All Sections ------------------------------- News & Events Pay & Benefits Departments & Divisions Members Only

Advanced Search

Printer-Friendly Page

---

---

---

Capitol Hill Moves on Postal Reform

(This article was first published in the May/June 2005 issue of The American Postal Worker magazine)

After weeks of lobbying from the White House, the mailing industry, and postal unions, the Senate version of postal reform legislation (S. 662) was introduced on March 17. The House version (H.R. 22) was one of the first bills introduced in the 109th Congress.

Our goal from the outset of this session has been to preserve our collective bargaining rights and secure the financial stability of the Postal Service in any postal bills considered by the House and Senate — as did the legislation approved by two key committees in 2004. The Bush administration signaled its displeasure with those measures and the legislation was never brought to the floor of either chamber. What many people do not know is that bills that aren’t enacted simply expire at the end of a Congress.

As a result, entirely new postal reform bills could have been introduced in the 109th Congress. Fortunately, both the Senate and the House bills introduced this year suggest that their sponsors did not want to start over.

A Matter of Timing

Rep. John McHugh (R-NY) introduced on Jan. 4, the first day of the new Congress, a bill that is essentially the same as one introduced last year. But speculation — and APWU concern — began to grow when the introduction of a bill was delayed in the Senate. The 2004 elections resulted in an increased Republican majority in that chamber, which affected the makeup of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

Although there was little opportunity to influence House members, the mailing industry renewed its efforts to push through changes in the Senate bill that would work against the interests of the APWU and its membership.

Matters were made worse when the Postal Board of Governors sent a letter to congressional leaders urging them to place retirement and health benefits on the bargaining table. (These benefits are currently guaranteed by law.) The Board also urged legislators to require arbitrators ruling on postal worker contracts to consider factors wholly favorable to the Postal Service. (This board, now chaired by longtime privatization advocate James C. Miller III, made it clear that, unlike the previous board, it plans to aggressively challenge the collective bargaining rights of postal workers.)

The APWU responded by launching its own aggressive effort to protect the rights of postal workers. In the end, the Senate bill introduced by Governmental Affairs Committee Chairperson Susan Collins (R-ME) is much like the House proposal. Neither bill contains provisions that would undermine our collective bargaining rights.

Committees’ Actions

The House Government Reform Committee met April 13 to act on McHugh’s bill, which has since been cosponsored by its chairman, Tom Davis (R-VA), its ranking Democrat, Henry Waxman (D-CA), and nearly 100 other House members. After accepting an amendment to prevent the USPS from giving foreign airlines preferential treatment, the committee passed the bill unanimously (39-0). The legislation now moves to the House floor and could be considered by that chamber at any time.

A day after the House action, the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee held a hearing on S.662, listening to testimony from the USPS, the Government Accountability Office, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, and the Treasury Department.

Several senators did not like what they heard — particularly from witnesses representing the Treasury and OPM. It is clear that the White House remains rigid in its opposition to releasing from escrow the money being held from overpayments into the Civil Service Retirement System. The Bush administration also refuses to transfer back to the Treasury the retirement-benefit payments for postal workers who served in the military.

Sen. Collins was very critical of the administration’s position on both of these issues and continued to press for a satisfactory explanation from the witnesses, reminding them that even the president’s own appointed commission recommended the release of the escrow money and that the Treasury resume responsibility for paying military retirement benefits. The Senate’s most senior Republican, Ted Stevens (RAK), showed his frustration over the issue by declaring that he was going to go directly to President Bush to resolve the matter.

Postmaster General John E. Potter and GAO Comptroller General David M. Walker also argued for releasing the escrow money and for returning the military retirement liability to the Treasury. But both also made it clear that they want the Senate to reconsider its decision not to put health benefits and retirement benefits on the bargaining table.

The APWU, of course, is opposed to including retirement and health benefits in the bargaining process, and there was no indication at the hearing that the Senate was going to accede to USPS and GAO requests. The APWU also continues to oppose the language in the Senate bill that calls for anti-worker changes to the OWCP program (see below).

What It All Means

With key representatives and senators repeatedly stating that the resolution of the escrow and military retirement issues are vital components, a cloud of uncertainty now looms over both bills. The Senate bill may still be subject to amendment in committee, and both measures could be changed by activities in the full House and Senate. Even if the bills as they stand now are approved in their respective chambers, a House-Senate conference committee would need to be established to reconcile differences.

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

Here are the key elements of HR.22 and S.662 as they now stand:

• Both bills preserve universal service and uniform rates.
  
  
• Both bills preserve the collective bargaining process and guarantee that health care and retirement benefits, which are currently guaranteed by law, will not be become “negotiable.”
  
  
• The rarely used fact-finding provisions of the Postal Reorganization Act of 1971 have been replaced with a provision calling for a period of mediation before contract disputes move to arbitration.
  
  
• The rate-setting process would be streamlined; proposed rate increases could not exceed increases in the Consumer Price Index (CPI).
  
  
• Both bills provide that discounts that exceed costs avoided would be phased out over a period of time, with limited exceptions.
  
  
• S.662 would change Office of Workers’Compensation Program (OWCP) regulations by requiring a three-day waiting period before workers begin to receive continuation of pay, unless the disability exceeds 14 days or leads to a permanent disability. S.662 requires injured eligible employees on the rolls of OWCP to convert to a retirement annuity or have their compensation benefits reduced once they reach retirement age. The House bill does not tamper with OWCP.
  
  
• Both bills recommend the release from escrow of savings from overpayments to the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS). This could free up $70 billion over 60 years.
  
  
• Both bills recommend that responsibility for military retirement benefits be returned to the Department of the Treasury for postal employees who served in the military.

At this stage of the process we are satisfied that the two bills, in their present state, preserve our collective bargaining rights. We continue to be concerned over the proposed OWCP changes and hope to address these issues as the process continues.

[back to top]