You can keep your 2 cents!

Filed under: Non-Profit News,US Postal News — Luke Vander Linden at 10:00 am on Friday, October 1, 2010

The Postal Regulatory Commission‘s decision yesterday to reject the US Postal Service’s request for a rate increase means much more than sending your Christmas cards won’t be any more expensive this year.  It could have resulted in 5-6% increase for bulk (including non-profit) mailers as well.

An industry-wide coalition lobbied hard to oppose the increase.  From the nonprofit world, you can thank the folks at Alliance of Nonprofit Mailers, the Direct Marketing Association Nonprofit Federation, the National Catholic Development Conference, and the Association of Direct Response Fundraising Counsel — of which we are active members — for their good, effective work and determination.

According to Bob Tigner, General Counsel of ADRFCO…

As for what’s next in rate roulette, we presume that USPS will be stuck with this result — at least in the short run.  In other words, even if USPS were to successfully appeal and/or make a curative amendment to its rejected PRC filing, a different outcome would be months and months away.  So, for planning purposes, assume this: USPS will revert to its statutorily permitted CPI-based rate increases and will file such a request in short order.  This action will produce new rates in January 2011 averaging 1.5% (that’s one and one-half, NOT fifteen).

We will keep you updated on this and other industry news as it breaks.

As for what’s next in rate roulette, we presume that USPS will be stuck with this result — at least in the short run.  In other words, even if USPS were to successfully appeal and/or make a curative amendment to its rejected PRC filing, a different outcome would be months and months away.  So, for planning purposes, assume this: USPS will revert to its statutorily permitted CPI-based rate increases and will file such a request in short order.  This action will produce new rates in January 2011 averaging 1.5% (that’s one and one-half, NOT fifteen).

Comments: