2017 that benefitted Trump and the RNC. Maybe the compromise passage could be something like:
 * In May 2020, the bipartisan, Trump-selected USPS Board of Governors appointed Louis DeJoy postmaster general. He became the first postmaster general in nearly two decades who had no prior experience within the United States Postal Service.
 * Let me know if that works for you. I totally understand that this is a community of volunteer editors, and as you say, I'm a USPS employee doing this as part of my job. I'm not trying to make extra work for you, just looking for help reviewing the quality of my suggested edits, since obviously I shouldn't be editing the USPS article directly. Thanks for your time! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 17:54, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I recommend dropping the "inexperience" of DeJoy--he actually had a lot more delivery experience than anyone else--it was in the private sector which he used repeatedly. Rjensen (talk) 18:27, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
 * User:Rjensen, thanks for fixing that passage so it's more clear on what type of experience Mr. DeJoy brought to the job. Can I ask what you think about the first sentence? I think it's a good compromise between what I initially proposed and User:Beland's suggestion that some mention of Trump should remain. But obviously your opinion as an independent editor holds more weight than mine. Let me know! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 17:52, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm going to ask User:Beland if they have any thoughts on my proposed compromises above. I'm particularly interested in either removing or revising the clause that states "President Trump appointed Louis DeJoy" as that's strictly untrue. Again, I think Beland's insistence that Trump should be kept in the sentence is fair. But it would be incorrect to say that a president appointed the PMG, as that's just not how the process works. I'll slightly rephrase my suggested "compromise sentence," to reflect Rjensen's recent edit:
 * In May 2020 the bipartisan, Trump-selected USPS Board of Governors appointed Louis DeJoy, the first postmaster general in the last two decades who did not emerge from the postal bureaucracy.
 * If Beland has no further thoughts, or doesn't think we should go ahead with the change above and/or any of the other changes I suggested in this request, I'm going to drop this issue. I want to improve the article, but I also want to be respectful of editors' time. I know Wikipedia runs on volunteer effort and consensus. Perhaps that isn't reachable here. That's okay. I still very much appreciate everybody working through this stuff with me. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 20:29, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm going to ask User:Beland if they have any thoughts on my proposed compromises above. I'm particularly interested in either removing or revising the clause that states "President Trump appointed Louis DeJoy" as that's strictly untrue. Again, I think Beland's insistence that Trump should be kept in the sentence is fair. But it would be incorrect to say that a president appointed the PMG, as that's just not how the process works. I'll slightly rephrase my suggested "compromise sentence," to reflect Rjensen's recent edit:
 * In May 2020 the bipartisan, Trump-selected USPS Board of Governors appointed Louis DeJoy, the first postmaster general in the last two decades who did not emerge from the postal bureaucracy.
 * If Beland has no further thoughts, or doesn't think we should go ahead with the change above and/or any of the other changes I suggested in this request, I'm going to drop this issue. I want to improve the article, but I also want to be respectful of editors' time. I know Wikipedia runs on volunteer effort and consensus. Perhaps that isn't reachable here. That's okay. I still very much appreciate everybody working through this stuff with me. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 20:29, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * If Beland has no further thoughts, or doesn't think we should go ahead with the change above and/or any of the other changes I suggested in this request, I'm going to drop this issue. I want to improve the article, but I also want to be respectful of editors' time. I know Wikipedia runs on volunteer effort and consensus. Perhaps that isn't reachable here. That's okay. I still very much appreciate everybody working through this stuff with me. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 20:29, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
 * If Beland has no further thoughts, or doesn't think we should go ahead with the change above and/or any of the other changes I suggested in this request, I'm going to drop this issue. I want to improve the article, but I also want to be respectful of editors' time. I know Wikipedia runs on volunteer effort and consensus. Perhaps that isn't reachable here. That's okay. I still very much appreciate everybody working through this stuff with me. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 20:29, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Operation and budget updates
Hello again! I'm back to suggest a couple changes to the Operation and budget section, in which there are some out-of-date passages. First, at the very top of the section, there are FY21 figures. I'd like to propose those be updated. Current language:
 * In Fiscal Year 2021, the Postal Service had $77.06 billion in revenue and expenses of $81.99 billion with a net loss of $4.93 billion.

Suggested language:
 * In Fiscal Year 2022, the Postal Service had $78.81 billion in revenue and expenses of $79.74 billion. Accounting for savings generated by the Postal Service Reform Act of 2022, the agency reported a net income of $56.04 billion.

And in the subsection about Post office closures, there are some facts from 2012 that are written in present tense. I suggest bringing those into the past tense. Current language:
 * Approximately 40% of postal revenue already comes from online purchases or private retail partners including Walmart, Staples, Office Depot, Walgreens, Sam's Club, Costco, and grocery stores.

Suggested language:
 * In 2012, the Postal Service reported that approximately 40% of postal revenue came from online purchases or private retail partners including Walmart, Staples, Office Depot, Walgreens, Sam's Club, Costco, and grocery stores.

If independent editors could review these changes and either implement them or let me know how my suggestions might be improved, I would deeply appreciate it. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 14:38, 5 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Those both look like perfect edits to me. Making them now. --FeldBum (talk) 00:36, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Infobox updates
Hello again! I'm glad my request above was received as helpful. I have a few suggested infobox updates, since some of the figures currently listed are slightly out of date:
 * Employees: 635,350 (516,750 career personnel, 118,600 non-career personnel) as of 2022
 * Revenue (2022): $78.81 billion
 * Net income (2022): $56.04 billion

That first number comes from an updated version of the Size and Scope page on the USPS site, and the latter two are from the agency's annual report to Congress. In general, I'm happy to pull from any USPS resources I can track down in order to ensure that the article has accurate facts and figures in it. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 13:07, 15 September 2023 (UTC)


 * voorts (talk/contributions) 18:43, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
 * voorts (talk/contributions) 18:47, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for implementing the update! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 22:42, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Asking for correction in During Trump administration section
Hello! I'd like to ask that a sentence under the During the Trump administration subsection be corrected. The sentence currently says this:


 * In May 2020, in a controversial move, President Trump appointed Louis DeJoy, the first postmaster general in the last two decades who did not emerge from the postal bureaucracy.

The bit about Trump appointing DeJoy is incorrect. The Postmaster General is appointed by the USPS Board of Governors, not the President. I'll suggest an alternate phrasing (and a source) that keeps every other part of the sentence intact:


 * In May 2020, in a controversial move, the bipartisan USPS Board of Governors appointed Louis DeJoy, the first postmaster general in the last two decades who did not emerge from the postal bureaucracy.

Again, my intention here is not to alter tone or dispute the "experience" claim. I just want to fix that one factual error. Any help I can get with this request would be much appreciated. Thank you! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 11:19, 11 October 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅ with some minor changes. I left out "bipartisan," and replaced "USPS Board of Governors" with "Board of Governors of the United States Postal Service." ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 14:53, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * That seems very reasonable. Thank you so much for evaluating and implementing the request, I appreciate it. Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 18:24, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Error in Operations and Budget - Revenue Decline and Planned Cuts
Hi all,

I believe there are two errors in the Revenue Decline and Planned Cuts subsection. It currently reads:

In 2016, the USPS had its fifth straight annual operating loss, in the amount of $5.6 billion, of which $5.8 billion was the accrual of unpaid mandatory retiree health payments.

This section implies that in 2016 USPS experienced 103% of total loss loss from healthcare, but reads as if this number should be smaller than the total loss.

I hoped to fix this wording myself, but it seems the citation is also wrong. It says the pdf is "from the original on February 2, 2017. Retrieved January 28, 2017" but links to USPS's Fiscal Year 2021 Annual Report to Congress which was not published (and didn't yet exist!) in 2017. WingdingsTheFont (talk) 14:14, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

As it stands we could simply remove the section, since the summary of the most recent year's financials is directly above it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WingdingsTheFont (talk • contribs) 14:16, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Proposing Fleet subsection updates
Hello again! Jonathan from the Postal Service here to propose some updates to the Fleet subsection, which I noticed doesn't have much information about the ongoing electrification of the USPS fleet. I've added well-reported details about that effort to the section and done some slight reorganizing. You can see all the changes I'm suggesting in the comparison below.

{{textdiff|The USPS operates one of the largest civilian vehicle fleets in the world, with over 200,000 vehicles, the majority of which are the distinctive and unique Chevrolet/Grumman LLV (long-life vehicle), and the similar, newer Ford-Utilimaster FFV (flexible-fuel vehicle), originally also referred to as the CRV (carrier route vehicle). The LLVs were built from 1987 to 1994 and lack air conditioning, airbags, anti-lock brakes, and space for the large modern volume of e-commerce packages, the Grumman fleet ended its expected 24-year lifespan in fiscal year 2017. The LLV replacement process began in 2015, and after numerous delays, a $6 billion contract was awarded in February 2021 to Oshkosh Defense to finalize design and produce 165,000 vehicles over 10 years. The Next Generation Delivery Vehicle (NGDV), will have both gasoline and battery electric versions. Half of the initial 50,000 vehicles will be electric, as will all vehicles purchased after 2026. The number of gallons of fuel used in 2009 was 444 million, at a cost of {{USD|1.1 billion}}. For every penny increase in the national average price of gasoline, the USPS spends an extra {{USD|8}} million per year to fuel its fleet. Starting in 2026, all delivery truck purchases are scheduled to be electric vehicles, partly in response to criticism from the Environmental Protection Agency and an environmental lawsuit. The fleet is notable in that many of its vehicles are right-hand drive, an arrangement intended to give drivers the easiest access to roadside mailboxes. Some rural letter carriers use personal vehicles. All contractors use personal vehicles. Standard postal-owned vehicles do not have license plates. These vehicles are identified by a seven-digit number displayed on the front and rear. |The USPS operates one of the largest civilian vehicle fleets in the world, with over 235,000 vehicles as of 2024, the majority of which are the distinctive and unique Chevrolet/Grumman LLV (long-life vehicle), and the similar, newer Ford-Utilimaster FFV (flexible-fuel vehicle), originally also referred to as the CRV (carrier route vehicle). The LLVs were built from 1987 to 1994 and lack air conditioning, airbags, anti-lock brakes, and space for the large modern volume of e-commerce packages, the Grumman fleet ended its expected 24-year lifespan in fiscal year 2017. The LLV replacement process began in 2015, and after numerous delays, a $6 billion contract was awarded in February 2021 to Oshkosh Defense to finalize design and produce 165,000 vehicles over 10 years. The Next Generation Delivery Vehicle (NGDV), will have both gasoline and battery electric versions. Half of the initial 50,000 vehicles will be electric, as will all vehicles purchased after 2026. The number of gallons of fuel used in 2009 was 444 million, at a cost of {{USD|1.1 billion}}. For every penny increase in the national average price of gasoline, the USPS spends an extra {{USD|8}} million per year to fuel its fleet. The fleet is notable in that many of its vehicles are right-hand drive, an arrangement intended to give drivers the easiest access to roadside mailboxes. Some rural letter carriers use personal vehicles. All contractors use personal vehicles. Standard postal-owned vehicles do not have license plates. These vehicles are identified by a seven-digit number displayed on the front and rear.

Electrifying the USPS fleet
Starting in 2026, all delivery truck purchases are scheduled to be electric vehicles, partly in response to criticism from the Environmental Protection Agency and an environmental lawsuit, and also due to availability of new funding provided by the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. The Act included $3 billion for electric USPS vehicles, supporting the initiative by Postmaster General DeJoy and the Biden Administration to add 66,000 electric vehicles to the fleet by 2028. The electric fleet will be composed of 9,250 EVs manufactured by Ford; 11,750 commercial off-the-shelf EVs; and 45,000 Oshkosh Next Generation Delivery Vehicles. In February 2023, the Postal Service announced its purchase of the Ford EVs as well as 14,000 electric vehicle charging stations. The fleet electrification plan is part of the Postal Service's initiative to reduce carbon emissions from fuel and electricity 40 percent and emissions from contracted services 20 percent by 2030. }}

The subsection would look like this, if all my proposed edits were made: {{box|The USPS operates one of the largest civilian vehicle fleets in the world, with over 235,000 vehicles as of 2024, the majority of which are the distinctive and unique Chevrolet/Grumman LLV (long-life vehicle), and the similar, newer Ford-Utilimaster FFV (flexible-fuel vehicle), originally also referred to as the CRV (carrier route vehicle). The LLVs were built from 1987 to 1994 and lack air conditioning, airbags, anti-lock brakes, and space for the large modern volume of e-commerce packages, the Grumman fleet ended its expected 24-year lifespan in fiscal year 2017. The LLV replacement process began in 2015, and after numerous delays, a $6 billion contract was awarded in February 2021 to Oshkosh Defense to finalize design and produce 165,000 vehicles over 10 years. The Next Generation Delivery Vehicle (NGDV), will have both gasoline and battery electric versions. Half of the initial 50,000 vehicles will be electric, as will all vehicles purchased after 2026. The number of gallons of fuel used in 2009 was 444 million, at a cost of {{USD|1.1 billion}}. For every penny increase in the national average price of gasoline, the USPS spends an extra {{USD|8}} million per year to fuel its fleet. The fleet is notable in that many of its vehicles are right-hand drive, an arrangement intended to give drivers the easiest access to roadside mailboxes. Some rural letter carriers use personal vehicles. All contractors use personal vehicles. Standard postal-owned vehicles do not have license plates. These vehicles are identified by a seven-digit number displayed on the front and rear.

Electrifying the USPS fleet
Starting in 2026, all delivery truck purchases are scheduled to be electric vehicles, partly in response to criticism from the Environmental Protection Agency and an environmental lawsuit, and also due to availability of new funding provided by the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. The Act included $3 billion for electric USPS vehicles, supporting the initiative by Postmaster General DeJoy and the Biden Administration to add 66,000 electric vehicles to the fleet by 2028. The electric fleet will be composed of 9,250 EVs manufactured by Ford; 11,750 commercial off-the-shelf EVs; and 45,000 Oshkosh Next Generation Delivery Vehicles. In February 2023, the Postal Service announced its purchase of the Ford EVs as well as 14,000 electric vehicle charging stations. The fleet electrification plan is part of the Postal Service's initiative to reduce carbon emissions from fuel and electricity 40 percent and emissions from contracted services 20 percent by 2030.

}} I'll now step aside and let editors without a COI review and discuss. Happy to hop in and provide clarification or revision as needed. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 15:33, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I have reviewed these proposed changes and suggest that you go ahead and make the proposed changes to the page. Zippybonzo &#124;  talk  &#124;  contribs  (they/them) 20:22, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks, User:Zippybonzo! I've now updated the page. Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (talk) 17:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)