Congratulations!  Because you responded when we needed you to, we were successful today in having the House Committee on Rules reject a proposed amendment by Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC) that would have changed the rules for postal employees unfortunate enough to be injured at work.  Due to the hundreds of email messages delivered to congressional offices throughout the weekend, and all day Monday, postal employees have prevailed!  There was also an amendment offered by Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) that would have had a devastating impact on the collective bargaining procedure, restricting the arbitrator in a way that would have forever prohibited a fair contract should the process have gone to arbitration.  Again, the House Committee on Rules rejected consideration of the Pence amendment!

 While the House will likely consider postal reform legislation either Tuesday or Wednesday, we still have a long way to go.  Following House action the bill will be considered in the Senate (likely in September).  Next, conferees will be appointed from the House and Senate to work out differences in the two bills.  The report of the conference will then have to be voted on in both the House and Senate, and finally to the desk of the president for his approval or veto. 

 Again, thank you for your help!

 Yours in union solidarity,

 Myke Reid, Legislative Director

American Postal Workers Union, AFL-CIO

Summary of Amendment Submitted to the Rules Committee

McHenry #5
Allows the Postal Service to provide workers’ compensation benefits on par with private sector benefits by: (1) limiting its Federal Employment Compensation Act (FECA) compensation benefits to 50% of salary for monthly payment amounts; (2) imposing a 3-day waiting period before paying benefits; and (3) encouraging beneficiaries to transition to the appropriate retirement program when they qualify for retirement.
 

Pence #7
Removes the requirement that the first vacant slot on the Board of Governors is to be filled by and individual with unanimous backing by the labor unions. Currently, the Board of Governors consists of 9 members (with no more than 5 from the same party).

House Rules Committee Approves Four Amendments for Consideration to Postal Overhaul Bill

Committee Action Reported by Voice Vote

Union Urges Opposition to Amendment To Limit Rights of Injured Workers

Burrus: Warnings About Proposed Postage Increase Overlook a Simple Truth

Immediate Release (pdf) 4/14/05

As the Senate and House of Representatives consider postal "reform" legislation, the U.S. Postal Service has warned that if legislation is not enacted quickly, postage rates will rise to 39 cents for a first-class letter. But the simple truth is being overlooked: If the mailing-industry lobby and the USPS get their way, the brunt of the increase will be born by individual mailers and small businesses. Meanwhile, big advertisers and corporations that send billions of pieces of mail each year will pay as little as 10 cents for first-class letters.

Incredibly, the Postal Service's rate increase application, filed on April 8, 2005, proposes to increase the discounts offered to advertising mailers. "While announcing to the world that the price of a stamp will rise if action is not taken," said APWU President William Burrus, "the USPS is quietly planning to give corporate mailers an even better deal than they enjoy now.

"Over the years, the mailing industry has established and expanded so-called 'worksharing discounts' for mailers who 'pre-sort' their mail by bundling it according to its destination, and adding bar codes. But the discounts far exceed the costs the USPS would incur if it sorted the mail itself," Burrus said.

"This corporate welfare drains billions of dollars in revenue from the Postal Service every year, forcing the USPS to raise postage and leaving individual mailers and small business to make up the difference. The Postal Service is a national treasure, and everyone must pay their fair share."

Burrus: Warnings About Proposed Postage Increase Overlook a Simple Truth (PDF)

White House Continues Opposition To Key Provisions of Postal ‘Reform’ Bills

APWU Web News Article #19-05, April 18, 2005

Continued White House opposition to two key elements of postal “reform” legislation was the subject of a hearing by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on April 14. The two provisions — involving releasing funds from escrow and transferring responsibility for military retirement payments — are supported by the USPS, mailers, the APWU and other postal unions, consumers, and lawmakers of both parties.

Members of the Senate committee grilled Treasury Department and Office of Personnel Management (OPM) officials about the administration’s opposition to releasing from escrow overpayments to the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS), as well as the administration’s opposition to returning to the Treasury responsibility for the military-service retirement pay of postal employees. The Senate bill (the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2005 - S. 662) includes both of the provisions at odds with White House wishes.

“Any meaningful effort at postal reform must include these provisions,” said APWU President William Burrus.

Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins (R-ME) accused the Bush administration of playing a “shell game,” and said it was unfair to force the Postal Service to “subsidize the federal balance sheet.” Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE) also challenged the administration’s position.

Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) issued an angry rebuke to the Bush administration witnesses and said he intended to speak to the president personally about the matter.

Anti-Labor Proposals

The Senate panel also heard from Postmaster General John E. Potter and Government Accountability Office Comptroller General David M. Walker, who renewed their support for proposals the union adamantly opposes.

One proposal, endorsed at the hearing by both Potter and Walker, would make postal workers’ healthcare and retirement benefits, which are currently guaranteed by law, “negotiable” in the collective bargaining process. Another, suggested by Walker, called for adjustments to the wage standards used in contract negotiations.

Neither of the two proposals is included in the pending legislation.

Potter identified several subjects as essential elements of postal reform: resolution of the escrow and military retirement issues, bargaining over employee healthcare and retirement costs, requiring arbitrators to consider economic conditions favorable to management when issuing contract awards, and granting the Postal Service exceptions to the postage rate caps currently mandated in the Senate bill.

“The unwavering advocates of postal reform may be losing an important ally,” observed APWU President William Burrus. “After itemizing the elements that he considers essential to a balanced approach to postal reform, the postmaster general concluded by saying if the proper balance is not achieved, ‘We are better off with no bill at all.’

“This raises the interesting possibility that postal management and the Board of Governors could oppose postal reform as defined in the pending legislation,” Burrus said. “Groups that have been staunch allies on postal reform in the past may end up on the opposite side.”

Not Supported by Facts

In written testimony submitted to the panel [PDF], Burrus asserted that some assumptions underlying the rush to “reform” are not supported by fact.

First, Burrus told the committee, there is no evidence that the growth of electronic forms of communication will erode “hard copy” communication sent through the mail. He noted that growth in mail presort pieces sent to American households grew by five percent between 2000 and 2003, despite a poor economy and the terrorist attacks, and he cited a recent study that concludes, “the more one communicates electronically the more likely one is to use physical mail.”

“The sky is not falling,” Burrus told the senators, “and new technology does not threaten the viability of the United States Postal Service.”

A second faulty assumption, he said, is that the addition of 1.8 million new addresses each year constitutes a burden that will drain revenue from the USPS. “The addition of these new customers is presented as a negative, but any other business would be thrilled by a projected growth of 1.8 million new customers each year,” he said. “Yet in the debate over postal reform, the implication is that each of the new delivery points generates more costs than revenue. I have yet to see specific evidence to support this conclusion.”

Addiction to Excessive Discounts

Burrus reiterated the union’s belief that after resolution of the escrow and military retirement issues, the primary threat to the financial viability of Postal Service is its “addiction to excessive ‘worksharing’ discounts,” which “undermines the institution’s financial underpinnings, and cannot be justified.”

“If the mailing-industry lobby and the USPS get their way,” the brunt of the recently filed postal rate increase “will be born by individual mailers and small businesses,” Burrus said in press statement  released at the hearing. “Meanwhile, big advertisers and corporations that send billions of pieces of mail each year will pay as little as 10 cents for first-class letters.”

“Incredibly, the Postal Service’s rate increase application,” he continued, “proposes to increase the discounts offered to advertising mailers. While announcing to the world that the price of a stamp will rise” if postal reform legislation is not enacted, he added, “the USPS is quietly planning to give corporate mailers an even better deal than they enjoy now.”

“This corporate welfare drains billions of dollars in revenue from the Postal Service every year, forcing the USPS to raise postage and leaving individual mailers and small business to make up the difference. The Postal Service is a national treasure, and everyone must pay their fair share.”

Burrus also criticized provisions in the Senate bill that would impose a three-day waiting period on injured postal workers before they would be eligible for Workers’ Compensation. “Imposing a waiting period for worker compensation eligibility is unfair and inhumane – especially in light of the risks postal workers continue to face as they process and deliver America’s mail,” he said.

House Panel Approves its Version

The day before the Senate hearing, the House Government Reform Committee unanimously approved its version (H.R. 22) of postal reform legislation, which closely mirrors the legislation it approved last year. Last year’s bill never was scheduled for a vote in the full House.

Before voting 39-0 to send H.R. 22 to the full House of Representatives, the committee amended the bill to require the USPS to transport mail only on U.S. airlines.

No date has been set for floor debate on the House measure, and it remains to be seen whether lawmakers in either chamber will take up the matter without first resolving disagreements with the White House over the CSRS escrow and military retirement issues.

Postal Reform Legislation Introduced in Senate

APWU News Bulletin #04-2005, March 18, 2005| PDF

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), chair of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, introduced a postal reform bill March 17 that is similar to legislation approved by the panel last year. The measure was co-sponsored by Sen. Thomas R. Carper (D-DE) and Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH).

Senate bill S.662 does not contain controversial anti-union language requested by the USPS Board of Governors that would have required postal unions to bargain for healthcare and retirement benefits that are currently guaranteed by law. The bill also omits the Board’s proposal that would have required arbitrators to consider a selective set of economic criteria when ruling on postal workers’ contracts. Consideration of these economic factors would have guaranteed that the wages and benefits of postal employees would be eroded and would have ensured union opposition to the bill, APWU President William Burrus said.

The bill contains an important provision – opposed by the White House – that would relieve the Postal Service of responsibility for the retirement costs for military service of USPS employees, returning the obligation to the U.S. Treasury. No other federal agency pays these costs.

The bill relieves the Postal Service of the obligation to place in escrow (beginning in Fiscal Year 2006) overpayments to the Civil Service Retirement System that would have resulted under the old funding formula. The bill requires the USPS to pre-pay health benefits for retirees.

The Senate bill retains language limiting excessive “worksharing” discounts, with only minor differences from the language adopted by the committee last year. The APWU agreed to the final wording contained in the bill, which was the subject of extensive debate.

The bill includes a provision that would require workers who are injured on the job to miss three days of work before becoming eligible for workers’ compensation. “The union is concerned about provisions that would restrict the rights of injured postal workers,” Burrus said. “We object to any legal disparity between postal employees and other federal workers, and we will urge lawmakers to adopt the House model on this issue.” The House bill (H.R. 22), introduced in January by Rep. John McHugh (R-NY), is similar to the Senate bill, but does not reduce compensation for injured workers.

The bill would change the way postage rates are set. Approval for postage increases by the Postal Rate Commission would no longer be required, but the USPS would not be able to increase postage rates by more than the annual increase in the Consumer Price Index.

“The fight is far from over,” Burrus cautioned. “The bills may be subject to amendment when they are considered by the full Senate and House, and we must ensure that our position remains clear as the bills move through the legislative process.” If the bills are approved in their respective chambers, a House-Senate conference committee must be established to reconcile differences between the two versions.

“Throughout this process, mailers and others will continue to lobby for their views,” Burrus said, “and we must fight for ours.”

Postal Reform Legislation Introduced in Senate -

Hypocrisy Has No Bounds

Burrus Update # 4-2005, March 15, 2005

I am often amazed at the hypocrisy found in political debate when large sums of money are at stake. And in the debate over postal “reform” legislation, some major mailers have taken hypocrisy to new heights.

These corporate and advertising mailers seem willing to go to any length to protect the excessive postage discounts they have come to enjoy. And while they vigorously defend the postage discounts they receive for “worksharing” – even when the discounts exceed the costs the Postal Service avoids – they decry postal wages, claiming that postal workers are overpaid.

Some History

As a part of a 1976 postage rate case, the Postal Rate Commission approved “worksharing” postage discounts, which the commission asserted would facilitate the Postal Service’s transition from manual and mechanized sorting to automation. The justification for the reduced postage was that the mailers would perform functions – such as affixing bar codes to their mail – that would otherwise require labor by postal employees. Under the plan approved by the Postal Rate Commission (PRC), the savings to the Postal Service that resulted when mailers performed these functions would reduce the postage rates for those who engaged in worksharing.

The American Postal Workers Union opposed the postage discounts from their inception. The discounts were arbitrary exceptions to the principle of uniform rates, a hallmark of the Postal Service, we pointed out. And they were a gift to mailers with influential lobbyists that would ultimately harm the Postal Service, we said.

Under the guise that these rate reductions would be phased out as USPS sorting was automated, discounts were approved as “transitional rates.” Yet now, after 29 years and more than $10 billion invested in postal automation, worksharing discounts continue unabated.

No Longer Justified

There is no longer justification for postage discounts based on barcoding by mailers. Bar codes are just one of the indicia that identify recipients – no different than the name, street address, and city.

In fact, during the 29-year period that postage discounts have been in effect, manufacturers in virtually every industry have added bar codes to their products – bar codes that are used by the retailer – with no cost reduction. Manufacturers who affix bar codes to cans of peas don’t get a discount because they make it easier for grocery stores to track purchases and conduct inventory, and publishers don’t get discounts because they add bar codes to the covers of the books they provide to bookstores. Computerization has transformed bar codes from an added identifier to a routine means of identification.

The postage discounts of 1976 simply can no longer be justified. The costs to the Postal Service for applying bar codes have declined dramatically in the intervening years, as automation has taken hold. But despite the erosion of the rationale for these excessive discounts, large mailers continue to offer illogical and contradictory arguments in an attempt to justify their continuation.

Even worse, the corporate and advertising mailers are currently engaged in an all-out effort to convince the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, which is preparing postal reform legislation, that these excessive discounts should be codified into law.

Our Efforts

In 2003, in response to testimony by the American Postal Workers Union, the President’s Commission on the U.S. Postal Service recommended that “all new worksharing discounts be limited to the postal cost avoided.” [Emphasis added.] APWU believed this recommendation was insufficient, because it would have permitted excessive discounts that were already in existence to continue indefinitely.

The following year, after intense efforts by the APWU, language was added to a bill introduced in the House of Representatives that would limit worksharing discounts. The bill included several exceptions that were intended to protect the USPS revenue stream and minimize the disruption to large mailers and private mail-processing operations.

In a Senate bill, the language governing worksharing discounts granted additional exceptions that were so broad they would have rendered the provisions meaningless. Fortunately, through the efforts of Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) and Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), an amendment was adopted that would have limited the exceptions to an appropriate standard – the costs avoided by the Postal Service.

The bills were not acted on during the 108 th Congress, but similar legislation is again under consideration. A bill pending in the House of Representatives (H.R. 22) includes the same language on worksharing discounts as last year’s bill, and legislation is expected to be introduced in the Senate soon.

Under Attack

But the limitations on excessive discounts are now under renewed attack, as the mailers’ lobbyists attempt to obscure the relationship between postage discounts and postal costs.

At stake is the amount to be paid in postage by the large mailers who account for more 90 percent of letter mail. Excessive discounts have a devastating effect on postal revenue and, as a result, on the funds available for service to small businesses and individual customers, as well as on postal wages.

The debate over postage discounts exposes the rank hypocrisy of the large mailers who complain that the wages of postal employees are too high, while they scramble to ensure that they continue to receive discounts that are larger than the postal labor cost.

I have previously challenged the large mailers to accept a cost-avoided standard and in several published papers they have responded to the challenge. These responses have been in editorials that differ dramatically from their posture on Capitol Hill.

When hundreds of millions of dollars are at stake in unjustified subsidies, truth is the first casualty and irrational logic becomes the norm.

William Burrus
President

Burrus: Hypocrisy Has No Bounds

Action on Postal 'Reform' Legislation Expected Soon

Burrus Update #3-2005, March 11, 2005

Legislation to overhaul the Postal Service is on track to be presented in the Senate soon, and discussions between the White House and the Senate and House committees with jurisdiction are ongoing.

The major issues of concern to APWU that are under discussion are:

1. Whether the Postal Service will continue to be responsible for the retirement costs for military service of USPS employees (no other federal agency pays these costs);
    

2. The release from escrow of approximately $70 billion that the Postal Service overpaid to the Civil Service Retirement fund;
    

3. Weakening the limits on excessive “worksharing” discounts that were adopted by the Senate committee last year;
    

4. Restrictions on USPS authority to increase rates;
    

5. Changes to the pricing and classification of single-piece parcel-post mail that could force the Postal Service to discontinue providing the service; and
    

6. Reductions to compensation for employees who are injured on the job.

In addition, the following anti-union proposals have been circulated, but have not been accepted by the sponsors of the legislation:

7. A request by the USPS Board of Governors [PDF] and the Postmaster General that would require the union to negotiate for benefits – such as healthcare and retirement – that are currently guaranteed by law; and
    

8. A proposal that would require arbitrators to factor into their decisions on postal worker contracts a selective set of economic criteria (such as the Postal Service’s “present financial health”) that would virtually guarantee that the wages and benefits of postal workers would be eroded.

APWU is engaged in the discussions to resolve the outstanding issues. However, items 7 and 8 are viewed as destructive, anti-union amendments. Their consideration would require the APWU – and perhaps other postal unions – to use all of our resources to defeat this effort at postal “reform.”
 

William Burrus
President

Postal Reform: The Struggle Continues

APWU President William Burrus

Postal workers also face the lingering prospect of postal reform. In January, a House postal reform measure was one of the first bills proposed in the 109th Congress and it is expected that the Senate as well will renew its efforts to enact postal legislation. (See Page 32.) Congress is spurred by influential forces who continually push reform at the top of their agenda.

The rationale for reform, though widely debated, generally is misunderstood by the average employee. As a result, much of our membership views the entire process as alien to their individual interests. While there is an appreciation that the decline in mail volume in recent years has likewise led to a decrease in the size of the postal workforce, few employees connect the dots between postal reform and their employment next year and into the future.

The union has attempted to frame this debate in personal terms so that individual employees can relate to the possible impact. Some employees “get it,” while many others believe that, if reform is instituted, it will still be business as usual, because that is how it has always been.

Inevitable, Dramatic Change

If postal reform as presently being considered is signed into law, the working life of postal employees will change dramatically, and I do not mean 20 years from now. The possibilities of change will include the communities where postal plants will be located, the tour and timing of work, the activities involved in the work performed, and, if the “reformers” have their way, changes to the rate of pay for work performed.

Changes are, of course, inevitable in our rapidly evolving world. Our industry actually has been protected against the wrenching changes that competition has inflicted upon virtually every major industry in our country. Unfortunately, these union-won protections too often have led to complacency among our members and a belief that things will always be as they have been.

Well, brothers and sisters, fasten your seatbelts, because change is on the way. The passage of postal reform will put in place processes and pressures that will ensure change immediately, constantly, and far into the future.

We are protected contractually by no-lay-off provisions, so there is no danger that in the short run current employees will suffer the fate of millions of other displaced American workers. But while contract-modification language in the proposals made by the President’s Commission on the U.S. Postal Service have not been included in proposed legislation, the White House continues to insist that postal reform include some adjustments to the collective bargaining process.

I am equally concerned about the effect of the proposed Postal Regulatory Board and the arbitrary cap on future rates that are included in the pending bills. These easily could have a strong negative impact on employee compensation.

Mailers’ Primary Objective

Despite the lofty public pronouncements as to the reasons for postal reform, the primary objective of those hoping to exert their influence is to control rate increases for the major mailers. In that they provide over 70 percent of total mail volume, without their use of mail, obviously, the postal system and the relatively high number of postal jobs would collapse. We expect that the mailers will demand “controlled” postal costs. No matter how flowery the rhetoric, the underlying driving force of postal reform is cheap postage.

The current legislation in the House of Representatives and a similar measure expected in the Senate have similar provisions for cost control. The central provision in the legislation is the establishment of a Postal Regulatory Board with the authority to establish regulations governing the Postal Service.

The purpose of such regulations will be to maximize incentives; to stabilize rates; to maintain high-quality service; to provide pricing flexibility; to assure adequate revenues; and to reduce the administrative burden of the ratemaking process. Under the proposed legislation, postage rates would be controlled through “price caps” that would limit reimbursement for the increases in costs, including wage costs. This limitation on the amount that rates can be increased will negatively influence wages, and the number of employees and facilities. Clearly this would have adverse effect on all APWU-represented employees.

The fight over reform will continue, with the APWU Legislative Department advancing our agenda: To serve the American public and maintain the union’s collective bargaining rights. We will be calling upon our local and state organizations to weigh in as well: To raise issues with their legislators and seek their support.

Individual members can likewise communicate with their representatives and contribute to COPA. The 2004 COPA Campaign was our strongest year yet and we will need even better years to keep up this fight, a fight that clearly is worth your involvement. (See Pages 7-17.)

Our Next Contract The 2005 contract negotiations will be equally challenging. As global competition places downward pressure on employee wages, our demands for improved conditions and higher wages will be met with stiff resistance. As the only postal union scheduled for contract negotiations this year, APWU will be targeted to create a “model” for bargaining with other postal unions and management groups as their agreements expire.

We approach these negotiations with determination. Because the contract will directly affect the lives of hundreds of thousands of postal employees, I believe it is crucial to include rank-and-file APWU members in the process. I have asked each of the union’s 20 resident officers to name two employees – who do not serve as stewards or officers – to be asked to come to Washington to observe and to engage in the bargaining process.

Those selected will observe the bargaining process and will be provided an opportunity to share their experiences as postal employees. The national union will assume the full cost, including travel, lodging and lost time from work. Postal reform, COPA, and contract negotiations will dominate our agenda, and our success or failure will determine the future value of postal employment. If you have an interest in shaping your future as a postal employee, I urge you: Roll up your sleeves, we have serious work ahead!