US Postal Service

The company does not disclose sufficient emissions data to meaningfully assess its past or projected future performance against its 1.5°C pathway. The company should report its emissions intensity, its own and subcontracted emissions by mode, and activity data per tonne per kilometre. This will enable the company to create a more robust transition plan . USPS faced recent scrutiny over its share of low-carbon vehicles and has consequently made plans to purchase at least 33,800 battery-electric delivery vans. Further purchases should also be detailed in the company’s transition plan.

USPS has set two targets. The first is to reduce its scope 1 and 2 emissions by 25% by 2030 compared to 2019. The second is to reduce its scope 3 emissions by 30% by 2025 compared to 2008. However, USPS does not include its subcontracted transport activities in its scope 3 target. Additionally, a lack of data means it is not possible to assess the company’s targets against its 1.5°C pathway. The company should develop a science-based, long-term target that covers all its operations. It should also set regularly spaced intermediate targets aligned with its 1.5°C pathway. This will maintain focus on short and medium-term actions while committing to long-term change.

The company has developed a low-carbon transition plan which mainly focuses on increasing the consideration of climate change impacts within the business and among employees. However, USPS has not conducted climate scenario analysis to inform its transition plan and ensure the plan’s ambition is sufficient for a 1.5°C pathway. To improve, the company should add verifiable and quantifiable key performance indicators and financial commitments to its plan and ensure the plan is aligned with a 1.5°C pathway.

USPS invested USD15 million in research and development (R&D) in 2021. However, the company does not disclose what proportion of its R&D expenditure is invested in low-carbon vehicles and energies. USPS runs a facility in Virginia for the design, development and testing of postal equipment and operating systems. The company should ensure that a significant proportion of its R&D investment is in low-carbon vehicles and fuel development. The company has the capacity to enhance its research in low-carbon solutions and can benefit by doing this.

USPS has set a target to reduce scope 1 and 2 emissions by 25% by 2030 compared to 2019 and scope 3 emissions by 30% by 2025 compared to 2008 . However, the company does not disclose emissions and activity data and does not include its substantial subcontracted transport in its scope 3 emissions .

The company intends to shift an undisclosed proportion of its services from air to surface transport. It also plans to electrify its owned fleet by 2035. It has qualitative plans and is increasingly considering climate change impacts to inform its business model . It does not disclose plans for its subcontracted road fleet.

USPS spent USD 15 million on R&D in 2021 but did not disclose spending on low-carbon technologies. USPS is scheduling deliveries based on volume, reducing the number of empty vehicles on the road as well as overall mileage. USPS has identified climate risks but not yet implemented mitigations.

Emissions data disclosed by the company from 2015 to 2020 is insufficient to provide a meaningful assessment of its historic emissions intensity trend. After public pressure, the company confirmed in July 2022 that 40% of its new vehicles will be battery electric.

USPS’ scope 1 emissions reduction target is supported by its recent commitments to electrify its fleet. However, its scope 3 target is undermined as it does not include its subcontracted transport activities. Additionally, the company needs to disclose more data to assess its alignment with its 1.5°C pathway.

No evidence was found of the company’s commitment to social dialogue or of the categories of stakeholders the company engages with on a just transition. Furthermore, no evidence was found to demonstrate the company’s ongoing social dialogue and meaningful engagement with affected stakeholders.

No evidence was found of the company undertaking low-carbon transition planning to mitigate the social impacts of the transition on workers, affected stakeholders and its business relationships. Additionally, no evidence was found to demonstrate the company’s engagement in social dialogue or engagement with stakeholders in its just transition planning.

No public commitment by the company was found stating its intention to create and support access to green and decent jobs as part of the low-carbon transition. Moreover, no evidence was found of the company’s action to promote these jobs in a way that ensures gender balance and inclusion of vulnerable groups. Additionally, no relevant disclosure was found of the company’s assessment of employment dislocation risks.

No public commitment by the company was found stating its intention to reskill and upskill workers displaced by the transition to a low-carbon economy. Additionally, no evidence was found that the company reskills and upskills workers in a way that ensures gender balance and inclusion of vulnerable groups.

No relevant disclosure was found to show if the company identifies impacts of the low-carbon transition on social protection for workers and affected stakeholders, nor how it contributes to social protection. Additionally, no evidence was found that the company expects its business relationships to contribute to the social protection of their workers and affected stakeholders.
No relevant disclosure was found to show how the company identifies any misalignment of its lobbying activities with policies and regulations that support the just transition, nor of the measures it takes to address misalignment. Furthermore, no evidence was found that the company lobbies for policies and regulations for green and decent job creation; retention, education and reskilling; and social protection for workers.

No evidence was found of a company commitment to respecting human rights or the ILO fundamental rights at work. Furthermore, the company can increase disclosure on its human rights due diligence process, engagement with affected stakeholders and grievance mechanisms available to workers and external stakeholders.

While the company expects its business relationships to limit required working hours to 40 hours per week, no evidence was found of the same limit within its own operations. The company discloses the proportion of its direct workforce covered by collective bargaining agreements and the gender of its workforce by employee category. However, it can strengthen its disclosure on these subjects. Furthermore, the company can strengthen its commitments to worker health and safety and gender equality and women’s empowerment.

The company commits to protecting personal data. However, no evidence was found of a privacy statement regarding the collection, sharing and access to personal data of employees and customers. Furthermore, the company can strengthen disclosure on its global tax strategy, anti-bribery and anti-corruption policy and lobbying and political engagement policy.