This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:37, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
His wife is listed as a Polish-American yet there's nothing of his background? That's odd. What's his family background? Is he a Polish-American too? Or a Russian-American? How did he get to be CEO? When was he born? What year did he graduate university? There's so much missing from this. It's one of the most ridiculously lacking pages I've ever seen on Wikipedia. 101.109.211.6 ( talk) 23:55, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
Emir of Wikipedia, I would prefer to stop edit warring and discuss this, but the WP:ONUS is on you to change the formatting from what is standard. KidAd ( talk) 17:32, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
To add to this article: DeJoy's net worth (total assets). 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 22:23, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Why has this basic information not yet been added? 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 23:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Was DeJoy a donor or fundraiser to any prior Republicans such as Romney, McCain or Bush etc and if he was should it be mentioned in the article or was he a Democratic donor prior to Trump 🌸 1.Ayana 🌸 ( talk) 21:56, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Louis DeJoy is a Republican Party Mega-Donor - Not just a "fundraiser". 69.142.189.57 ( talk) 22:05, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
Are DeJoy's (and DeJoy's wife's) investments in shipping companies in competition with the USPS $30 million or $75 million, or some other number? Why such a wide variation? 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 23:20, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Emir of Wikipedia, you added the recentism tag on the article. I disagree with this addition, because the article does have some information on his past dealings as a businessman, but the reality of the situation is that he is notable almost exclusively for his role as postmaster general. Thus, I think the tag should be removed. What do others think? Sam-2727 ( talk) 18:11, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
His claim to fame, and how he got this Post Office appointment, is that he has been a champion fundraiser for Republicans. The Washington Post has just reported that when DeJoy owned a business in North Carolina, he got his employees to donate to Republican candidates and organizations, then reimbursed them for the contributions. That, of course, would be illegal. Should we mention it? My feeling is, not at this time since it's just reporting from a newspaper. If an investigation is launched we could report that. Here is the WaPo article for future reference: [1] -- MelanieN ( talk) 01:47, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
To add to this article: the subpoena issued in early September 2020 to force DeJoy to turn over documents he had previously failed to turn over to Congress. It's ridiculous that this information was not already included in this article! 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 06:42, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Content on DeJoy's changes to the USPS, the thing that this man is by far most known for and which the body covers at the greatest length, was removed from the lead. The content was removed by the editor 'Emir of Wikipedia'. Now the lead basically just says that he's the head of the USPSP and nothing more, even though the body is full of content. The content should be restored ASAP. Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 20:03, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
I agree we need something in the lead about his changes, but not the wording that was removed. It did not explain the situation well at all. This was the removed material:
A few months into his tenure as Postmaster General, the U.S. Postal Service’s watchdog concluded that the quality and timeliness of postal service deliveries had declined. [1] After DeJoy's reforms were walked back, USPS mail deliveries improved. [2]
Sources
- ^ Palazzolo, Rebecca Smith and Joe (2020-10-22). "Mail Service Deteriorated After Postmaster General Louis DeJoy's Arrival, Watchdog Found". Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660. Retrieved 2020-10-23.
- ^ "USPS Delivering More Mail on Time After Walking Back DeJoy's Reforms". Government Executive. Retrieved 2020-10-29.
I will work on a better explanation for the lead and propose it here. -- MelanieN ( talk) 20:41, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
Here's my proposal. I did not include any references since the rest of the lead doesn't, and everything is detailed and well referenced in the text.
Upon assuming office in June 2020 he instituted a number of cost-cutting measures such as banning overtime, forbidding late or extra trips to deliver mail, removing and dismantling hundreds of high-speed sorting machines, and removing some mail collection boxes from streets. The changes caused significant delays of mail delivery, resulting in investigations by Congressional committees and the postal service inspector general. In August DeJoy announced that the changes would be suspended, and in October the USPS agreed to reverse all the changes.
@ Snooganssnoogans, Neutrality, Emir of Wikipedia, and KidAd: Thoughts? -- MelanieN ( talk) 21:22, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
The last sentence of my version is In August, DeJoy announced that the changes would be suspended, and in October the USPS agreed to reverse all the changes.
User:Bdeneris changed it to As a result of the Congressional investigation, in August, DeJoy agreed that further changes would be suspended. On October 27, 2020, only six days before the election, a judge ordered the USPS to immediately reverse all mail collection changes.
User:Emir of Wikipedia reverted the change. IMO Bdeneris's version is an improvement and I would like to reinstate it - possibly leaving out "only six days before the election". --
MelanieN (
talk)
16:34, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Agree Bdeneris ( talk) 21:17, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 04:55, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
The article claims that DeJoy reversed and undid his destruction of the post office, but it’s now May 2021 and in Palo Alto, California, we still don’t have our corner mail drops back. I have to drive 3 miles to the post office to mail a letter. Valerie voigt ( talk) 10:32, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
"In addition, Congressman Tim Ryan has referred to the SEC a $54 million purchase of Oshkosh stock made hours before the contract was announced" - link to news article (56)does not sate this. 2601:147:4380:4740:8464:6874:642C:D91B ( talk) 19:35, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Is DeJoy of French heritage? 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 01:27, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
I live in the City of Aiken. Alot of our mail is said to have been delivered but is never delivered. We have called the local post office and the tell us once the carrier says it's delivered it not their problem. How can we resolve this issue. The last package was our license plate was said to have been delivered on 2/18/23 at our mailbox.When my wife checked there was nothing in our mailbox. Our mailbox is labeled 8181 Truman Ave. Aiken, South Carolina 29803. Please help. Thank you 159.250.133.42 ( talk) 22:02, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hi there! I'm a U.S. Postal Service employee working as a COI editor to improve various USPS-related pages. My full conflict-of-interest declaration is on my user page, and you can see the edits I've requested by consulting from my user contributions history.
I want to request a minor edit to the postmaster general's article. A few weeks ago, editors added to the infobox that Mr. DeJoy has received a BBA from Stetson University and an MBA from MIT. The former is correct—here's a link to a New York Times article that says as much—but I'm not sure where the latter claim comes from. I have asked around internally at USPS and confirmed that Mr. DeJoy doesn't have an MIT degree of any kind. The claim doesn't seem to have appeared in any reliable media outlets either. Could editors please remove it? Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 17:21, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello again! I'm returning to this Talk page to place another edit request that I hope will improve the quality of the article. My request concerns the Postmaster general section of this article. Since I'm suggesting a number of changes to the existing version of the section, I've uploaded a revised section draft to a subsection of my user page. For the most part, I kept the existing material in the section, with some edits and adjustments. I did remove a few sentences, each of which I have noted below, along with the reasons why. The main changes in the draft are the additions of new information based on more recent sourcing, some of which provided an update or conclusion to details in the existing section. I also added over a dozen new sources, to help solidify content in the section. To make it easy for editors to identify parts of my draft that are different from what currently exists in the article: brand new language that I have added is highlighted in green, and language that I have adjusted in order to make it more accurate is highlighted in blue.
In the revised section draft I have:
I know this is a longer request than I've made before. I'm happy to discuss this piece by piece, but wanted to share the whole section so that you can see the entirety of what I'm requesting in context. While I've aimed to align all of this with Wikipedia's content guidelines, I'm very open to feedback. If any editors would like to help with these changes or have thoughts on them, please let me know. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 19:09, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
Current version | Proposed change | Reference and comments |
---|---|---|
Current version 1 | Proposed change 1 | Reference and comments |
Current version 2 | Proposed change 2 | etc. |
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Okay, I'm back! Following User:Spencer's helpful advice above, I have added the current version of the Postmaster general section to my user space, so that it can be easily compared against my revised section draft. Under the current version, I've highlighted material that my revised version of the section removes in red, and flagged passages that I have altered in blue. And then in the revised version, altered language is highlighted in blue and brand new language is in green. You can view both versions of the section by following this link.
I realize that editors probably won't want to tackle every change my revised section proposes at once, so I've assembled a table that details the first four updates I'm suggesting within the first three paragraphs of the section. In that last column on the right, I've briefly explained what I'm trying to accomplish and indicated any new sourcing I use in the revised draft. Here's the table:
Current version | Proposed change | References and/or comments |
---|---|---|
On May 6, 2020, the USPS Board of Governors, all selected by Trump and confirmed by the Senate, announced DeJoy's appointment as postmaster general and CEO, despite concerns about conflicts of interest. | On May 6, 2020, the bipartisan USPS Board of Governors, all selected by Trump and confirmed by the Senate, announced DeJoy's appointment as postmaster general and CEO, despite concerns about conflicts of interest. | Adding "bipartisan" to reflect composition of USPS board at time DeJoy was appointed. |
DeJoy did not go through the normal vetting process for postmaster general; two separate search firms were used by the USPS board, and neither firm mentioned DeJoy in their list of candidates. | Two search firms were used by the USPS board, and neither firm mentioned DeJoy in their list of candidates. | Removing editorializing language while keeping salient fact. |
While he divested shares in UPS and Amazon before taking on his role, DeJoy drew scrutiny for not divesting from his $30–$75 million equity stake in XPO, a subcontractor for USPS. Under his tenure as postmaster general, USPS has increased its business with XPO. Additionally, when DeJoy sold his Amazon shares, he purchased stock options in Amazon that represent between 20 and 100% of his prior holdings. USPS prioritizes Amazon package delivery. | While he divested shares in UPS and Amazon before taking on his role, DeJoy drew scrutiny for not divesting from his $30–$75 million equity stake in XPO, a subcontractor for USPS. Under his tenure as postmaster general, USPS has increased its business with XPO. Additionally, when DeJoy sold his Amazon shares, he purchased stock options in Amazon that represent between 20 and 100% of his prior holdings. USPS prioritizes Amazon package delivery. An investigation carried out by the Postal Service's inspector general found that DeJoy "met all the applicable ethics requirements" related to his investments. | Adding that USPS inspector general looked into DeJoy's investments and found him in compliance with ethics requirements, per Washington Post and Bloomberg. |
Mail collection boxes were removed from the streets in many cities; after photos of boxes being removed were spread on social media, a postal service spokesman said they were being moved to higher traffic areas but that the removals would stop until after the election. | In the summer of 2020, the longstanding practice of removing mail collection boxes from low-traffic areas became a controversial issue, as photos of their removal spread on social media. This practice had been ongoing for decades, due to the public's declining use of first-class mail. In August 2020, DeJoy announced that the Postal Service would halt the removal of mailboxes and decommissioning of mail-sorting equipment until after the November election. | Adding dates to clarify timeline, further clarifying that removal of mailboxes was an established practice as opposed to something USPS had started doing in summer 2020, per Washington Post article cited in current version, and two new sources: Time and New York Times. |
I hope that lays everything out clearly. If not, I'm happy to clarify anything. User:Spencer, you might have interest in this, but obviously any other independent editors are welcome to review this request as well. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 22:22, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Once again, I'm back, with the next chunk of changes to the "Postmaster general" section. As mentioned above, the current version of the Postmaster general section is in my user space, highlighted to show removals in red and altered passages in in blue. That page also shows my revised version, with altered language highlighted in blue and brand new language in in green. You can view both versions of the section by following this link.
Continuing from my last request, I have a table of the next six updates that I'm suggesting for paragraphs six through eleven of the section. In that last column on the right, I've briefly explained what I'm trying to accomplish and indicated any new sourcing I use in the revised draft. Here's the table:
Current version | Proposed change | References and/or comments |
---|---|---|
After congressional protests, the USPS inspector general began a review of DeJoy's policy changes and whether he was complying with federal ethics rules;. | After congressional protests, the USPS inspector general began a review of DeJoy's policy changes. | The USPS IG's ethics review and the investigation into policy changes are two separate incidents, and the ethics review is covered earlier in this section (paragraph 2). |
In September 2020, a court blocked the USPS from sending Colorado households a mailer with false and misleading information about vote-by-mail for Colorado. Secretaries of state had requested that DeJoy show them previews of the mailers that the USPS intended to send out, but DeJoy refused. [1] | In September 2020, a court blocked the USPS from sending Colorado households a mailer with false and misleading information about vote-by-mail for Colorado. [2] [3] Secretaries of state also requested that DeJoy and his staff show them previews of any future mailers that the USPS intended to send out. [3] [4] | Adding new sourcing and clarifying the request from Secretaries of State. This request came out of the lawsuit following the distribution of an initial set of mailers, and asked for advance review of future mailers. |
The government institution agreed to reverse removal of collection boxes and mail sorting machines, closure or consolidation of mail processing facilities, reduced retail hours, banning or restricting overtime, and restriction of late or extra trips for timely mail delivery, affecting all 50 states. | The government institution agreed to stop removal of collection boxes and mail sorting machines, closure or consolidation of mail processing facilities, reduced retail hours, banning or restricting overtime, and restriction of late or extra trips for timely mail delivery, affecting all 50 states. | Changing "reverse" to "stop"; the mailboxes were not replaced but the practice was halted, so "stop" is a more accurate term. |
USPS was sued in federal court in September of 2020 by American Oversight to "compel the release of directives, guidance, analyses, and key emails from Postmaster General Louis DeJoy and his chief of staff related to voting by mail" after USPS failed to respond to FOIA requests for such information within the legally designated time period. [5] [6] When USPS released DeJoy's calendar in response to the lawsuit, it was almost entirely redacted. [6] | USPS was sued in federal court in September of 2020 by American Oversight to "compel the release of directives, guidance, analyses, and key emails from Postmaster General Louis DeJoy and his chief of staff related to voting by mail" after USPS failed to respond to FOIA requests for such information within the legally designated time period. [7] [6] When USPS released DeJoy's calendar in response to the lawsuit, it was almost entirely redacted. [6] A March 2021 report from the Postal Service's inspector general found that the vast majority of mail-in ballots and registration materials in the 2020 election were delivered to the relevant authorities on time. [8] [9] | Adding a sentence about how USPS performed in 2020 election. |
In addition, Congressman Tim Ryan has referred to the SEC a $54 million purchase of Oshkosh stock made hours before the contract was announced. Biden then nominated three people to fill the four vacancies on the USPS board of governors under Democratic pressure. He does not have the authority to remove DeJoy. [10] | In addition, Congressman Tim Ryan referred to the SEC a $54 million purchase of Oshkosh stock made hours before the contract was announced. | Grammatical fix to reflect that the referral is an event that already happened, not an ongoing matter. Removing sentence that is more about USPS Board than about DeJoy. |
DeJoy and his wife currently have $30-70 million invested in companies related to the USPS. [11] He plans to further slow down first-class mail delivery, reduce post office hours, and raise postage prices--which would impact voters, families, and small businesses in several states. [12] With the mostly Trump-appointed USPS board of governors behind him, when asked how much longer he intended to stay postmaster general, he said: "A long time, get used to me." [10] | DeJoy and his wife currently have $30-70 million invested in companies related to the USPS. [13] | Removing the passage about DeJoy's "plans" as it's speculative, and coverage since has shown that DeJoy did not reduce postal service hours or intend to slow service. |
I've included full citations above, where necessary, and tried explain each change in some detail, but I'm happy to clarify anything further.
User:Spencer, thanks for the help so far. I'm including you here in case you'd like to continue and welcome any other independent editors to review this request too. Thanks!
Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (
talk)
19:17, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)
Part of an edit requested by an editor with a conflict of interest has been implemented. |
Hi, I'm back with a shorter request before continuing with the Postmaster General section updates. One of the statements in the introduction incorrectly states the timing of the launch of the USPS 10-year plan: "Upon assuming office in June 2020, he instituted a 10-year plan for the USPS that eliminated overtime, banned late or additional trips to deliver mail, decommissioned hundreds of high-speed mail-sorting machines, and removed some mail collection boxes from streets."
The 10-year plan was not launched until the following year, per media coverage such as this Washington Post article, and the Postal Service press release. I think that the language in the introduction is likely the result of confusion between the media coverage of operational issues in 2020 and the launch of the 10-year plan, which came later and established a number of major changes to the Postal Service. To resolve this, could the sentence be edited to remove mention of the 10-year plan?
I've written a couple of revised sentences to replace this sentence and better reflect the events, based on the sourcing and how this is now described within the Postmaster General section: "Upon assuming office in June 2020, DeJoy was widely criticized for making changes to the service that slowed mail delivery, including the reduction of overtime hours and additional late trips to deliver mail. He was also criticized for established USPS practices such as decommissioning older mail-sorting machines and removing mail collection boxes from low-traffic areas."
As always, I'm open to feedback on this. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 20:00, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello again! To wrap things up my Postmaster general section update requests, I have one final round of suggestions. Editors can find a comparison of my changes with the pre-update version of the Postmaster general section in my user space, highlighted to show removals in red and altered passages in in blue. The revised version shows altered language highlighted in blue and brand new language in in green. You can view the comparison by following this link.
For the final few requests for this section, I have a table of the last four updates that I'm suggesting for what is now the final subsection of the Postmaster general section. The table shows the current text, proposed new content or updates, and the final column provides an explanation. Here's the table:
Current version | Proposed change | References and/or comments |
---|---|---|
N/A | After the Biden administration contacted the Postal Service about the possibility of mailing free COVID-19 test kits to Americans in December 2021, DeJoy collaborated with the White House to help USPS deliver approximately 380 million home test kits from January 2022 through May 2022. [1] [2] [3] | New sentence to add under the final subsection, about Mr. DeJoy's role in getting approximately 380 million free COVID test kits mailed to Americans, since multiple sources discuss this. |
N/A | In February and March of 2022, DeJoy worked with Rep. Carolyn Maloney and Rep. James Comer to build bipartisan support for the Postal Service Reform Act of 2022, which lifted financial burdens placed on the Postal Service by the 2006 Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act and required the agency to continue delivering mail six days per week. [1] [4] The bill was signed into law by President Joe Biden on April 6, 2022. [4] | Two sentences to add to the final subsection about Mr. DeJoy's role in getting postal reform passed, again since multiple sources discuss his involvement in the reform bill. |
In 2022, DeJoy flouted instructions by the Joe Biden administration to electrify the USPS fleet. Instead, DeJoy put in a $11.3 billion order to renew the existing USPS fleet with mostly gasoline-powered vehicles. [5] [6] The EPA criticized the USPS for the order, pointing to the environmental costs of the fleet ($900 million of damage over 20 years), the low fuel efficiency, and the short-sightedness of making a long-term investment in gasoline-powered vehicles. [6] [7] In response to the backlash, DeJoy signaled that the USPS may add more electric trucks to the order. [8] | In February 2022, DeJoy was criticized by Democrats for placing a $11.3 billion order to renew the USPS fleet with primarily gas-powered vehicles. [9] [6] DeJoy cited an ongoing Postal Service environmental review as well as the agency's grave financial condition as reasons for not including more electric vehicles in the initial order. [10] | Removed claim that Mr. DeJoy "flouted" Biden WH instructions to electrify fleet and reworded the rest of the passage so that it reflects sourcing to explain that DeJoy received criticism from Democrats about the lagging fleet electrification, and add in the response from DeJoy which is discussed in sources including this Bloomberg piece. |
Following an April 2022 lawsuit from 16 states regarding slow rates of electrification of its vehicles, the USPS later shifted to the majority of vehicles purchased being electric, supported by additional funding from Congress including the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act in August 2022. [11] | Following an April 2022 lawsuit from 16 states regarding slow rates of electrification of its vehicles, the USPS later shifted to the majority of vehicles purchased being electric, supported by additional funding from Congress including the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act in August 2022. [12] In December 2022, DeJoy and senior members of the Biden administration announced plans to buy 66,000 electric vehicles for the USPS fleet, with a goal of purchasing almost exclusively electric delivery vehicles by 2026. [13] The first order in this plan, a contract to purchase 9,450 EVs manufactured by Ford and 14,000 electric vehicle charging stations, was announced in February 2023. [14] [15] [16] | Added two sentences to provide specifics about the measures taken to further electrify fleet. |
References
Once again, I'm happy to provide any further clarification needed on any of the above. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 19:56, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. |
Hello, I'm back! I'd like to ask editors to consider the Personal life section. Would it be reasonable to remove most or all of the second paragraph? For reference, here's the text:
Extended content
|
---|
'The couple have twin children [1] and maintain at least two homes: one in the Kalorama neighborhood in Washington, D.C., [2] [3] [4] and the other, from prior to DeJoy's government appointment and bought with Wos in 2005, [5] a 10,900-square-foot (1,010 m2) mansion [5] in the Irving Park Historic District next to the Greensboro Country Club Golf Course [6] [7] in Greensboro, North Carolina. [8] [9] [10] The latter has been the location of several political fundraising events. [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] References
|
I understand that Mr. DeJoy and his wife are both public figures, but their children are not. And providing the location of their homes feels slightly invasive. I worry the information might be used for harassment purposes, especially considering one of the citations on the sentence about his Greensboro home links to a tweet containing the address of the country club near the house.
To be clear, I'm not necessarily asking that the fundraising mention be expunged. (Though obviously, his efforts in that area are covered pretty extensively in the Republican Party fundraising section.) I'm more concerned about the exposure of Mr. DeJoy's personal details, some of which I believe are protected under Wikipedia's Biography of living persons guidelines.
Thanks in advance to any editors who jump in to help here. Cheers! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 17:58, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Clarification / feedback needed
Regards, Spintendo 18:23, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
Notes
References
Hey there! I'm proposing that information about Mr. DeJoy's former company, New Breed Logistics, be added to the Business section. You can see what I'm suggesting below. The new sentence is highlighted in green. It basically bisects what is now the first sentence of the section. I've formatted it here so that, if editors approve it, all they need to do is remove the highlighting code and it should be good to post to the article:
References
As chairman and CEO of New Breed Logistics, DeJoy spent decades in collaboration with the U.S. Postal Service... The company received Quality Supplier Awards from the Postal Service on four separate occasions.
I think this new information is relevant considering that Mr. DeJoy went on to become postmaster general. It establishes that, though he did not work for the Postal Service prior to taking over as PMG, the company he ran as CEO worked with the agency frequently and proficiently enough that it recognized New Breed as a valued partner.
I'll tag in three editors here, who have been helpful in reviewing USPS and Mr. DeJoy-related material over the past few months. User:Beland, User:Quetstar, and User:Spencer: you're all welcome to take a look, as are any other independent editors. If you've got thoughts or questions, I'm here to field them. Thank you! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 21:25, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
References
As chairman and CEO of New Breed Logistics, DeJoy spent decades in collaboration with the U.S. Postal Service... The company received Quality Supplier Awards from the Postal Service on four separate occasions.
With the Business section now updated, I'm going to move on to the Republican Party fundraising one, in which I'm proposing a few changes related to Mr. DeJoy and his former company New Breed's alleged involvement in a "straw donor" scheme. All formal investigations (FBI, FEC, and Wake County, NC) into that incident were subsequently dropped, and I've pulled press reports that confirm as much. My suggested revisions are below, with language I'm asking be stricken highlighted in red and new language highlighted in green. Please click the drop-down to take a look:
Suggested Republican Party fundraising revisions
|
---|
In September 2020 The Washington Post and The New York Times reported that according to former employees at DeJoy's logistics company New Breed, he participated in a straw donor scheme, reimbursing employees for making political donations. Employees, particularly managers, were expected to contribute to fundraisers for Republican candidates and organizations; they were allegedly reimbursed in full through the company's system of bonuses. [1] Campaign finance records show that employees at New Breed gave substantial sums to Republican candidates and negligible amounts to Democrats. Between 2000 and 2014, when New Breed was sold, 124 employees gave a combined total over $1 million. Many of these people had not donated before they worked at the company and have not done so since leaving. [2] Pressuring employees to make campaign donations, reimbursements for such donations, and use of corporate money to support individual politicians are in violation of both North Carolina and federal election laws, although some statutes of limitations may have expired. [3] At an August congressional hearing DeJoy emphatically denied having engaged in such practices. [1] The House Committee on Oversight and Reform has opened an investigation into the allegations and the possibility that DeJoy lied to the committee, and has called for the Postal Service to suspend him. [4] North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein said that reimbursing someone for a political contribution would be a violation of the law and that "Any allegation that's this serious merits investigation." [5] By the end of 2020, the Wake County, North Carolina district attorney's office had decided that it would not pursue a criminal investigation of New Breed's alleged campaign finance law violations. The office formally announced this decision in April of the following year. [6] That same month, the Federal Election Commission dismissed two criminal complaints against DeJoy, citing approximately 20 New Breed employees who denied being pressured to make campaign contributions. [7] CNN reported in June 2021 that the FBI was investigating the matter. [8] [9] That investigation was eventually closed, with no charges being filed, as reported by Time in March 2023. [10] References
|
Here's a detailed rundown of my suggested changes:
Again, my broad aim with these updates is to "close the loop" and provide solid information on how these developments concluded. As always, I'm happy to discuss my suggestions with independent editors. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 20:53, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
The articles of both Megan Brennan and John E. Potter have more robust "Early Life" sections concerning their subjects. Does anyone know of sources that would give where DeJoy went to high school, the names of his parents, etc? Maximilian775 ( talk) Maximilian775 ( talk) 14:01, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello! I'm back to ask if editors would consider a pair of updates to the article. First, I have a request for the Business subsection. Within the subsection, there is a paragraph about the audit of USPS contracting processes relating to the contracting of New Breed from 1992 onwards, and the first sentence is somewhat misleading. It mentions only one of the administrations in power during the time of the contracts with USPS. Could the sentence that currently reads:
Be adjusted to:
:A 2001 audit found that under President George H. W. Bush and President Bill Clinton, the USPS had given New Breed Logistics noncompetitive contracts of more than $300 million starting in 1992.
These changes highlighted in blue would make this more accurate: the audit covered the contracts issued in the period from 1992 to 2001, so, the contracts were issued under President George H.W. Bush and President Bill Clinton. (Neither the audit nor the cited NBC News report mentions President Bush or President Clinton.) Also, the audit and source both discuss "contracts" vs. one contract. Can the sentence be edited to add Clinton and correct to "contracts" as suggested above?
Second, could we add a sentence about Mr. DeJoy's private sector experience to the Selection and conflict of interest controversy subsection? Existing text is below, for context, and my new sentence is highlighted in green:
Selection and conflict of interest controversy + new content
|
---|
In the process to identify a new postmaster general, the USPS Board hired two search firms, neither of which included DeJoy in their final list of candidates. [1] USPS Board Chair Mike Duncan, who had also served as chairman of the Republican National Committee and had known DeJoy personally, was involved with DeJoy's recommendation for the role. [1] DeJoy was the first postmaster general in two decades without prior experience in the United States Postal Service. [2] Instead he had three decades of experience in the private delivery sector. [3] [4] References
|
That language appears verbatim within the United States Postal Service article, as a clarification that though DeJoy did not come from the Postal Service bureaucracy, he did have extensive experience in logistics.
I'll tag in User:Beland and User:Spencer here, since they've fielded past requests and seem to have an interest in the quality of this article. Any help or guidance I can get here would be much appreciated. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 00:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
Edit request partially implemented
"he had three decades of experience in the private delivery sector". The article in fact only states
"The cost-cutting measures, intended to address the Postal Service’s longtime financial problems, were imposed last month after DeJoy, a Republican fundraiser and former supply-chain executive, took over the top job in June.. If only one source confirms this information, then that is the source that should be used with the proposal.
Regards, Spintendo 22:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello again! Jonathan from USPS here. I wanted to ask if editors would consider amending a sentence about Mr. DeJoy's role in the passage of the Postal Service Reform Act. The current sentence reads:
My proposed revision is:
References
My contention is that DeJoy's in-person lobbying efforts were more influential in winning Republican support for the bill than his association with Trump. The latter is intangible and sort of ill-defined, whereas the former is more concrete. It's something that definitively happened.
I've cited just one source above, to avoid reference overkill, but I want to emphasize that this particular detail has been covered pretty extensively by the press. Please see this Politico article: "[DeJoy] partnered with the [Biden] administration on the initiative to distribute Covid-19 tests through the mail and lobbied Republican lawmakers to support postal reform legislation championed by Democrats."
As well as this American Prospect piece: "DeJoy actively lobbied for the postal reform bill, encouraging his fellow Republicans to sign on."
And a report from the Federal News Network: "DeJoy played an active role in pitching the legislation to Republican lawmakers skeptical of earlier USPS reform efforts, but ultimately won them over by providing a 10-year reform plan of the agency planned to dig out a financial hole."
Alright, I've made my case. I believe that User:Beland, going off a previous request of mine, wrote the first version of the sentence, so I'll let them chime in here, if they wish to. But other editors are welcome to contribute to the discussion as well. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 11:21, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello again! I'd like to suggest some revisions to the Other donations and board work section, which is largely accurate but hasn't been updated in a little while. I'll put the current section and my own section draft in collapsible boxes, so that editors can easily compare, and then down below I'll detail the changes I'm asking for:
Current version of Other donations and board work
|
---|
DeJoy donated $747,000 to Duke University in 2014, funding Blue Devil Tower and the DeJoy Family Club at the football stadium. That year, his son was accepted to the school and joined the school's tennis team as a walk-on. [1] His daughter also attended Duke, majoring in music. [2] DeJoy serves on the Elon University board of trustees. [3] [4] References
|
Revised version of Other donations and board work
|
---|
DeJoy donated $747,000 to Duke University in 2014, funding Blue Devil Tower and the DeJoy Family Club at the football stadium. That year, his son was accepted to the school and joined the school's tennis team as a walk-on. [1] In 2005, [2] DeJoy and his wife founded the Louis DeJoy and Aldona Wos Family Foundation, through which they have provided donations to academic scholarships, [3] [4] including establishing the DeJoy-Wos Odyssey Scholars Endowment at Elon University. [5] DeJoy is on the board of the Fund for American Studies. [6] In 2022, DeJoy and his wife funded nine scholarships for North Carolina and Estonia-based students to attend Fund for American Studies programs. [7] DeJoy serves on the Elon University board of trustees. [8] [9] References
|
My suggested changes are as follows:
As always, I'm available to discuss any of my suggested changes with independent editors. Thank you! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 17:22, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
Revised version of Other donations and board work, Take Two
|
---|
DeJoy donated $747,000 to Duke University in 2014, funding Blue Devil Tower and the DeJoy Family Club at the football stadium. That year, his son was accepted to the school and joined the school's tennis team as a walk-on. [1] In 2005, [2] DeJoy and his wife founded the Louis DeJoy and Aldona Wos Family Foundation, through which they have provided donations to academic scholarships, [3] [4] including establishing the DeJoy-Wos Odyssey Scholars Endowment at Elon University. [5] DeJoy is on the board of the Fund for American Studies. [6] DeJoy serves on the Elon University board of trustees. [7] [8] References
|
De Joy has done nothing but bring the USPS down. Please list the steps needed to get rid of him. 2601:342:100:CE30:3D7A:720:CFED:96BA ( talk) 15:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:37, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
His wife is listed as a Polish-American yet there's nothing of his background? That's odd. What's his family background? Is he a Polish-American too? Or a Russian-American? How did he get to be CEO? When was he born? What year did he graduate university? There's so much missing from this. It's one of the most ridiculously lacking pages I've ever seen on Wikipedia. 101.109.211.6 ( talk) 23:55, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
Emir of Wikipedia, I would prefer to stop edit warring and discuss this, but the WP:ONUS is on you to change the formatting from what is standard. KidAd ( talk) 17:32, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
To add to this article: DeJoy's net worth (total assets). 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 22:23, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Why has this basic information not yet been added? 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 23:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Was DeJoy a donor or fundraiser to any prior Republicans such as Romney, McCain or Bush etc and if he was should it be mentioned in the article or was he a Democratic donor prior to Trump 🌸 1.Ayana 🌸 ( talk) 21:56, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Louis DeJoy is a Republican Party Mega-Donor - Not just a "fundraiser". 69.142.189.57 ( talk) 22:05, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
Are DeJoy's (and DeJoy's wife's) investments in shipping companies in competition with the USPS $30 million or $75 million, or some other number? Why such a wide variation? 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 23:20, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Emir of Wikipedia, you added the recentism tag on the article. I disagree with this addition, because the article does have some information on his past dealings as a businessman, but the reality of the situation is that he is notable almost exclusively for his role as postmaster general. Thus, I think the tag should be removed. What do others think? Sam-2727 ( talk) 18:11, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
His claim to fame, and how he got this Post Office appointment, is that he has been a champion fundraiser for Republicans. The Washington Post has just reported that when DeJoy owned a business in North Carolina, he got his employees to donate to Republican candidates and organizations, then reimbursed them for the contributions. That, of course, would be illegal. Should we mention it? My feeling is, not at this time since it's just reporting from a newspaper. If an investigation is launched we could report that. Here is the WaPo article for future reference: [1] -- MelanieN ( talk) 01:47, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
To add to this article: the subpoena issued in early September 2020 to force DeJoy to turn over documents he had previously failed to turn over to Congress. It's ridiculous that this information was not already included in this article! 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 06:42, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Content on DeJoy's changes to the USPS, the thing that this man is by far most known for and which the body covers at the greatest length, was removed from the lead. The content was removed by the editor 'Emir of Wikipedia'. Now the lead basically just says that he's the head of the USPSP and nothing more, even though the body is full of content. The content should be restored ASAP. Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 20:03, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
I agree we need something in the lead about his changes, but not the wording that was removed. It did not explain the situation well at all. This was the removed material:
A few months into his tenure as Postmaster General, the U.S. Postal Service’s watchdog concluded that the quality and timeliness of postal service deliveries had declined. [1] After DeJoy's reforms were walked back, USPS mail deliveries improved. [2]
Sources
- ^ Palazzolo, Rebecca Smith and Joe (2020-10-22). "Mail Service Deteriorated After Postmaster General Louis DeJoy's Arrival, Watchdog Found". Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660. Retrieved 2020-10-23.
- ^ "USPS Delivering More Mail on Time After Walking Back DeJoy's Reforms". Government Executive. Retrieved 2020-10-29.
I will work on a better explanation for the lead and propose it here. -- MelanieN ( talk) 20:41, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
Here's my proposal. I did not include any references since the rest of the lead doesn't, and everything is detailed and well referenced in the text.
Upon assuming office in June 2020 he instituted a number of cost-cutting measures such as banning overtime, forbidding late or extra trips to deliver mail, removing and dismantling hundreds of high-speed sorting machines, and removing some mail collection boxes from streets. The changes caused significant delays of mail delivery, resulting in investigations by Congressional committees and the postal service inspector general. In August DeJoy announced that the changes would be suspended, and in October the USPS agreed to reverse all the changes.
@ Snooganssnoogans, Neutrality, Emir of Wikipedia, and KidAd: Thoughts? -- MelanieN ( talk) 21:22, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
The last sentence of my version is In August, DeJoy announced that the changes would be suspended, and in October the USPS agreed to reverse all the changes.
User:Bdeneris changed it to As a result of the Congressional investigation, in August, DeJoy agreed that further changes would be suspended. On October 27, 2020, only six days before the election, a judge ordered the USPS to immediately reverse all mail collection changes.
User:Emir of Wikipedia reverted the change. IMO Bdeneris's version is an improvement and I would like to reinstate it - possibly leaving out "only six days before the election". --
MelanieN (
talk)
16:34, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Agree Bdeneris ( talk) 21:17, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 04:55, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
The article claims that DeJoy reversed and undid his destruction of the post office, but it’s now May 2021 and in Palo Alto, California, we still don’t have our corner mail drops back. I have to drive 3 miles to the post office to mail a letter. Valerie voigt ( talk) 10:32, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
"In addition, Congressman Tim Ryan has referred to the SEC a $54 million purchase of Oshkosh stock made hours before the contract was announced" - link to news article (56)does not sate this. 2601:147:4380:4740:8464:6874:642C:D91B ( talk) 19:35, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Is DeJoy of French heritage? 173.88.246.138 ( talk) 01:27, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
I live in the City of Aiken. Alot of our mail is said to have been delivered but is never delivered. We have called the local post office and the tell us once the carrier says it's delivered it not their problem. How can we resolve this issue. The last package was our license plate was said to have been delivered on 2/18/23 at our mailbox.When my wife checked there was nothing in our mailbox. Our mailbox is labeled 8181 Truman Ave. Aiken, South Carolina 29803. Please help. Thank you 159.250.133.42 ( talk) 22:02, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hi there! I'm a U.S. Postal Service employee working as a COI editor to improve various USPS-related pages. My full conflict-of-interest declaration is on my user page, and you can see the edits I've requested by consulting from my user contributions history.
I want to request a minor edit to the postmaster general's article. A few weeks ago, editors added to the infobox that Mr. DeJoy has received a BBA from Stetson University and an MBA from MIT. The former is correct—here's a link to a New York Times article that says as much—but I'm not sure where the latter claim comes from. I have asked around internally at USPS and confirmed that Mr. DeJoy doesn't have an MIT degree of any kind. The claim doesn't seem to have appeared in any reliable media outlets either. Could editors please remove it? Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 17:21, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello again! I'm returning to this Talk page to place another edit request that I hope will improve the quality of the article. My request concerns the Postmaster general section of this article. Since I'm suggesting a number of changes to the existing version of the section, I've uploaded a revised section draft to a subsection of my user page. For the most part, I kept the existing material in the section, with some edits and adjustments. I did remove a few sentences, each of which I have noted below, along with the reasons why. The main changes in the draft are the additions of new information based on more recent sourcing, some of which provided an update or conclusion to details in the existing section. I also added over a dozen new sources, to help solidify content in the section. To make it easy for editors to identify parts of my draft that are different from what currently exists in the article: brand new language that I have added is highlighted in green, and language that I have adjusted in order to make it more accurate is highlighted in blue.
In the revised section draft I have:
I know this is a longer request than I've made before. I'm happy to discuss this piece by piece, but wanted to share the whole section so that you can see the entirety of what I'm requesting in context. While I've aimed to align all of this with Wikipedia's content guidelines, I'm very open to feedback. If any editors would like to help with these changes or have thoughts on them, please let me know. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 19:09, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
Current version | Proposed change | Reference and comments |
---|---|---|
Current version 1 | Proposed change 1 | Reference and comments |
Current version 2 | Proposed change 2 | etc. |
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Okay, I'm back! Following User:Spencer's helpful advice above, I have added the current version of the Postmaster general section to my user space, so that it can be easily compared against my revised section draft. Under the current version, I've highlighted material that my revised version of the section removes in red, and flagged passages that I have altered in blue. And then in the revised version, altered language is highlighted in blue and brand new language is in green. You can view both versions of the section by following this link.
I realize that editors probably won't want to tackle every change my revised section proposes at once, so I've assembled a table that details the first four updates I'm suggesting within the first three paragraphs of the section. In that last column on the right, I've briefly explained what I'm trying to accomplish and indicated any new sourcing I use in the revised draft. Here's the table:
Current version | Proposed change | References and/or comments |
---|---|---|
On May 6, 2020, the USPS Board of Governors, all selected by Trump and confirmed by the Senate, announced DeJoy's appointment as postmaster general and CEO, despite concerns about conflicts of interest. | On May 6, 2020, the bipartisan USPS Board of Governors, all selected by Trump and confirmed by the Senate, announced DeJoy's appointment as postmaster general and CEO, despite concerns about conflicts of interest. | Adding "bipartisan" to reflect composition of USPS board at time DeJoy was appointed. |
DeJoy did not go through the normal vetting process for postmaster general; two separate search firms were used by the USPS board, and neither firm mentioned DeJoy in their list of candidates. | Two search firms were used by the USPS board, and neither firm mentioned DeJoy in their list of candidates. | Removing editorializing language while keeping salient fact. |
While he divested shares in UPS and Amazon before taking on his role, DeJoy drew scrutiny for not divesting from his $30–$75 million equity stake in XPO, a subcontractor for USPS. Under his tenure as postmaster general, USPS has increased its business with XPO. Additionally, when DeJoy sold his Amazon shares, he purchased stock options in Amazon that represent between 20 and 100% of his prior holdings. USPS prioritizes Amazon package delivery. | While he divested shares in UPS and Amazon before taking on his role, DeJoy drew scrutiny for not divesting from his $30–$75 million equity stake in XPO, a subcontractor for USPS. Under his tenure as postmaster general, USPS has increased its business with XPO. Additionally, when DeJoy sold his Amazon shares, he purchased stock options in Amazon that represent between 20 and 100% of his prior holdings. USPS prioritizes Amazon package delivery. An investigation carried out by the Postal Service's inspector general found that DeJoy "met all the applicable ethics requirements" related to his investments. | Adding that USPS inspector general looked into DeJoy's investments and found him in compliance with ethics requirements, per Washington Post and Bloomberg. |
Mail collection boxes were removed from the streets in many cities; after photos of boxes being removed were spread on social media, a postal service spokesman said they were being moved to higher traffic areas but that the removals would stop until after the election. | In the summer of 2020, the longstanding practice of removing mail collection boxes from low-traffic areas became a controversial issue, as photos of their removal spread on social media. This practice had been ongoing for decades, due to the public's declining use of first-class mail. In August 2020, DeJoy announced that the Postal Service would halt the removal of mailboxes and decommissioning of mail-sorting equipment until after the November election. | Adding dates to clarify timeline, further clarifying that removal of mailboxes was an established practice as opposed to something USPS had started doing in summer 2020, per Washington Post article cited in current version, and two new sources: Time and New York Times. |
I hope that lays everything out clearly. If not, I'm happy to clarify anything. User:Spencer, you might have interest in this, but obviously any other independent editors are welcome to review this request as well. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 22:22, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Once again, I'm back, with the next chunk of changes to the "Postmaster general" section. As mentioned above, the current version of the Postmaster general section is in my user space, highlighted to show removals in red and altered passages in in blue. That page also shows my revised version, with altered language highlighted in blue and brand new language in in green. You can view both versions of the section by following this link.
Continuing from my last request, I have a table of the next six updates that I'm suggesting for paragraphs six through eleven of the section. In that last column on the right, I've briefly explained what I'm trying to accomplish and indicated any new sourcing I use in the revised draft. Here's the table:
Current version | Proposed change | References and/or comments |
---|---|---|
After congressional protests, the USPS inspector general began a review of DeJoy's policy changes and whether he was complying with federal ethics rules;. | After congressional protests, the USPS inspector general began a review of DeJoy's policy changes. | The USPS IG's ethics review and the investigation into policy changes are two separate incidents, and the ethics review is covered earlier in this section (paragraph 2). |
In September 2020, a court blocked the USPS from sending Colorado households a mailer with false and misleading information about vote-by-mail for Colorado. Secretaries of state had requested that DeJoy show them previews of the mailers that the USPS intended to send out, but DeJoy refused. [1] | In September 2020, a court blocked the USPS from sending Colorado households a mailer with false and misleading information about vote-by-mail for Colorado. [2] [3] Secretaries of state also requested that DeJoy and his staff show them previews of any future mailers that the USPS intended to send out. [3] [4] | Adding new sourcing and clarifying the request from Secretaries of State. This request came out of the lawsuit following the distribution of an initial set of mailers, and asked for advance review of future mailers. |
The government institution agreed to reverse removal of collection boxes and mail sorting machines, closure or consolidation of mail processing facilities, reduced retail hours, banning or restricting overtime, and restriction of late or extra trips for timely mail delivery, affecting all 50 states. | The government institution agreed to stop removal of collection boxes and mail sorting machines, closure or consolidation of mail processing facilities, reduced retail hours, banning or restricting overtime, and restriction of late or extra trips for timely mail delivery, affecting all 50 states. | Changing "reverse" to "stop"; the mailboxes were not replaced but the practice was halted, so "stop" is a more accurate term. |
USPS was sued in federal court in September of 2020 by American Oversight to "compel the release of directives, guidance, analyses, and key emails from Postmaster General Louis DeJoy and his chief of staff related to voting by mail" after USPS failed to respond to FOIA requests for such information within the legally designated time period. [5] [6] When USPS released DeJoy's calendar in response to the lawsuit, it was almost entirely redacted. [6] | USPS was sued in federal court in September of 2020 by American Oversight to "compel the release of directives, guidance, analyses, and key emails from Postmaster General Louis DeJoy and his chief of staff related to voting by mail" after USPS failed to respond to FOIA requests for such information within the legally designated time period. [7] [6] When USPS released DeJoy's calendar in response to the lawsuit, it was almost entirely redacted. [6] A March 2021 report from the Postal Service's inspector general found that the vast majority of mail-in ballots and registration materials in the 2020 election were delivered to the relevant authorities on time. [8] [9] | Adding a sentence about how USPS performed in 2020 election. |
In addition, Congressman Tim Ryan has referred to the SEC a $54 million purchase of Oshkosh stock made hours before the contract was announced. Biden then nominated three people to fill the four vacancies on the USPS board of governors under Democratic pressure. He does not have the authority to remove DeJoy. [10] | In addition, Congressman Tim Ryan referred to the SEC a $54 million purchase of Oshkosh stock made hours before the contract was announced. | Grammatical fix to reflect that the referral is an event that already happened, not an ongoing matter. Removing sentence that is more about USPS Board than about DeJoy. |
DeJoy and his wife currently have $30-70 million invested in companies related to the USPS. [11] He plans to further slow down first-class mail delivery, reduce post office hours, and raise postage prices--which would impact voters, families, and small businesses in several states. [12] With the mostly Trump-appointed USPS board of governors behind him, when asked how much longer he intended to stay postmaster general, he said: "A long time, get used to me." [10] | DeJoy and his wife currently have $30-70 million invested in companies related to the USPS. [13] | Removing the passage about DeJoy's "plans" as it's speculative, and coverage since has shown that DeJoy did not reduce postal service hours or intend to slow service. |
I've included full citations above, where necessary, and tried explain each change in some detail, but I'm happy to clarify anything further.
User:Spencer, thanks for the help so far. I'm including you here in case you'd like to continue and welcome any other independent editors to review this request too. Thanks!
Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service (
talk)
19:17, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)
Part of an edit requested by an editor with a conflict of interest has been implemented. |
Hi, I'm back with a shorter request before continuing with the Postmaster General section updates. One of the statements in the introduction incorrectly states the timing of the launch of the USPS 10-year plan: "Upon assuming office in June 2020, he instituted a 10-year plan for the USPS that eliminated overtime, banned late or additional trips to deliver mail, decommissioned hundreds of high-speed mail-sorting machines, and removed some mail collection boxes from streets."
The 10-year plan was not launched until the following year, per media coverage such as this Washington Post article, and the Postal Service press release. I think that the language in the introduction is likely the result of confusion between the media coverage of operational issues in 2020 and the launch of the 10-year plan, which came later and established a number of major changes to the Postal Service. To resolve this, could the sentence be edited to remove mention of the 10-year plan?
I've written a couple of revised sentences to replace this sentence and better reflect the events, based on the sourcing and how this is now described within the Postmaster General section: "Upon assuming office in June 2020, DeJoy was widely criticized for making changes to the service that slowed mail delivery, including the reduction of overtime hours and additional late trips to deliver mail. He was also criticized for established USPS practices such as decommissioning older mail-sorting machines and removing mail collection boxes from low-traffic areas."
As always, I'm open to feedback on this. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 20:00, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello again! To wrap things up my Postmaster general section update requests, I have one final round of suggestions. Editors can find a comparison of my changes with the pre-update version of the Postmaster general section in my user space, highlighted to show removals in red and altered passages in in blue. The revised version shows altered language highlighted in blue and brand new language in in green. You can view the comparison by following this link.
For the final few requests for this section, I have a table of the last four updates that I'm suggesting for what is now the final subsection of the Postmaster general section. The table shows the current text, proposed new content or updates, and the final column provides an explanation. Here's the table:
Current version | Proposed change | References and/or comments |
---|---|---|
N/A | After the Biden administration contacted the Postal Service about the possibility of mailing free COVID-19 test kits to Americans in December 2021, DeJoy collaborated with the White House to help USPS deliver approximately 380 million home test kits from January 2022 through May 2022. [1] [2] [3] | New sentence to add under the final subsection, about Mr. DeJoy's role in getting approximately 380 million free COVID test kits mailed to Americans, since multiple sources discuss this. |
N/A | In February and March of 2022, DeJoy worked with Rep. Carolyn Maloney and Rep. James Comer to build bipartisan support for the Postal Service Reform Act of 2022, which lifted financial burdens placed on the Postal Service by the 2006 Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act and required the agency to continue delivering mail six days per week. [1] [4] The bill was signed into law by President Joe Biden on April 6, 2022. [4] | Two sentences to add to the final subsection about Mr. DeJoy's role in getting postal reform passed, again since multiple sources discuss his involvement in the reform bill. |
In 2022, DeJoy flouted instructions by the Joe Biden administration to electrify the USPS fleet. Instead, DeJoy put in a $11.3 billion order to renew the existing USPS fleet with mostly gasoline-powered vehicles. [5] [6] The EPA criticized the USPS for the order, pointing to the environmental costs of the fleet ($900 million of damage over 20 years), the low fuel efficiency, and the short-sightedness of making a long-term investment in gasoline-powered vehicles. [6] [7] In response to the backlash, DeJoy signaled that the USPS may add more electric trucks to the order. [8] | In February 2022, DeJoy was criticized by Democrats for placing a $11.3 billion order to renew the USPS fleet with primarily gas-powered vehicles. [9] [6] DeJoy cited an ongoing Postal Service environmental review as well as the agency's grave financial condition as reasons for not including more electric vehicles in the initial order. [10] | Removed claim that Mr. DeJoy "flouted" Biden WH instructions to electrify fleet and reworded the rest of the passage so that it reflects sourcing to explain that DeJoy received criticism from Democrats about the lagging fleet electrification, and add in the response from DeJoy which is discussed in sources including this Bloomberg piece. |
Following an April 2022 lawsuit from 16 states regarding slow rates of electrification of its vehicles, the USPS later shifted to the majority of vehicles purchased being electric, supported by additional funding from Congress including the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act in August 2022. [11] | Following an April 2022 lawsuit from 16 states regarding slow rates of electrification of its vehicles, the USPS later shifted to the majority of vehicles purchased being electric, supported by additional funding from Congress including the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act in August 2022. [12] In December 2022, DeJoy and senior members of the Biden administration announced plans to buy 66,000 electric vehicles for the USPS fleet, with a goal of purchasing almost exclusively electric delivery vehicles by 2026. [13] The first order in this plan, a contract to purchase 9,450 EVs manufactured by Ford and 14,000 electric vehicle charging stations, was announced in February 2023. [14] [15] [16] | Added two sentences to provide specifics about the measures taken to further electrify fleet. |
References
Once again, I'm happy to provide any further clarification needed on any of the above. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 19:56, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. |
Hello, I'm back! I'd like to ask editors to consider the Personal life section. Would it be reasonable to remove most or all of the second paragraph? For reference, here's the text:
Extended content
|
---|
'The couple have twin children [1] and maintain at least two homes: one in the Kalorama neighborhood in Washington, D.C., [2] [3] [4] and the other, from prior to DeJoy's government appointment and bought with Wos in 2005, [5] a 10,900-square-foot (1,010 m2) mansion [5] in the Irving Park Historic District next to the Greensboro Country Club Golf Course [6] [7] in Greensboro, North Carolina. [8] [9] [10] The latter has been the location of several political fundraising events. [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] References
|
I understand that Mr. DeJoy and his wife are both public figures, but their children are not. And providing the location of their homes feels slightly invasive. I worry the information might be used for harassment purposes, especially considering one of the citations on the sentence about his Greensboro home links to a tweet containing the address of the country club near the house.
To be clear, I'm not necessarily asking that the fundraising mention be expunged. (Though obviously, his efforts in that area are covered pretty extensively in the Republican Party fundraising section.) I'm more concerned about the exposure of Mr. DeJoy's personal details, some of which I believe are protected under Wikipedia's Biography of living persons guidelines.
Thanks in advance to any editors who jump in to help here. Cheers! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 17:58, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Clarification / feedback needed
Regards, Spintendo 18:23, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
Notes
References
Hey there! I'm proposing that information about Mr. DeJoy's former company, New Breed Logistics, be added to the Business section. You can see what I'm suggesting below. The new sentence is highlighted in green. It basically bisects what is now the first sentence of the section. I've formatted it here so that, if editors approve it, all they need to do is remove the highlighting code and it should be good to post to the article:
References
As chairman and CEO of New Breed Logistics, DeJoy spent decades in collaboration with the U.S. Postal Service... The company received Quality Supplier Awards from the Postal Service on four separate occasions.
I think this new information is relevant considering that Mr. DeJoy went on to become postmaster general. It establishes that, though he did not work for the Postal Service prior to taking over as PMG, the company he ran as CEO worked with the agency frequently and proficiently enough that it recognized New Breed as a valued partner.
I'll tag in three editors here, who have been helpful in reviewing USPS and Mr. DeJoy-related material over the past few months. User:Beland, User:Quetstar, and User:Spencer: you're all welcome to take a look, as are any other independent editors. If you've got thoughts or questions, I'm here to field them. Thank you! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 21:25, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
References
As chairman and CEO of New Breed Logistics, DeJoy spent decades in collaboration with the U.S. Postal Service... The company received Quality Supplier Awards from the Postal Service on four separate occasions.
With the Business section now updated, I'm going to move on to the Republican Party fundraising one, in which I'm proposing a few changes related to Mr. DeJoy and his former company New Breed's alleged involvement in a "straw donor" scheme. All formal investigations (FBI, FEC, and Wake County, NC) into that incident were subsequently dropped, and I've pulled press reports that confirm as much. My suggested revisions are below, with language I'm asking be stricken highlighted in red and new language highlighted in green. Please click the drop-down to take a look:
Suggested Republican Party fundraising revisions
|
---|
In September 2020 The Washington Post and The New York Times reported that according to former employees at DeJoy's logistics company New Breed, he participated in a straw donor scheme, reimbursing employees for making political donations. Employees, particularly managers, were expected to contribute to fundraisers for Republican candidates and organizations; they were allegedly reimbursed in full through the company's system of bonuses. [1] Campaign finance records show that employees at New Breed gave substantial sums to Republican candidates and negligible amounts to Democrats. Between 2000 and 2014, when New Breed was sold, 124 employees gave a combined total over $1 million. Many of these people had not donated before they worked at the company and have not done so since leaving. [2] Pressuring employees to make campaign donations, reimbursements for such donations, and use of corporate money to support individual politicians are in violation of both North Carolina and federal election laws, although some statutes of limitations may have expired. [3] At an August congressional hearing DeJoy emphatically denied having engaged in such practices. [1] The House Committee on Oversight and Reform has opened an investigation into the allegations and the possibility that DeJoy lied to the committee, and has called for the Postal Service to suspend him. [4] North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein said that reimbursing someone for a political contribution would be a violation of the law and that "Any allegation that's this serious merits investigation." [5] By the end of 2020, the Wake County, North Carolina district attorney's office had decided that it would not pursue a criminal investigation of New Breed's alleged campaign finance law violations. The office formally announced this decision in April of the following year. [6] That same month, the Federal Election Commission dismissed two criminal complaints against DeJoy, citing approximately 20 New Breed employees who denied being pressured to make campaign contributions. [7] CNN reported in June 2021 that the FBI was investigating the matter. [8] [9] That investigation was eventually closed, with no charges being filed, as reported by Time in March 2023. [10] References
|
Here's a detailed rundown of my suggested changes:
Again, my broad aim with these updates is to "close the loop" and provide solid information on how these developments concluded. As always, I'm happy to discuss my suggestions with independent editors. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 20:53, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
The articles of both Megan Brennan and John E. Potter have more robust "Early Life" sections concerning their subjects. Does anyone know of sources that would give where DeJoy went to high school, the names of his parents, etc? Maximilian775 ( talk) Maximilian775 ( talk) 14:01, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello! I'm back to ask if editors would consider a pair of updates to the article. First, I have a request for the Business subsection. Within the subsection, there is a paragraph about the audit of USPS contracting processes relating to the contracting of New Breed from 1992 onwards, and the first sentence is somewhat misleading. It mentions only one of the administrations in power during the time of the contracts with USPS. Could the sentence that currently reads:
Be adjusted to:
:A 2001 audit found that under President George H. W. Bush and President Bill Clinton, the USPS had given New Breed Logistics noncompetitive contracts of more than $300 million starting in 1992.
These changes highlighted in blue would make this more accurate: the audit covered the contracts issued in the period from 1992 to 2001, so, the contracts were issued under President George H.W. Bush and President Bill Clinton. (Neither the audit nor the cited NBC News report mentions President Bush or President Clinton.) Also, the audit and source both discuss "contracts" vs. one contract. Can the sentence be edited to add Clinton and correct to "contracts" as suggested above?
Second, could we add a sentence about Mr. DeJoy's private sector experience to the Selection and conflict of interest controversy subsection? Existing text is below, for context, and my new sentence is highlighted in green:
Selection and conflict of interest controversy + new content
|
---|
In the process to identify a new postmaster general, the USPS Board hired two search firms, neither of which included DeJoy in their final list of candidates. [1] USPS Board Chair Mike Duncan, who had also served as chairman of the Republican National Committee and had known DeJoy personally, was involved with DeJoy's recommendation for the role. [1] DeJoy was the first postmaster general in two decades without prior experience in the United States Postal Service. [2] Instead he had three decades of experience in the private delivery sector. [3] [4] References
|
That language appears verbatim within the United States Postal Service article, as a clarification that though DeJoy did not come from the Postal Service bureaucracy, he did have extensive experience in logistics.
I'll tag in User:Beland and User:Spencer here, since they've fielded past requests and seem to have an interest in the quality of this article. Any help or guidance I can get here would be much appreciated. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 00:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
Edit request partially implemented
"he had three decades of experience in the private delivery sector". The article in fact only states
"The cost-cutting measures, intended to address the Postal Service’s longtime financial problems, were imposed last month after DeJoy, a Republican fundraiser and former supply-chain executive, took over the top job in June.. If only one source confirms this information, then that is the source that should be used with the proposal.
Regards, Spintendo 22:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello again! Jonathan from USPS here. I wanted to ask if editors would consider amending a sentence about Mr. DeJoy's role in the passage of the Postal Service Reform Act. The current sentence reads:
My proposed revision is:
References
My contention is that DeJoy's in-person lobbying efforts were more influential in winning Republican support for the bill than his association with Trump. The latter is intangible and sort of ill-defined, whereas the former is more concrete. It's something that definitively happened.
I've cited just one source above, to avoid reference overkill, but I want to emphasize that this particular detail has been covered pretty extensively by the press. Please see this Politico article: "[DeJoy] partnered with the [Biden] administration on the initiative to distribute Covid-19 tests through the mail and lobbied Republican lawmakers to support postal reform legislation championed by Democrats."
As well as this American Prospect piece: "DeJoy actively lobbied for the postal reform bill, encouraging his fellow Republicans to sign on."
And a report from the Federal News Network: "DeJoy played an active role in pitching the legislation to Republican lawmakers skeptical of earlier USPS reform efforts, but ultimately won them over by providing a 10-year reform plan of the agency planned to dig out a financial hole."
Alright, I've made my case. I believe that User:Beland, going off a previous request of mine, wrote the first version of the sentence, so I'll let them chime in here, if they wish to. But other editors are welcome to contribute to the discussion as well. Thanks! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 11:21, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello again! I'd like to suggest some revisions to the Other donations and board work section, which is largely accurate but hasn't been updated in a little while. I'll put the current section and my own section draft in collapsible boxes, so that editors can easily compare, and then down below I'll detail the changes I'm asking for:
Current version of Other donations and board work
|
---|
DeJoy donated $747,000 to Duke University in 2014, funding Blue Devil Tower and the DeJoy Family Club at the football stadium. That year, his son was accepted to the school and joined the school's tennis team as a walk-on. [1] His daughter also attended Duke, majoring in music. [2] DeJoy serves on the Elon University board of trustees. [3] [4] References
|
Revised version of Other donations and board work
|
---|
DeJoy donated $747,000 to Duke University in 2014, funding Blue Devil Tower and the DeJoy Family Club at the football stadium. That year, his son was accepted to the school and joined the school's tennis team as a walk-on. [1] In 2005, [2] DeJoy and his wife founded the Louis DeJoy and Aldona Wos Family Foundation, through which they have provided donations to academic scholarships, [3] [4] including establishing the DeJoy-Wos Odyssey Scholars Endowment at Elon University. [5] DeJoy is on the board of the Fund for American Studies. [6] In 2022, DeJoy and his wife funded nine scholarships for North Carolina and Estonia-based students to attend Fund for American Studies programs. [7] DeJoy serves on the Elon University board of trustees. [8] [9] References
|
My suggested changes are as follows:
As always, I'm available to discuss any of my suggested changes with independent editors. Thank you! Jonathan with U.S. Postal Service ( talk) 17:22, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
Revised version of Other donations and board work, Take Two
|
---|
DeJoy donated $747,000 to Duke University in 2014, funding Blue Devil Tower and the DeJoy Family Club at the football stadium. That year, his son was accepted to the school and joined the school's tennis team as a walk-on. [1] In 2005, [2] DeJoy and his wife founded the Louis DeJoy and Aldona Wos Family Foundation, through which they have provided donations to academic scholarships, [3] [4] including establishing the DeJoy-Wos Odyssey Scholars Endowment at Elon University. [5] DeJoy is on the board of the Fund for American Studies. [6] DeJoy serves on the Elon University board of trustees. [7] [8] References
|
De Joy has done nothing but bring the USPS down. Please list the steps needed to get rid of him. 2601:342:100:CE30:3D7A:720:CFED:96BA ( talk) 15:29, 3 May 2024 (UTC)