Greg Bell, Executive Vice President, APWU
Another conservative think tank has jumped on the “privatize everything but the last mile” bandwagon.
In a June 2013 report titled “Postal Reform for the Digital Age,” the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) offers a plan that “would preserve the USPS monopoly on ‘final mile’ delivery while opening up the collection, transport, sorting and processing of the mail to much greater competition.” In other words, privatize all postal operations except delivery.
Where have we heard that before?
Earlier Privatizers’ Report
In January, a group of self-proclaimed “postal industry thought leaders” published a paper that advocates contracting out all postal functions except delivery — a plan that is often referred to as “the last mile strategy.” The paper was titled “Restructuring the U.S. Postal Service: The Case for a Hybrid Public-Private Partnership.” In coordination with the paper’s publication, the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA), a congressionally chartered non-profit organization, announced that it was conducting an “independent” review of the proposal.
In May, NAPA published its review of the proposal to privatize all postal operations except delivery and concluded the idea “merits serious consideration.”
The NAPA review didn’t quite endorse the proposal to privatize everything but delivery, but it gave a sense of legitimacy to the concept, which up to now has been dismissed as extreme.
The fact is the NAPA review was financed in part by a contribution from Pitney-Bowes, one of the largest pre-sort companies in the country. Pitney-Bowes owns more than 40 mail processing centers and stands to be a major beneficiary if mail processing operations are contracted out to the private sector.
Any postal study financed by those who stand to profit from privatization or dismantling of the Postal Service cannot be considered independent, neutral or credible.
Now a different group is promoting the same message, advocating the same privatization concept with a similar approach and same end game — to privatize a $65 billion per year public service agency in order to redirect that revenue to private industry.
Different Group, Same Objective
According to the June 2013 report, the USPS has lost nearly $30 billion in the last three fiscal years, due to the decline in first-class mail.
You have to read nearly halfway through the report to find any mention of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act (PAEA) and the fact that “Many groups, including the USPS, have argued that the [PAEA] unfairly forces USPS to overfund retirement benefits of current and future employees.”
The fact that no other private business or government agency is required to pre-fund healthcare benefits for future employees is omitted.
If the Postal Service is losing money in the face of declining volume, how do private profit-seeking businesses expect to make money? The report is clear. “Private sector work rules are demonstrably more flexible than those currently in place for Postal Service career employees.” In addition, the report says, “Some of the savings would also come from paying private sector wages and salaries, which are lower than USPS salaries.”
You might wonder, “What about our contract and our no-layoff clause?” No problem, according to the report. Congress simply needs to “give USPS the authority to close post offices, sorting facilities and other facilities, to layoff postal workers, and to choose how many days a week to deliver mail.” The Postal Service should give employees notice “and some reasonable severance pay, but it should avoid generous early retirement packages as these make it harder to cut costs,” it says.
Who’s Bailing Out Who?
The report ominously warns that, “Many defenders of USPS, including some mailers, the paper and letter industry, and the postal unions want taxpayers to bailout the USPS.”
Where have we heard that before? From an honorary co-chair of the “think tank,” Rep. Darrell Issa.
Rep. Issa has been promoting the myth that the Postal Service is seeking a taxpayer bailout ever since he took over as Chairman of the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee and began drafting his version of postal reform legislation. He even suggests that the USPS is funded by taxpayers.
In fact, the U.S. Treasury recently raided federal and postal employees’ retirement funds, borrowing money to prevent the federal government from defaulting on the national debt.
However, the Postal Service has overpaid billions of dollars into these accounts, but government has refused to return the surplus — even while the USPS is closing post offices and mail sorting facilities, reducing services and delaying mail.
The Treasury also borrowed from the pre-funding account that is pushing the Postal Service toward insolvency.
“Defenders” of the Postal Service aren’t looking for a bailout. Returning overpayments made by the USPS to the Civil Service Retirement Fund (CSRS) and the Federal Employee Retirement System (FERS) is not a bailout. Treating the Postal Service like every other business and government agency when it comes to pre-funding retiree health benefits is not a bailout.
Calling these things a bailout is a privatizers’ talking point with no basis in reality.
It’s by no coincidence that the drafted postal bill released by Rep. Issa includes provisions that would enhance the closing of post offices and mail processing facilitates and eliminate postal workers’ protection against layoffs.
These “privatization reports” have Issa’s fingerprints all over them, one way or another.
The continuous effort of those who want to dismantle and privatize the Postal Service underscores the urgency for us to take whatever action is necessary to Save America’s Postal Service.
I love when you see these union reps write long opinion pieces about how the republicans are killing the p.o but you never see them on the work floor. They spend about 10 minutes out of a 8 hr work day on the work floor. The rest of the day they’re doing ” union work ” behind a closed door. Oh when they’re running for election they spend hours on the work floor .. go figure.If you wanna see your union rep have elections every other day.
I did get a laugh after reading that they are counting on low informed postal workers not bothering to read this well balanced report. Where do these people come from that post on these sites?
Issa may be a smart businessman but he is also a poor congressman. He couldn’t buy a senate seat. The plan he proposes is wonderful for the
Private contractors who are going to fleece postal employees and American citizens. He also wants to disregard fed rif guidelines. Severence
Is based on years of service and also anyone over 40 gets
Time added. I wonder too about veteren preference? No dem will vote for this
And many republicans won’t either.
Annie,
Bill Clinton’s treasury secretary said that there were “no tangible assets in the social security fund”. In 1977 congress passed legislation to put social security payments into the general fund and Jimmy Carter signed it…the same as our pre fund payments, as well as all monies from all revenue pools under management by the government.
Hey Tired Mailman, my mommy thinks I’m in the basement but I am at your mommy’s house poking her cinnamon ring and tossing her some throat yogurt!
It is all about me and the money. me me me
USPS has many accounts set up for employees. Retirement, thrift, medical
Do think the money is in the accounts or filled with iou’s?
Our mail boxes are under Federal protection so why do you think The USPS mgmt wants to keep street delivery and give for rest to private industry?
If the USPS goes private 600,000 employees lose everything ?
THE ACCOUNTS FILLED WITH IOU’S will not have to be repaid?
Private industry takes over low wages,barebones medical, no retirement plan, NO MORE MIDDLE CLASS AMERICANS ….
IT IS ALL ABOUT ME ME AND THE MONEY.
Answer this. Is our Federal Social Security funds in the lock box account or is it opened and filled with IOU’S?
All of the recent PMGs come from the floor. All of the APWU Officers come from the floor. My point is – is that none of them are blind to the rancid culture that exists in the plants. How come NO ONE has tried to change this Postal culture? The culture that causes us to bankrupt our souls as well as our bottom line? The reason is both profit from the status quo.
In 17 years I have seen one person fired. After six months UA, he came back and demanded to be fired so he could get unemployment. He had to shame management into action. Now the second one may be fired for going home regularly on the clock. After others threatened to go to the inspectors about it management was shamed into action. Another person has been to work 8 times in 2013 and can walk through the door at any time and go back to work. If you were in trouble the word was to take out a loan with the Postal Credit Union, the step two designee was also the manager of the credit union and no one who owed money has ever had discipline go past level two.
Our postal culture was bankrupt long before our bank account and both management and the Union are to blame.
Think Tank ? Thinking FOLLOW the money ! Just ladle off the CREAM and feed the balance to the peons ! ! Whilst the old customer gets the gaff , but NO service.
Hey ET does your Mom know you’re in the basement using the computer?
Talk about a moron “Tired Mailman”…I know it was voice voted but it was still passed unanimously…that means the D’s and the R’s voted for it in mass. Why don’t you look up the definition of “Unanimous” idiot!
Take a dirt nap fool if your that tired! I have a bar of soap that is smarter than you. Your are one of the “low info” voters I mentioned, you failed to refute anything I said. Since you mentioned it…F*#K YOU shitbird!
Bipartisan bill huh? Look it up moron it was a voice vote, there is no record of who voted how and what the numbers were. Conservatives never let the facts get in the way of your idiotic uneducated talking points. You’re all about hurray for me and f*#k you
Gee Whiz Greg, so you use the term “conservative” as a negative to try and discredit what appears to be a well balanced report by this group. I take it that you are counting on your typical “low information” postal worker to not look up and actually read this report, and you might be right about that but some of us will. You did not prove that this “think tank” were a bunch of conservative bent on destroying the Post Office, you merely said they were. Just because you say it doesn’t make it true. That makes you appear to be every bit as partisan as you claim they are for your own selfish reasons and out of a sense of self preservation. Your article can be discredited in the same fashion as your attempt to discredit this groups policy paper. Your worried that the politicians might read this and act on it? REALLY Greg! They don’t even read the bills they pass that become law.
You failed to mention in this hit piece that Obama’s former director of OMB Peter Orzag has also called for privatization and Obama himself has called for 5 day delivery, which according to you liberals is a “first step” toward that end. You and the other liberal democrats always fail to mention that the PAEA had two democrat cosponsors and that it passed both chambers of government UNANOMOUSLY!, that means very few people voted against it, D and R alike, even the NALC endorsed it for crying out loud! You and the partisan left always want to settle the outcome of the vote for the PAEA in the terms of “..well Bush Signed it!”…while whining about the lack of bipartisanship in Washington, let me give you some ABC type information here…the PAEA is a bipartisan bill…is that crystal clear to you? If you are going to regurgitate the past don’t pick and choose which facts you choose to present, present all of them.
Bell,you Guffey, Strunk,Morris, and all of you fools in the APWU who supported the management dictated piece of crap CBA should all resign and let competent people who are for the best interests of the members and not management and inflating the numbers of APWU represented employees with PSE’s take over leadership of the union.