The Postal Service has - voluntarily - kept the Postal Police Force benched for nearly four years despite what it describes as a “postal crime wave.” Image: elbud/Shutterstock.com
On April 16, 2024, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC) held a hearing in Washington D.C. to “examine the U.S. Postal Service’s current service, operations, and finances, including oversight of changes to the Postal Service’s network and their potential impacts on mail delivery.”
At the hearing, Senator Richard Blumenthal questioned United States Postmaster General (PMG) Louis DeJoy to measure his support for the Postal Police Reform Act—bipartisan Senate legislation which would restore postal police jurisdictional authority allowing uniformed Postal Police Officers (PPOs) to once again protect letter carriers who have increasingly been the target of criminal attack. Indeed, robberies of letter carriers have exploded by 781% from only 73 robberies in 2019, to an astounding 643 robberies in 2023.
Unfortunately, Mr. DeJoy’s answers to the Senator’s questions were misleading and, quite frankly, ridiculous.
First, despite what PMG DeJoy might claim, postal police jurisdictional authority is at the discretion of the Postal Service. It is misleading for him to claim that the Postal Service does not have authority to deploy PPOs to protect letter carriers when it is only true insofar as the Postal Service interprets the law.
In fact, on February 28, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled for a second time that enabling statute (18 U.S.C. § 3061(c)) which governs postal police arrest authority is ambiguous. Given the fact that the DC Court also found that the “most commonsense reading of the statute” would empower PPOs to protect letter carriers if the Postal Service assigned such duties—Mr. Dejoy’s claim becomes disingenuous.
The plain language of the DC Court ruling is not difficult to understand. PMG DeJoy should take the time to read it:
“A plausible alternative reading is that § 3061(c)(2) grants PPOs law-enforcement powers with respect to “such property” as USPS has actually assigned them to protect, not as to every piece of property to which USPS lawfully could assign PPOs. Indeed, that is the most commonsense reading of the statute, if not the most literal one.”
In other words, the Postal Service—under PMG DeJoy’s leadership—made a policy choice to bench the Postal Police Force during what would emerge as an unprecedented postal crime wave. PMG DeJoy should stop blaming Congress and instead point the blame where it should fall—upon his law department and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service for not exercising common sense.
Second, contrary to what PMG DeJoy claimed at the hearing, and as the incontrovertible evidence shows, 600 PPOs would most certainly have an impact on preventing crime against letter carriers. The Postal Service must think in terms of 600 federal police officers in 20 specific geographic locations, not 600 officers spread out across America.
As PMG DeJoy correctly points out, 600 PPOs cannot police over 200,000 letter carrier routes. But is the Postmaster General really claiming that all 200,000 letter carrier routes are unsafe? I sincerely hope not because it is obviously not true. Rather, there are certain zip codes and certain letter carrier routes that are frequently and repeatedly targeted by criminals — most of which are in the areas where Postal Police Officers once patrolled.
Put another way, it makes zero sense for PMG DeJoy to state that if PPOs cannot stop ALL attacks on letter carriers in America, then PPOs should not be utilized to stop ANY of the attacks on letter carriers. There are PPOs stationed in cities like Chicago, Washington DC, Newark, New York, Dallas, Houston, Miami, Los Angeles, Oakland, San Francisco, Boston, St Louis, New Orleans, Atlanta and Memphis (all being hard-hit by mail thieves)—and PPOs can make a difference in those locations, so why not utilize them?
Third, if 600 PPOs would have no “impact” on protecting letter carriers and preventing mail theft, as PMG DeJoy claims, then neither would his U.S. Postal Inspection Service.
The USPS Office of Inspector General (OIG) recently reported that the U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS) only assigns about 37% of Postal Inspectors to investigate mail theft cases (about 440 Postal Inspectors). Yet, according to PMG DeJoy’s logic, 440 Postal Inspectors will make enormous strides in protecting letter carriers and the mail—across all of America—while the 600 PPOs stationed in 20 cities most affected by postal-related street crime would have “no impact.” Simply put, the Postmaster General is not making sense.
Indeed, HSGAC Ranking Member Senator Rand Paul, had harsh words of criticism for the Postmaster General. Senator Paul emphatically explained to PMG DeJoy that a private business would run much differently than the way Mr. DeJoy runs the Postal Service.
Be that as it may, one thing is certain, while private carriers such as FedEx and UPS continue to hire more armed security for their delivery drivers, the Postal Service has done the exact opposite by banning all postal police letter carrier protection and mail theft prevention patrols.
Even more bizarre? In some areas, Fedex and UPS have hired off-duty Postal Police Officers to provide armed security for their vulnerable delivery drivers. And yet, when those same officers return to postal police duties in postal police uniforms, they are prevented by the Postal Service from protecting letter carriers. Only in the topsy-turvy world of Dejoy’s Postal Service could any of this make sense.
Having a recognized, fully authorized, highly trained uniformed federal police force within its organization provides the Postal Service with a unique asset that no private carrier possesses. And yet, the Postal Service simply refuses to utilize that distinct advantage. When asked why, PMG DeJoy has yet to provide a coherent explanation.
In fact, rather than broadcasting that postal employees and their deliveries are better protected by a uniformed federal police force, the Postal Service instead proudly announces to Congress, the American public and the news media (and therefore the criminals) that Postal Police Officers are powerless to stop mail theft.
Senator Paul is right: This is hardly what a properly-run private business would do.
Even worse, the Postmaster General apparently does not even want the option to utilize his Postal Police Force to protect letter carriers and the mail. When Senator Blumenthal asked whether the Postal Service supported the Postal Police Reform Act — describing it as “commonsense legislation” — Mr. DeJoy unconvincingly replied, “I’ll take a look at it.”
Based upon his track record, the Postmaster General will give the Postal Police Reform Act the same amount of attention that he gave Senator Ossoff’s letter which sought answers to the lengthy mail delivery delays experienced in Georgia under DeJoy’s Delivering for America Plan — which is to say, NONE.
The Postal Police Reform Act (S. 3356) is supported by the National Association of Police Organizations (NAPO), the National Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), and the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association (FLEOA). The Postmaster General—who has no law enforcement experience whatsoever—seems to believe he knows more about law enforcement than the three preeminent policing associations in America.
And, while PMG DeJoy is spending his time “looking at” the Postal Police Reform Act, Americans will continue to suffer under the epidemic of mail theft, banking fraud and identity theft which is slowly destroying the once-trusted USPS brand.
More to the point, in 2015, the USPS OIG estimated the Postal Service’s corporate brand value at $3.6 billion. That is, the Postal Service could expect to realize $3.6 billion in future cash flows as a direct result of its brand. The OIG identified trust, reliability, convenience, tradition, value, and affordability as critical attributes of the Postal Service corporate brand. Today, however, Americans associate the U.S. Postal Service with staffing shortages, delayed mail, never-ending postage rate hikes, attacks on letter carriers, stolen mail, check fraud and identity theft.
The Postal Service has—voluntarily—kept the Postal Police Force benched for nearly four years despite what it describes as a “postal crime wave.” It is as if USPS leadership all lost their minds on the same day—August 25, 2020—the day the Postal Service stripped PPOs of their policing power and banned all postal police crime prevention patrols.
Senator Paul once said, “giving more money to the Postal Service is the equivalent to burning money.” At the HSGAC Hearing, the Senator sarcastically corrected his mistake by saying, “However, that may have been a false equivalency because at least burnt money provides warmth.”
I believe Senator Paul is wrong, but Postmaster General Louis DeJoy is making the Postal Service almost impossible to defend.
Frank Albergo is the current national president of the Postal Police Officers Association (PPOA). The PPOA represents uniformed police officers employed by the United States Postal Inspection Service.
*The views and opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not imply endorsement by FEDweek.
Interested in contributing? Please send us your article.
Deferred Resignation Periods about to End for Many; Overall 12% Drop
Retirement Surge Likely as Deferred Resignation Periods End
Senate Rejects Bills to Defer Shutdown; Familiar Process Lies Just Ahead
Senate Bill Would Override Trump Orders against Unions
Report Describes Impact of Shutdown on Employees, Agencies
TSP Adds Detail to Upcoming Roth Conversion Feature
See also,
How to Handle Taxes Owed on TSP Roth Conversions? Use a Ladder
The Best Ages for Federal Employees to Retire
Best States to Retire for Federal Retirees: 2025