The 78 or 80 percent of costs that are represented by personnel, I am not going to ask how that compares with other service industries, but let me just ask: Is that a stable number?

There are about half a million retirees right now?

But 2 years was more acceptable to GAO. Is that correct?

So as Congress would consider policy decisions such as a reduction in service from 6 to 5 days, you could go back to your constituents and explain to them how this is all going to work.

I think what we just heard, it could cycle on and off. Part of the year, busier times.

If you go from 6 to 5 days, some of your customers, including your competitors, might be less inclined to use you as a partner for going that last mile.

You say it pays on average 13 percent more than the Federal Government pays, provides for most of its employees?

I was privileged to work with her a couple of years ago on this legislation, and I never thought at the time that we would continue to work on it as much as we have.

Actually, there might even be an opportunity to partner with Members of Congress.

Are you asking for maybe a test drive, a year or so, see how it works out, do you have enough flexibility?

What I am asking for is that the Board be given the latitude to evaluate our mail volumes and to make decisions, in concert with our mailers, on when it would be prudent to roll back or eliminate six day delivery.

And roughly what percent--is the loss greater in First-Class? Where is it the greatest?

Let me just say, we think around here about echo effect.

It has not gained traction.

I would just urge the Subcommittee to keep those in mind.

When will that happen?

What I really would like to hear from you on this question is what are some economic opportunities that the Commission has recognized, identified, that maybe should be pursued, or should be pursued somehow differently.

The Postal Service wants that as well. We will continue to talk in those areas.