The following is a perspective by postal commentator Gene Del Polito prepared for publication in Federal Times. The views expressed are the author's and do not necessarily reflect the views of the association.

The U.S. Postal Service (USPS) is facing its most formidable challenges since postal reorganization. For the first time in its history, the USPS faces real mail volume losses in of some of its vital, core mail services. The past two accounting periods tell a dismal story. Advertising mail volume growth (once the postal leader) is now most meager and barely keeping pace with inflation; while First-Class Mail volume actually has dropped when compared with similar periods from a year ago. In short, the oft-predicted impact of electronic communication alternatives is beginning to impact on the Postal Service's business. Unfortunately for the USPS, what we are witnessing today will not be a one-time phenomenon.

In pieces I have written elsewhere, I've tried to point out that the USPS' single greatest shortcoming lies in the incentives that drive its workers. To put it simply, the incentives, for a competitive enterprise, are misdirected. In the private sector, businesses strive to minimize costs and maximize gains. The Postal Service, on the other hand, is prohibited by law from making a profit, and operates as it always has--on a breakeven cost basis.

This should come as no surprise to anyone, since the U.S. Postal Service is not structured, nor has it ever been intended to be operated, as a competitive business. Its statutory grant of a letter-mail monopoly over most First-Class and Standard A mail is evidence that competition was not something Congress had envisioned for the Postal Service.

Despite Congress' intent, the world in which the Postal Service finds itself today is clearly a competitive one. In fact, the USPS faces competition in virtually every market in which it operates. Messages that formerly were restricted to mail now can be distributed by alternative electronic avenues that are more cost-efficient and reliable. In the meantime, the Postal Service goes bumbling along with a legislative and regulatory structure that does little to instill a sense of entrepreneurial verve.

There's an old saying: "If you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch." Well, our postal "Rover" has been on the porch for over 30 years. It's either time to take off his leash and let him run, or it's time to put the old boy out of his misery.

What, if anything, can be done? The answer is simple: PLENTY, particularly if we believe the postal pooch still has several good years in him.

First, the incentives that underlie the Postal Service need to be restructured to reinforce cost-efficient, productive, and profitable behavior. Compensation for postal executives, managers, supervisors, and workers should provide real, tangible rewards for minimizing costs and maximizing gains.

Getting rid of the ridiculous ceilings on postal officer pay would be a good place to start. The Germans pay their chief executive officer compensation that exceeds a million dollars. The Canadians pay their CEO more than $400,000. Even the Italians compensate their CEO more than $400,000. In contrast, we here in America cap the pay we provide our postal CEO (who is expected to run a $63 billion enterprise) to less than $160,000 a year.

Second, Congress must direct the Postal Service to operate on a profit-making not a break-even basis.

Third, Congress needs to allow the Postal Service to set its prices on a market-determined, rather than a cost-determined, basis.

Fourth, if the existence of a letter-mail monopoly impedes Congress' ability to actualize any of the above, then the letter-mail monopoly should go. There are other ways of ensuring the provision of universal mail service without resorting to statutory monopoly--particularly since the the Postal Service's monopoly already has been severely eroded by the realities of modern technological developments and a vastly changed marketplace.

Finally, Congress must decide once and for all if the purpose of the U.S. Postal Service is to satisfy our nation's need for viable, affordable, reliable and universal mail services or to serve as the nation's social laboratory. If it's the former, then Congress should stay as far away as possible from matters pertaining to day-to-day personnel management. Its meddling in personnel issues simply allows the disputants to avoid the consequences of their own actions and benefits no one. If it's the latter, then Congress had better get ready to pick up the tab for a postal system that no longer will be able to sustain its incredibly large infrastructure (human as well as brick and mortar) solely on the basis of user-paid postage.

Delivering the mail isn't rocket science. Coming up with a workable, sustainable solution to our nation's changing (but enduring) postal needs, isn't either. Everyone has his reasons for why this or that possible solution "just won't work." These aren't reasons; they're excuses, and the time to tolerate such excuses has long passed.