Court Upholds Large Rate Increases For The USPS (mediapost.com)

A federal appeals court on Friday upheld the major rate hikes imposed in August by the U.S. Postal Service, saying the Postal Regulatory Commission’s order underlying the increases was neither arbitrary and capricious, nor did it exceed the Commission’s statutory authority.

The decision, by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, preserves a 6.8% increase for first-class mail and an 8.8% increase for package services — hikes of unprecedented size in recent years. The increases came after the PRC late last year finished an overhaul of the existing rate-setting system, which it had deemed inadequate. The new rate system ties price caps to what the PRC identified as the USPS’ most significant cost drivers: fewer pieces of mail going to more addresses and benefits payments the agency is required to make for future retirees.

The case in the appeals court was brought by the National Postal Policy Council, the trade association for large business users of letter mail, primarily first class. Members of the NPPC are a who’s who in the U.S. economy, particularly banking and insurance, including Netflix, State Farm, Wells Fargo, Sprint, American Express, Citibank, Canon, and Fidelity Investments.
more at source: https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/368678/court-upholds-large-rate-increases-for-the-usps.html?edition=124314

Related Posts

Kohl’s Responds to Director Nominations from Macellum Advisors; Company Reaffirms Commitment to Maximize Value for All Shareholders

Kohl’s Corporation issued the following statement regarding Macellum Advisors GP, LLC’s announcement of its nomination of directors for election to the Kohl’s Board of Directors at the Company’s 2022 Annual Meeting of Shareholders: Kohl’s believes Macellum’s effort to take control of the Board is unjustified and counterproductive. Kohl’s appointed two of Macellum’s designees, along with an additional mutually agreed upon designee, to its Board pursuant to the 2021 settlement agreement with Macellum and certain other shareholders. All members of the Kohl’s Board, other than its CEO, are independent. Macellum’s claim that Kohl’s Board is not equipped to evaluate sale opportunities is groundless. The Board designated its Finance Committee, which is comprised entirely of independent directors, was formed pursuant to the settlement with Macellum and includes one of Macellum’s 2021 designees, to lead the review of any expressions of interest. Additionally, the Company and the Board have engaged financial advisors, including Goldman Sachs and PJT Partners, and have asked Goldman Sachs to engage with interested parties. Furthermore, Macellum’s claim to be “disappointed and shocked” by Kohl’s rejection of the previously disclosed expressions of interest is disingenuous. Macellum has on multiple occasions stated publicly that Kohl’s is worth “at least $100 per share.”

Rite Aid Reports Fiscal 2018 Second Quarter Results

• Second Quarter Net Income of $170.7 Million or $0.16 Per Diluted Share, Compared to the Prior Year Second Quarter Net Income of $14.8 Million or $0.01 Per Diluted Share • Second Quarter Adjusted Net Loss Per Diluted Share of $0.01, Compared to the Prior Year Second Quarter Adjusted Net Income Per Diluted Share of $0.03 • Adjusted EBITDA of $213.3 Million for the Second Quarter, Compared to the Prior Year Second Quarter Adjusted EBITDA of $312.7 Million. Click Read More below for additional detail.

Less Than Meets the Eye: Print Book Use Is Falling Faster in Research Libraries

In late 2010, I was thinking quite a bit about book use in research libraries. The conventional wisdom was that “no one uses print books anymore” in libraries like mine, and indeed annual data provided by the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) showed a pretty clear decline in book circulations: between 1991 and 2008 (the most recent data available at that time), the number of initial circulations in ARL libraries had fallen by over a quarter. And when I ventured into the book stacks in my own library I usually found them spookily deserted. But I was haunted by a passing comment a colleague had made to me a few years earlier, noting that the conclusions we draw from library usage data can easily be confounded by changes in the library’s user population. It occurred to me that if we really want to understand what’s happening with regard to library patrons and printed books, we need to take into account the changing nature of our patron base. And the simplest and most consistent change in that population is growth over time: university enrollment tends to grow from year to year. Click Read More below for more of the story.
Back To Top
×Close search
Search