Privitize Canada Post?

[albeethere1]

With their looming losses ahead, Canada Post needs to do an overhaul in order to survive.  Every year, postage goes up and the service stays the same.  I just received a shipment from Isreal - it was mailed on Sunday, probably left the country Monday and was at my doorstep Friday (5 days!).  The parcel weighed at least 2 pounds and I was charged only $12; this same parcel on the other hand if I was sending it to isreal would be an exorbitant $40 and probably take up to 20 days to receive.  I am afraid that if something doesn't happen soon, Canadian sales will fall into the toilet due to the high cost of shipping.  I get asked all the time if there is a cheaper rate.

What does everyone else think?

[art-in-the-making]

"annual", that's right, sorry.

Still, even at that it would be a small price to pay considering the massive scope of the job.

Nowadays $1 bil is the amount that pretty much any noticeable project goes over budget. By 2020 it will be chump change, powdered mashed. Meanwhile, they maintain their assets until they figure out how to leverage it.

The other thing with cutting delivery to skimp on costs is that that would be a deterrent for expanding the PO parcel service.

One bright spot is parcel delivery, which is expected to buck the downward trend and increase by 26 per cent by 2020, thanks in part to the growth of e-commerce.

Probably the best and most obvious thing they could do is target a more spectacular increase in parcel business.

A 26% increase seems about as modest as you could ever imagine.

[jhay4737]

What they should be looking into if they haven't already is doing away with door to door delivery of mail and placing super boxes everywhere. That way the only mode of delivery is by car instead of walking. It would cut down on time and workers. They definately wouldn't need as many. The super boxes in the places I've lived have parcel boxes as well for small medium and large parcels. If there's a signature needed you pick it up at your local post office and sign for it. There's no need for delivering mail by foot anymore it can be done away with. In my opinion.

[tobyshitzu]

Finally some good news art!!  Just got to keep the dippers out

"The federal government is taking a harder line on collective bargaining, giving itself sweeping new powers to steer independent Crown corporations on their negotiations with employees over wages and benefits."

..

He specifically cited Canada Post – “it’s common knowledge that they are struggling to re-imagine themselves with a declining demand”"

..

"That strategy entails bringing public-service salaries, benefits and pensions in line with what the government believes is the private-sector norm."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-tightening-the-reins-on-cbc-via-rail-and-canada-post/article11645749/

[puckstopshere]

Money can be saved - by Canada Post.

It will cost Canadians more in the long run.

Super mail boxes, as are currently being installed in many subdivisions, will be installed in more and more locations.  Household mail delivery will disappear.  You will have to go to another location to pick up your mail.  If you want anything delivered to your home, you will have to pay for it. 

Storefront mail pick-up locations are coming in mall locations (lots of parking).  These locations will be unmanned and open 24 hours a day.  There are already test facilities in  the U.S.  There will be many hundreds of boxes at each location.  A CP employee will fill them once a day - to start.

Rural mail delivery will disappear.  You will have to go to the nearest town to pick up your mail.

We have seen changes here in London.  Mail carriers used to be delivered to their routes - and picked up again - by taxis.  This is disappearing in favor of small CP leased vehicles.  They can deliver a lot more mail for less money. 

Many long term employees are being offered early retirement packages.  New employees receive a lower level of pay and fewer benefits.   My friend

 -  a 34 year postie - has been offered several severance packages but has turned them down.  He is making a ton of money because he is working a ton of O.T.  He expects that to disappear once he is gone and there are fewer "senior" employees to claim the O.T.

[prior-of-verity*shake-hands-with-your-devil]

A LOT of job losses, especially in the country where jobs are hard enough to find.

[ilurkthereforiam]

It's a shame that some people will lose their jobs, but you cannot expect taxpayers to keep a system running at a loss so that a few people can keep their jobs.

Most of them will get decent severance packages and others will retire.

The ones that don't retire can find other jobs.

It happens all the time.

[pierrelebel]

"you cannot expect taxpayers to keep a system running at a loss so that a few people can keep their jobs."

At this point, the taxpayer is not paying.  Canada Post gets its revenues from users - folks using the mail to send letter (mostly) or packages.

"will get decent severance packages"

Q - Who will pay for that?

A - Higher postage fees.

"The ones that don't retire can find other jobs."

Yes, I hear Walmart, Target and many other retailers are hiring at $10 to $12 an hour.

[ilurkthereforiam]

At this point, the taxpayer is not paying.  Canada Post gets its revenues from users - folks using the mail to send letter (mostly) or packages.

The taxpayers are on the hook when they operate at a loss.

Q - Who will pay for that?

It would be in their contracts and their employers will have to pay.

A - Higher postage fees.

Let the user pay. I don't use Canada post any more.

I use electronic billing and the only mail that I get is junk mail.

"The ones that don't retire can find other jobs."

Yes, I hear Walmart, Target and many other retailers are hiring at $10 to $12 an hour.

If that all that their qualified for maybe they should get some job skills that pay more.

[prior-of-verity*shake-hands-with-your-devil]

Let the user pay. I don't use Canada post any more.

But shouldn't you care about others who do?

A few weeks ago someone was talking to me about their water and sewer rates and I almost......almost said ........."well it doesn't concern me, I don't have that expenditure". But then I thought........I should care.

If that all that their qualified for maybe they should get some job skills that pay more.

- They can get skills......but the jobs aren't there.

- If a postal worker is older, their age often makes them un-hireable. Even if they have new skills, they don't have the experience employers often want.

[ilurkthereforiam]

- They can get skills......but the jobs aren't there.

- If a postal worker is older, their age often makes them un-hireable. Even if they have new skills, they don't have the experience employers often want.

People lose their jobs all the time. 

I have a friend (in his 50s) who lost a good job because they moved the plant to Michigan.

What did he do? He took his severance, upgraded his skills and got another job.

He didn't whine about and complain about how they owed him. He did what he had to do and moved on.

There are lots of companies who don't want older workers, but there are lots that do because older workers are perceived to have better work ethics and show up on time and work hard.

It is not my job to pay taxes to keep a defunct system alive, just because someone can keep an overpaid, underworked government job.

I do not want to live under communist rule.

[prior-of-verity*shake-hands-with-your-devil]

He took his severance, upgraded his skills and got another job.

You may find many more people whose lives did not end up that way.

just because someone can keep an overpaid, underworked government job.

I see.

I'm curious...........are there government or unionized workers you approve of? 

[pierrelebel]

"are there government or unionized workers you approve of?"

I think so, starting with members of the cabinet, their appointed staff, etc...  😉

[prior-of-verity*shake-hands-with-your-devil]

Been licking stamps all day again have you?? 😉

[ilurkthereforiam]

You may find many more people whose lives did not end up that way.

Why not?

I'm curious...........are there government or unionized workers you approve of?

I don't care whether their union or non-union.

I don't like the idea of paying unskilled government labour $20.00 an hour. I would prefer to see them paid what their worth and give a dividend back to the tax payers.

[prior-of-verity*shake-hands-with-your-devil]

Why not?

Location....available jobs etc.

I don't like the idea of paying unskilled government labour $20.00 an hour. I would prefer to see them paid what their worth and give a dividend back to the tax payers.

What do you classify as "unskilled"? .......and what are 'unskilled' people worth so they can make a living and everything that goes along with it?

Does this 'unskilled' idea apply to just government employees...or should it apply to everyone in any occupation that could be classified as 'unskilled'?

[ilurkthereforiam]

Location....available jobs etc.

I know lots of people who had to move to take jobs. Even people who had skilled trades or certifications in various fields.

What do you classify as "unskilled"? .......and what are 'unskilled' people worth so they can make a living and everything that goes along with it?

Does this 'unskilled' idea apply to just government employees...or should it apply to everyone in any occupation that could be classified as 'unskilled'?

It's not the government's job to pay people a liveable wage if they don't have the skills to make a liveable wage.

The private sector rarely pays what you would call a livable wage to unskilled labour unless it is hard back breaking work or they require people and can't get them.

Tim Hortons pays premium wages in areas where they can't get people.

[prior-of-verity*shake-hands-with-your-devil]

I know lots of people who had to move to take jobs. Even people who had skilled trades or certifications in various fields.

In dire necessity some people may have to move but for others it is very, very difficult for many, many reasons.

It's not the government's job to pay people a liveable wage if they don't have the skills to make a liveable wage.

So you are saying....if I have this right that:

a) It is not the responsibility of a government to give people enough money to live on? If a person does not have a particular 'skill' they are trained for that we should try and get them for the least amount possible? On the other side of the coin I know people with degrees and certifications who go to work and kick the can all day long. 

b) You didn't really answer what you call 'skilled'? Would you consider someone who is hired help on a farm "skilled"? How about a tree planter? Maybe a postal worker? There are many people out there who do jobs that others do not want to do and many people consider them unskilled, but to me that's a fallacy. It takes 'skill' to do just about anything and do it well. My father had a grade 8 education but taught himself to work with steel and heavy equipment. He was very 'skilled'. I know a fellow who works for the township and all he does is paint, grease, oil, and do general easy service on the municipal vehicles and to me......he is skilled. Everyone deserves a decent wage.....a wage where they can have hope for the future and for their families. Frankly, I consider an immigrant farm worker very skilled in what they do. Everyone is skilled in their own right.......postal workers as well.  

[art-in-the-making]

It's not the government's job to pay people a liveable wage if they don't have the skills to make a liveable wage.

Lurk, Prior made a good reply to this but I could elaborate also.

What is really at issue here at the core of it is the monetary system itself.

We accept the marketplace as reality, a reality that effectively governs everyone's lives - and its validity is tirelessly defended and buttressed by all of its great stakeholders... but it is becoming less defensible, less needed, less practical and less effective.

There are so many contradictions, so many incidents of the pure surreal, that to come out and say that a person's wage depends on their level of "skill" is neither true nor credible.  Someone gets their face smashed in in an accident in the U.S. they get paid probably millions  - the same accident in Canada maybe pays them $100,000. Someone does your nails in a regular shop in Asia they make maybe 10 or 50 cents - the same exact person does the same exact procedure a week later in Toronto, they make $20 or $40.

Tons of people make livings just sitting at a computer clicking buttons. Never producing anything, never conducting any business with actual people.

You call customer service - you could be talking to someone making $20 an hour or $20 a week. Same skills.

The U.K. overturned centuries of copyright jurisprudence with a law this week that says any image uploaded to the internet is free game to be copied for commercial purposes unless the author takes painstaking measures to ensure that ownership is clearly substantiated at all times.

And so forth. Say you're a 50-year pressman with 30 years experience and a family and you find yourself out of work. Oh-oh - no one's hiring pressmen any more. Suddenly your skill that was worth $30 an hour isn't worth squat.

Lurk it's not a simple world any more.

But one thing I do know - a modest living (wage) should not be a privilege in Canada. How to arrive at a scenario where that becomes a reality is not so easy to say, but it is a worthwhile problem to solve.    

[puckstopshere]

But one thing I do know - a modest living (wage) should not be a privilege in Canada. How to arrive at a scenario where that becomes a reality is not so easy to say, but it is a worthwhile problem to solve.

Good post, art!

There is no one answer.  There needs to be a basic change in the way we think.  Not something that is easy to accomplish because of the sheer masses of people who need to change. 

Personally, I believe that we are heading for another crash of greater proportions than what happened in 1929.  It seems to be the only way that we will ever be able to start over on a fairly level playing field.  Greed fuelled the 1929 crash.  The same greed is all too prevalent, today.

Countries are printing money like it was, well ................. paper.  Entire economies are based on fiction.  Debt is rampant, from the smallest consumer to entire nations.  This is not sustainable.  No government will risk taking the steps necessary to make the changes that are needed.  No political party will do the unpopular.  They are too focused on re-election. 

Some European countries are trying, but their "entitled" citizens are not willing to make any sacrifice to achieve financial stability.  We all want the other guy to give up something, while we keep all that we have - and oh, by the way, we need a raise. 

My belief that the solution is coming.  It is in our hands, because we are quickly driving our economies to the brink and could do things to reverse this.  Will we?  Not likely.  Let someone else make the sacrifices.

Pretty soon, it will be out of our hands. 

[puckstopshere]

You didn't really answer what you call 'skilled'?

Skills are intangible.  They are things we gain by learning and by doing.  As far as employment opportunities, skills are only valuable if someone else needs them.

A farm hand has many skills that are useful to farmers.  Are they useful in getting a job in another field?  Probably not.

One "skill" that I looked for when I was hiring was a work ethic.  I was as interested in a persons history of job performance.  Did they show up for work every day?  Would they give you your money's worth in productivity?

A few years ago, I worked in a food processing plant.  I hired a guy who was 62.  Word got back to my boss and I got "spoken to".  Why would I hire an old man?  (p.s. my boss was 64 and one year away from retirement)

A few weeks later, my boss, while touring the plant, noticed a particular worker.  When he saw me later, he said that it was too bad we couldn't clone this guy.  I said to him, "why would you want to do that?  He is 62."

Why did I hire this guy?  To start with, he rode his bike 11 miles in the rain to apply for the job.  He had a good work history, having worked for 30 years for a business that had just closed.  In my mind, he had the "skills" I wanted.  He could be trained to do the job.