More customers cite poor treatment at the post office

Rude, sloppy or slow Postal Service workers could cost their agency nearly $300 million this year if they treat don’t their customers better.

A growing number of consumers reported dissatisfaction with the service they received at counters across 32,000 U.S. Postal Service facilities in 2013, an inspector general’s report found.

Though the post office handled fewer transactions that year than it did the previous year, the percentage of customers who said they were treated poorly at the counter jumped by nearly 9 percent.

In fact, more than one-fifth of all customers said they had been treated “worse than other retailers” in surveys in 2013.

“For every customer who complains directly to management, there are at least 10 more who complain to their friends and associates,” the report said, suggesting the spike in negative feedback didn’t fully reflect how many customers felt dissatisfied with the service they received.

The inspector general estimated the Postal Service could lose up to $289 billion this year if postal staff failed “to improve customer experiences at postal retail counters.”

Of the three main problems with service identified in the report — timeliness, quality and courtesy — “lack of courtesy” was cited as the most important factor in customer satisfaction.

Another customer service problem: “Sales associates are selected based on seniority rules, rather than suitability for the position,” the report said.

Postal Service officials disagreed with most of the watchdog’s findings and said the inspector general had “grossly overstated” the number of people who would choose a competitor based on poor customer service alone. The agency said estimates of how much revenue it could lose from dissatisfied consumers was also wrong.

In its response to the inspector general, the postal service also called the report’s finding that sales associates received no continuous training “completely untrue.”

A Postal Service spokesman referred a reporter to the agency response included in the report, and declined to comment further.

Related Content