Office Of Inspector General’s audit of USPS Officer Compensation for Calendar Year 2012
This report presents the results of our audit of calendar year (CY) 2012 compensation paid to or deferred by officers of the U.S. Postal Service (Project Number 13BG016FT000). The objective of the audit was to determine whether the Postal Service complied with the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 (Postal Act of 2006), Postal Service policies and guidelines, and IRS regulations for CY 2012 compensation paid to officers.
The Postal Act of 2006 amended Title 39 of the U.S. Code and revised the cap imposed on total compensation payable to Postal Service employees. Compensation includes annual salary, merit lump sum payments,3 bonuses, awards, and annuity payments. Table 1 explains the three compensation levels for CY 2012.4
Although the Postal Service complied with IRS regulations for CY 2012, it did not always comply with annual officer compensation caps in the Postal Act of 2006. This occurred because management previously misinterpreted the relevant statutory authority in the Postal Act of 2006. Our finding is tied to this misinterpretation.
Of the 36 officers whose files we reviewed, we identified three whose compensation exceeded or otherwise failed to comply with the compensation caps imposed by the Postal Act of 2006. As shown in Table 3, we identified one officer whose compensation exceeded or otherwise failed to comply with the compensation caps, as the Postal Service did not consider the officer’s annuity to be part of the base salary for computing the compensation cap. We also identified two officers who, the Postal Service asserts, were designated among the top 12 critical positions by the Board, but who were not included on a list submitted to the OPM and Congress.
As a result, during CY 2012, the Postal Service paid a total of $142,075 above the compensation cap imposed by the Postal Act of 2006. Since management agreed to new criteria and will follow them going forward, we will not make recommendations related to compensation cap violations.
In addition, although management expressly decided to freeze officers’ salaries according to its 2012 annual report, we identified seven officers who received nominal salary increases during CYs 2011 and 2012. Management informed us that they received salary increases for promotions or for assuming greater responsibilities; however, all seven officers remained vice presidents. In our judgment, a mere shifting of responsibilities does not equate to a promotion. We are reporting this for informational purposes only, as management has the discretion to provide pay increases.
According to the Postal Service’s 2012 annual report, pay and bonuses for officers and executives remained frozen; however, we identified seven of 36 officers who received nominal salary increases during CYs 2011 and 2012 while they remained vice presidents. In addition, we identified two officers who received salary increases for their promotions from vice president to executive vice president. Management informed us that all nine officers received salary increases for promotions or for assuming significantly greater responsibilities due to restructuring. We agree that a move from vice president to executive vice president would be considered a promotion; however, while the other seven officers may have received additional or different responsibilities, they remained vice presidents. In our opinion, assuming additional or different responsibilities as a result of a restructuring and remaining at the same vice president level should not be considered a promotion. Therefore, the OIG does not agree that the officers were entitled to an increase, based on management’s disclosure to the public that it was freezing salaries. Since management has the discretion to provide pay raises, we are reporting this for informational purposes only.
Prior Audits
Funny how we get additional responsibilities all the time. And, then asking for the compensation has to come in the form of an EEO which is a joke.
It will all come out in the wash as soon as you don’t get your first Pay Check.!!!
They should eliminate all the POOM’s! Then all the useless AREA people!!1
Legal Corruption at its best!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
USPS has added several NEW VPs over the years, then has the nerve to say that the existing VPs are assuming “additional responsibilities.” What are all these new responsibilities anyway?
Damn. That sounds like something some sorry congressman would try.
the OIG is a complete waste. they have certainly failed miserably in achieving their stated goal of bring accountability and integrity to the united states postal service management and operation. while postal management is certainly responsible for the lies, deciet, corruption, and incompetence that seems to saturate it, the OIG/ office of the inspector general seems more like a co-conspirator than any
‘watch-dog’ that would help the situation.
Assuming greater responsibilities? Is that like when they add 20% more deliveries to your route, add more “reference volume” mail,
more parcels, more DPS and expect it all done in the same time for the same pay? Oh yeah and one more idiotic phrase in there, ” 12 critical positions?!?! I’ll bet that if they eliminated ALL of those twelve critical positions my customers WOULD NOT notice one scintilla of difference in their mail service. They are “Critical” only in their own minds.
Names?
AS Gomer Pyle would say Surprise, Surprise Surprise. Is anyone really surprised. Executives in the PO are nothing but leeches
Gee, imagine that.
Postal mgmt, liars and thieves ?
Whuuda thunk ?
Of course, not one will be held accountable, for anything.
As usual.
These corrupt, sleazy, unethical scum turn my stomach.
Why does this not surprise me?