MARLBORO
More than 500 people packed a meeting at the Holiday Inn last night to oppose a proposal to close the Central Massachusetts Postal Processing and Distribution Center in Shrewsbury and eliminate nearly 100 jobs.
The often contentious meeting is part of a series of public sessions that U.S. Postal Service management is holding to get input from employees and to give them an overview of proposals to consolidate processing and distribution centers in Massachusetts. One of the proposals is to close the 20-year-old facility in Shrewsbury and move its operations to facilities in Boston and North Reading.
Charles K. Lynch, district manager for the Greater Boston District, emphasized that a recommendation of the area mail processing study to close the Shrewsbury facility is not final and subject to change. But, he said the proposed annual savings of closing the facility is about $7.7 million. Ninety-six of the nearly 600 positions would be eliminated. The plan would also result in overnight first-class mail not being delivered for two to three days.
Mr. Lynch said the USPS lost $11 billion last year. He said that even if the agency gets some relief through Congress from the controversial annual $5.5 billion pre-funded health care benefits for future retirees, the agency will continue to lose money if drastic changes aren’t made.
Because of mobile and web-based communications, postal mail has decreased from 213 billion pieces of first-class mail in 2002 to 78 billion pieces in 2010. The number is projected to drop to 39 billion by 2020. Processing and distribution centers have decreased from 673 in 2006 to 487. The Shrewsbury facility is among 252 nationwide that are being considered for consolidation. Mr. Lynch said if the studies are successful, there will be 35,000 fewer positions in the remaining mail processing and distribution centers. All relocations or closures are in abeyance until May.
“Everybody has done a tremendous job but it’s just not enough. If we do nothing as an operation, we will fail. If we continue to do business as usual, we will fail. There is nothing not being looked at,” Mr. Lynch said.
U.S. Rep. James P. McGovern, D-Worcester, and Worcester City Councilor Kathleen M. Toomey were among the people who said it does not make sense to close a facility that is making money and keep open the Boston facility that is losing money. Ms. Toomey said mail volume has increased by 75 million pieces at the Shrewsbury plant since 2008 while work hours have been cut by more than 200,000 work hours during the same time period. She also said the City Council is concerned about the proposed closure of two substations in Worcester at 484 Main St. and 22 Front St.
Residents were angered when they were told that a study to determine the feasibility of closing the Boston plant and moving its operation to either North Reading or Waltham was aborted because some equipment in Boston is too large to move to another facility. Residents said the 260,000-square-foot facility on 51.7 acres has plenty of room for expansion.
“You can add on to our plant in Shrewsbury and bring that equipment to our plant and save … The Shrewsbury plant has done an outstanding job,” said Earl Duncan, a longtime employee.
One of the USPS managers said the Shrewsbury plant is the most productive plant for its size in the Northeast. Mr. Lynch, district manager of the Greater Boston District, said while managers were asked to look at existing facilities, not expansions, the fact that the Shrewsbury plant can easily be expanded will be included in the final report.
Mr. McGovern pointed out that for the past three years, the state has expressed interest in buying the Boston facility property for $200 million to allow for expansion of South Station to improve rail service and other economic development.
“What makes absolutely no sense is to incur the cost of relocating or rebuilding the Boston general mail facility to another location while closing or consolidating Shrewsbury, Brockton or North Reading,” he said. “The USPS and the commonwealth of Massachusetts is best served by selling that property and maintaining the suburban sorting facilities.”
Written comments, post-marked by Jan. 20, can be mailed to Manager, Consumer and Industry, Greater Boston District, 25 Dorchester Ave., Boston, MA 02205-0098.
<!–
–>