In other words, why can’t you have a UPS package sent to a PO Box? Is it the US Postal Service that won’t accept a UPS delivery or is it UPS that doesn’t want to deliver to the US Postal Service? And why? Something that makes it less profitable or just sour grapes?
Only mail delivered by the post office can be placed in a mail box.
I don’t have a cite but as I recall, the Post Office refuses to permit United Parcel Service–or anyone other than the United States Post Office–to deliver items to a post office box, or to a mailbox on private property. I believe that this is in fact to make it harder for private delivery services to compete with the U.S. Postal Service.
There is also the issue of what to do about packages that don’t fit in the box.
>> In other words, why can’t you have a UPS package sent to a PO Box?
You can. Just mail it. Or do you expect to use the Post Office installations for free? Would you expect UPS to deliver A USPS package for free?
PO boxes are for delivery of potal mail which has paid postage. Why should they allow others to use it? How could they allow non USPS employees access to the premises and installations?
I just don’t understand how the question even comes up. Do you often sit in a restaurant and bring your own food there?
Not much of an issue. All they do is stick a note in your box saying that you have a package and to claim it at the counter since it is too big.
But people are paying a fee to rent PO Boxes. I would think that the USPS could work out some kind of a deal with UPS to try and attract more PO Box customers, like Mail Boxes Etc. does.
And let’s say they need some part for a piece of equipment at the Post Office and the company that sells them only ships via UPS. What would they do? 
UPS owns Mail Boxes Etc. which makes delivering there not much of a problem.
They are paying a fee to rent boxes in post offices for the delivery of US Mail by the USPS. You are not forced to to have a PO Box. You freely enter into a contract with the USPS.
It is a government monoply. Why should the USPS share with commercial businesses? It’s called use their system or a private system. The two do not mix.
Uh, how about those taxes I pay to subsidize something that’s never turned a profit? Is that money nonexistent, or is it just expected that I pay for something I can’t exert control over?
Oh, and nobody delivers for free. Even if you discount taxes (and nobody’s offering me a full tax discount), you still have to pay for a PO box and pay to ship packages.
So what’s all the vitriol? What’s so fundamentally evil about letting the public use what the public pays for?
The USPS is not a government agency and AFAIK is not subsidized by your taxes since 1983 but, even if it were, it makes absolutely no difference .
What is this sense of entitlement? You have no right or obligation to have a PO box. The USPS, offers their PO boxes on their terms and you can take it or leave it. The PO Box is property of the USPS for their own use, not yours.
If they offered UPS access they would have to do the same for any other person or company who wanted to deliver there. For free? Come on! they deliver if you pay the fee called postage but I cannot see why they should deliver for free. Should an individual be allowed to deliver to a PO box for free? If only UPS wouldn’t we then have protests of people saying “taxpayer” money was being used for profit of private business? I tell you, you just can’t win.
At any rate, supose UPS delivers to your PO box. who do you claim when the package is lost? UPS? USPS?
On the whole it just makes little sense and is probably more complicated than it is worth. I can understand why they won’t do it.
sailor, I accept that I might be wrong about the status of the subsidization of the USPS. But even if I am, it’s still a corporation that’s been granted substantial privileges under the law. The delivery of first-class mail, for example, is a government-mandated monopoly, and it is a monopoly the USPS holds. So is the usage of PO boxes.
Given that the USPS has so many exemptions and so much special consideration (I wonder what its tax liability is, for example, and how easy it is to bring suit against it.), I think it’s natural that many people (myself included) want more access to its property and its services. If it were to give up the first-class mail monopoly, and if it allowed other people to deliver to mailboxes and other people to build post offices, I think a lot of this would die down.
Somewhat off topic, but I seem to recall that you can mail a package to someone at a local Post Office. They don’t need to have a box there. Just an address like:
John Doe c/o
MainStreet Post Office
NY, NY
That someone can just ask the clerk for a pick-up. Is this still/ever been true?
Yes, you can mail to someone at the Post Office without them having a box. People who hike the whole Appalchain trail sometime do this - they mail supplies like food to the PO in small towns along the way and then pick up the mail in town when they get there. If they don’t use that method then they have to find some other way to get supplies along the route, such as meeting up with family or friends at various places.
And stamps would rise to a couple of bucks.
In this case, having the monopoly keeps costs down, since the largest cost for mail is the infrastructure. You want to have a post office located conveniently and not have to travel 50 miles to get your mail. If first class mail volume drops due to more carriers, you still need to pay for the post office buildings. If there’s competition for first class mail, income drops while costs remain fixed. You close post offices and raise prices.
Note that there is little interest on the part of UPS or FedEx to handle first class mail. Both get away with a much smaller infrastructure – one station can handle deliveries for hundreds of miles (they also don’t deliver to everyone every day). UPS has bought Mailboxes, Etc., but those are independent franchisees that do a lot more than just handle mail. They are no more a part of the UPS’s infrastructure than they were before the UPS bought them.
If you want more access than the PO provides, go the to UPS store and rent a box there.
The USPS can set its rules for boxes as it pleases; if it finds that not offering UPS delivery is cutting into box rentals, they can consider offering it, just like any other business (though a change might require changes to the law.
But ultimately, it’s their rule and their condition and the condition does not affect box rentals enough for them to consider changing it.
Just in case someone takes it seriously: that’s not delivery to a PO Box, it’s delivery to the Postal Service Branch Station’s own street address, and the UPS van will pull in 'round the back to the loading dock and the package will be signed for by the Assistant Postmaster or whoever is in charge of receiving.
And to elaborate on a point made above: The Post Office does not have to provide POBoxes, it just has to get USPS mail to you. The hard truth is that our elected representatives chose to maintain USPS as a protected franchised monopoly (and good luck changing that) under these terms.
BTW, though we are absolutely free to choose any carrier for parcel-delivery services to our doorstep, they’ve got their own problems. While we’re complaining that we can’t have UPS/FedEx deliver to PO Boxes, we might as well whinge about the private carriers not providing home delivery on Saturdays, or (many of them) outside business hours, or having the pick-up point for when you cannot receive it at home be in some industrial park an hour’s drive out of town.
My downtown mail drop IS a former MailBoxes Etc. (now UPS Store) where I can receive UPS, FedEx, USPS parcel, USPS First Class, DHL and even whatever oddball carrier was that package I got from Japan last year. Heck, in this one I can even open an account so they’ll front any customs/excises due on a received shipment.
I’ve always assumed it was a matter of economics.
The nearest post office to me is always busy it seems. If UPS were to deliver to a PO box, someone one on one of the ends is going to have to be hired to handle the volume.
The Post office would have to hire someone to handle the UPS packages coming in (because in a busy office it would happen all the time).
or
UPS will have to pay their delivery people to stand in line to deliver the box. Yesterday I was in line for over 1/2 an hour. That can seriously bite into their work schedule. You could say that UPS could just drop it off at the Post Office, but some postal employee is going to have to move it to the correct place.
I don’t see wither of those two scenarios happening.
Interestingly, you can also do this for UPS distribution centers. Give the shipper the address of the facility but with your name, and they’ll hold it for you and give you a call to pick it up. I’ve done it before, because I’m never home when they deliver. This may only work if you are a regular picker-upper though.
I stopped doing it because you can’t always be certain whether a given shipper will use UPS or USPS. Though I can state from personal experience that UPS will hold a USPS box for you. And that they get a real kick out of it.
Some posters are forgetting that being a monopoly has costs and responsibilities. Every single person in the US gets USPS mail service, and the cost of delivering a first class letter is exactly the same no matter where in the country the sender and the recipient are. Costs for mail to other countries are also fixed.
This can’t be said for private services, which make their profits by cream-skimming, and reducing, eliminating, or putting extra charges on service to the less fortunate.
So? what is that got to do with anything except to support the idea that the USPS has no obligation to deliver UPS packages?
The USPS has a monopoly on first class mail? Sure. Fine. So what? UPS is not handling first class mail. UPS is handling packages in direct competition with the USPS in that segment. Why should the USPS cooperate with its competitor?