Скачать презентацию MTAC Workgroup 147 Enhanced Parcel Return Processes January Скачать презентацию MTAC Workgroup 147 Enhanced Parcel Return Processes January

186ad80f45990e816d448708edb21938.ppt

  • Количество слайдов: 32

MTAC Workgroup 147 Enhanced Parcel Return Processes January 2012 MTAC Workgroup 147 Enhanced Parcel Return Processes January 2012

Overview § Background § Current vs. Ideal State § § Physical Routing Published Rules Overview § Background § Current vs. Ideal State § § Physical Routing Published Rules Data Exchange Postage Due Payment § Specific Changes and Timeline § Summary 1

Background Background

Background The focus of this workgroup is to improve UAA and returns handling on Background The focus of this workgroup is to improve UAA and returns handling on Standard Mail and PS Lightweight parcels. Specifically, the group will develop proposals to improve options, handling, and service consistency. 3

Customer Experience USPS Return to Sender processes currently present a poor customer experience: § Customer Experience USPS Return to Sender processes currently present a poor customer experience: § Receiving incorrect service level § Absorbing expenses for unwanted returns § Manual and cumbersome postage due function results in postage errors and delivery delays § Confusing range of parcel endorsements leads to execution challenges within the USPS network 4

Testimonials “For returns that are supposed to be intercepted and disposed of, we receive Testimonials “For returns that are supposed to be intercepted and disposed of, we receive the proper handling only about half the time…we’ve had to go back for significant refunds when it was discovered that the returns were not being rated correctly. ” Wendy Smith, Publishers Clearing House. “With USPS focused on cost reductions, more efficient processes can leverage technology and reduce parcel return handling/touch points. For example, process the returns closest to the point of entry and eliminate the routing to CFSs. Scan the original barcode and/or ancillary endorsement line to determine appropriate action (e. g. forward, return to sender, destroy), have the system determine the appropriate postage due (based on weight and zone or flat fee) and automatically debit CAPS. ” Wendy Smith, Publishers Clearing House. 5

Optimization is Necessary USPS must optimize UAA and returns handling to eliminate risks: § Optimization is Necessary USPS must optimize UAA and returns handling to eliminate risks: § Significant outbound and return revenue is at risk due to poor customer experience § Manual processes for postage due are costly to administer § Origin protocol for return to sender can result in “loop mail” which adds processing costs 6

Impact on USPS Significant costs incurred from: § Processing and sortation at CFS sites Impact on USPS Significant costs incurred from: § Processing and sortation at CFS sites § Manual data entry by clerks (ACS codes, reason codes, etc. ) § Weighing and rating every piece Additional costs may also result from: § Transportation § Processing wasted pieces § Differences between mail classes 7

Current vs. Ideal State Current vs. Ideal State

Current vs. Ideal State An ideal state for UAA/RTS simplifies the overall process in Current vs. Ideal State An ideal state for UAA/RTS simplifies the overall process in the following areas: § Physical Routing § Published Rules § Data Exchange § Postage Due Payment 9

Physical Routing Current: § All UAA/RTS pieces transported from local Post Office to CFS Physical Routing Current: § All UAA/RTS pieces transported from local Post Office to CFS sites for processing § Clerks manually verify endorsement to determine handling procedure Ideal: § Decentralized processing occurs at local facilities § Endorsement and handling procedure identified electronically 10

Physical Routing Decentralized processing allows for identification and disposal of low-value or unwanted pieces Physical Routing Decentralized processing allows for identification and disposal of low-value or unwanted pieces near origin § Avoids cost of three to five potential moves through USPS network § Model already exists with Parcel Return Service § Dispose locally or hand off to PRS partner for disposal § Still capable of handling ACS pieces, which require processing before disposal 11

Published Rules Current: § Rules for existing process are confusing and not wellpublicized § Published Rules Current: § Rules for existing process are confusing and not wellpublicized § Endorsements: Five endorsements whose definition can vary by mail class § Codes: Fifteen event codes and twelve reason codes Ideal: § Update and clarify DMM rules for UAA/RTS processes § Ensure that future publications and rule descriptions are clear, thorough, and distributed appropriately § Endorsements: Four simplified endorsements § Codes: Three event codes and simplified reason codes 12

Ideal: Endorsement Consolidation Current Endorsements Proposed Endorsements 1. Address Service Requested 1. Forwarding Service Ideal: Endorsement Consolidation Current Endorsements Proposed Endorsements 1. Address Service Requested 1. Forwarding Service Requested 2. Return Service Requested 3. Change Service Requested 4. No Endorsement 5. No Endorsement (Handling procedure depends on mail class) Potential Handling Change: Based on the consolidated endorsement system, handling would be consistent across mail classes even though pricing may not be. 13

Ideal: Event Code Consolidation § Divide existing event codes to eliminate overlap of reasons/explanations Ideal: Event Code Consolidation § Divide existing event codes to eliminate overlap of reasons/explanations and actual disposition events § Carriers indicate reason code at time of delivery attempt § Clerks may also enter additional reason codes that apply at time of processing § Clerks indicate event code upon processing UAA piece § New reason and event codes integrated with other PTS scans § CFS would obtain codes from PTS Proposed Reason/Explanation Codes 04 Refused 05 Undeliverable as Addressed 21 No Such Number 22 Insufficient Address 23 Moved, Left No Address/Unable to Forward 24 Forward Expired 25 Addressee Unknown 26 Vacant 27 Unclaimed 28 Deceased 29 Other ## (L) Illegible ## (M) No Mail Receptacle Proposed Event Codes 06 Forwarded 09 Return to Sender 31 Return to Sender / Not Picked Up (For Hold For Pick Up Items) 32 Disposed by Post Office 33 Disposed by PRS Partner 14

Ideal: Reason Code Consolidation Twelve Code Consolidation Proposed Three Code Consolidation A – Attempted, Ideal: Reason Code Consolidation Twelve Code Consolidation Proposed Three Code Consolidation A – Attempted, not known (ANK) A UTD B – Returned for Better address (UTF) Q NSD D – Outside delivery limits (UTF) Q UTD E – In dispute (DIS) E UTD I – Insufficient address (IA) I NSD L – Illegible (ILL) L NSD M – No mail receptacle (NMR) M UTD N – No such number (NSN) N NSD P – Deceased (DEC) P UTD Q – Not deliverable as addressed (UTF) Q NSD R – Refused (REF) R UTD S – No such street (NSS) S NSD U – Unclaimed (UNC) U UTD V – Vacant (VAC) V VAC X – No such office (UTF) Q NSD Original Fifteen Code Definitions Consideration: These codes could be eliminated if CFS can communicate with PTS to obtain original reason/event codes Three Code Definitions: § UTD (Unable to deliver to addressee): Addressee problem causing article to be undeliverable § NSD (No such delivery point address): Addressing problem causing article to be undeliverable § VAC (Vacant) 15

Overall Ideal State Endorsement Forwarding Service Requested Routing Description Piece is forwarded to new Overall Ideal State Endorsement Forwarding Service Requested Routing Description Piece is forwarded to new address Return Service Requested Piece is returned to sender Change Service Requested Piece is disposed: • Local facility disposes • Hand off to PRS partner for disposal No Endorsement BPM and PS Lightweight: Piece is disposed* All Others: Piece is returned to sender *Unless handling is standardized across mail classes Data Exchange 1. Reason Code 2. Event Code 3. ACS Notice: ACS indicator in manifest -or- Event Codes Reason Codes • 06 Forwarded • 31 Return to Sender / Not Picked Up (For Hold for Pick Up Items) • 09 Return to Sender ACS notice provided in all cases • 32 Disposed by Post Office • 33 Disposed by PRS Partner 1. Reason Code 2. Event Code • 31 Return to Sender / Not Picked Up (For Hold for Pick Up Items) • 09 Return to Sender • 32 Disposed by Post Office • 33 Disposed by PRS Partner • 04 Refused • 05 Undeliverable as Addressed • 21 No Such Number • 22 Insufficient Address • 23 Moved, Left No Address/Unable to Forward • 24 Forward Expired • 25 Addressee Unknown • 26 Vacant • 27 Unclaimed • 28 Deceased • 29 Other • ## (L) Illegible • ## (M) No Mail Receptacle 16

Data Exchange Current: § Manual processing required for every piece § All required data Data Exchange Current: § Manual processing required for every piece § All required data is entered manually Ideal: § Full or partial automation of manual processes and data entry § Utilizes enhanced data exchange methods via the IMpb 17

Data Exchange IMpb linked to an electronic manifest from outbound shipment can provide: § Data Exchange IMpb linked to an electronic manifest from outbound shipment can provide: § § § Endorsement and handling procedure Physical piece characteristics (e. g. weight) Outbound postage Permit Holder and Mail Owner Return address Also use IMpb to send PTS extracts that include: § Reason and event codes § Scan events from re-routing (if applicable) 18

Postage Due Payment Current: § Manual return postage calculation and collection results in errors Postage Due Payment Current: § Manual return postage calculation and collection results in errors and delivery delays § Postage due processing is costly Ideal: § Automated return postage processes improve service consistency § New postage calculation offerings appeal to customers 19

Postage Due Payment Postage Calculation Options: § Published flat rate based on mail class Postage Due Payment Postage Calculation Options: § Published flat rate based on mail class and endorsement § Average flat rate based on customer’s sampling data § Associate to outbound manifest § Weight § Zone (if necessary) Postage Collection: § Modified Scan Based Payment – Charges triggered by event code selection 20

Specific Changes and Timeline Specific Changes and Timeline

Short-Term Changes March 2012 § Over-label at origin to improve customer experience and eliminate Short-Term Changes March 2012 § Over-label at origin to improve customer experience and eliminate loop mail July 2012 § Clarify existing processes in DMM via Postal Bulletin Notice § Issue new SOPs for delivery and back office tasks § Update M-41, City Carrier Duties and Responsibilities § Use mail class, event code, and unique barcode to charge published flat rate § Eliminate forwarding charges based on inflation factor § Consolidate Endorsements and Event / Reason Codes 22

Long-Term Changes 2013 § Use mail class, event code, and IMpb to charge average Long-Term Changes 2013 § Use mail class, event code, and IMpb to charge average rate based on customer’s sampling data 2014 § Eliminate CFS sites § Link CFS system to PTS § Automate remaining manual processes § Utilize IMpb and outbound shipment manifest § § Electronic endorsement recognition Identification of new delivery address Automatic label generation Postage calculation and payment 23

Summary Summary

Summary The proposed UAA/RTS handling process is streamlined in order to: § Decentralize processing Summary The proposed UAA/RTS handling process is streamlined in order to: § Decentralize processing § Eliminate high costs of current system § Reduce errors in mail operations and financial transactions § Improve consistency in overall process 25

Appendix A: Process Flows Appendix A: Process Flows

Current vs. Ideal State Current Process: Ideal Process: The current UAA handling process is Current vs. Ideal State Current Process: Ideal Process: The current UAA handling process is complicated, highly manual, and costly. The proposed process is more streamlined and eliminates problem areas in the existing process. 27

Current 28 Current 28

Ideal 29 Ideal 29

Appendix B: DMM Clarifications Appendix B: DMM Clarifications

DMM Clarifications Clarify DMM for existing processes: § Footnote ‘e’ moved directly into chart DMM Clarifications Clarify DMM for existing processes: § Footnote ‘e’ moved directly into chart to ensure it is clear and not overlooked by customers using ASR and CSR § DMM 507. 1 - Note that $3. 00 fee does apply to Parcel Select forwarded pieces under Shipper Paid Forwarding 31