USPS's Flats Sequencing System Comes Under Scrutiny

In the midst of the progressing postal rate survey, another report from the USPS assessor general flashes blended sentiments on the fate of magazine mailing.

By Greg Dool :: August 28, 2018

191

The United States Postal Service's pads sequencing framework (FSS)— a $1.3 billion mail-arranging framework for magazines and inventories—was charged as a progressive headway when it was first uncovered 10 years prior, to the point that its rollout even incorporated a smoothly created, Hollywood-style film trailer.

"Steady, dependable, and on-time conveyance," "moderate mail benefit," "insight through innovation"— what's not to adore?

Ten years and 100 establishments later, FSS is "as yet missing the mark regarding desires," as indicated by another report from the USPS Office of the Inspector General (OIG), which cocked eyebrows upon its open discharge prior this month for its strangely honest evaluation of the Postal Service's tasks.

"Additional upsetting," the OIG states, "is that it's misty in the case of handling pads on FSS machines is more cost-effective than utilizing AFSM [the mechanized pads arranging machine, FSS's precursor]."

While the OIG consistently makes proposals to the Postal Service dependent on its evaluations, this felt unique, says Rita Cohen, senior VP of authoritative and administrative strategy at the MPA (the Association of Magazine Media).

"They said they don't comprehend the operational and budgetary effect of the framework," Cohen tells Folio:. "They don't have the foggiest idea about that this whole framework is more affordable than what they were doing previously, which included manual handling."

The USPS, in its very own emphatic articulation, debated the OIG's review, which it called "summed up" and "methodologically defective." Among different things, it blames the OIG for putting forth "excessively broad expressions" in light of "a discrete examination of a couple of select FSS destinations," basically sticking FSS underperformance on what it calls an "assortment of non-FSS-related components," that add to issues, for example, spillage—that is, magazines or lists planned for FSS that breeze up arranged somewhere else, regularly through AFSM.

When we had a reasonable direction of the majority of the different acronyms included, Folio: chose to take a seat with Cohen to take in more about the issue and how it may affect the magazine business.

Rita Cohen

Folio: What was huge about the OIG report, from your point of view?

Rita Cohen: It truly scrutinized the entire essential of the pads sequencing framework, which we had raised critical worries about when they initially chose to do it. They were setting up a bifurcated framework where a few workplaces did it one way, and others did it another. We were concerned up and down this would include cost. Lo and see, we were correct, sadly, in light of the fact that we are the ones that endure the worst part of the expenses.

Folio: This OIG report appears to reason that, because of a decrease in pads mailing and spillage, FSS execution has fallen path beneath the fundamental benchmarks to meet its productivity objectives. Is that exact? 

Cohen: Mail volume is down a considerable measure, throughput on the machines is down significantly, the hours that they're running are down drastically. In addition, there's the spillage—volume that ought to have gone into the machines yet didn't. So I would state there are a large number of issues going ahead here, and in all honesty, in our remarks to the commission, we fundamentally said that we figure they ought to consider simply rejecting FSS, rather than proceeding to put resources into what appears as though a disastrous framework. I figure the OIG isn't going so far as to suggest that, however they are stating that it should be rethought.