Printer-Friendly Page
Taking Our Case to Congress
(This column by APWU President William Burrus was first published in the March/April 2004 issue of The American Postal Worker magazine)
In February, I testified before congressional committees reviewing the work of the President's Commission on the U.S. Postal Service. The decisions of these panels, which are considering proposals to overhaul the USPS, will undoubtedly have a tremendous impact on the lives and work of postal employees, as well as the service we provide to the American people. The following are excerpts from my presentations to the U.S. House Special Panel on Postal Reform and the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee.
Mailing Industry Drives 'Reform' Debate
"The congressional committees have the historic opportunity to protect and preserve the Postal Service. Too often, in this rush for reform, special interests have been considered without balancing the broader needs of our nation and its individual citizens.
"The debate has been driven by the mailing industry as it seeks to shape the Postal Service in a way that will best serve its interests. This is neither surprising nor bad; but it is very important that the Committee distinguish between the public interest in universal mail service at uniform rates, and the interests of major mailers in maximizing their profits.
"The stated objective of those who favor postal reform is to offset the impact of technology on mail volume. Whether mail volume increases or decreases, however, the need for a viable Postal Service will be important to our country.
"In considering the specifics of reform, I want to emphasize that the Commission did not give sufficient consideration to the needs of individual Americans and businesses that are not part of the mailing industry. The hearings and the Commissioners' private meetings were dominated by large mailers. Naturally, their interests must be considered, but not to the exclusion of all others."
Technological Impact
"The widespread support for postal 'reform' is based on the premise that the Postal Service is a failing institution. ... We must remember that postal volume continues to recover from the effects of several national events. The first was, of course, the terrorist attacks of 9/11. That was followed by the anthrax attack that took the lives of two postal workers.
"The combined effects of the 9/11 and anthrax attacks were superimposed over the recession that began in early 2001, from which we are only now experiencing a relatively weak and inconsistent recovery.
"There are positive signs. The Postal Service recently reported that mail volume during the 2003 holiday mailing season increased sharply over the previous year, resulting in the highest volume period in the history of the Postal Service. Are we to believe that technological impact took a holiday this Christmas season, or are other factors at work?
"Throughout this period of technological upheaval, the Postal Service has shown a remarkable capacity to provide excellent service. Despite declining mail volumes, productivity increased and service standards were maintained."
Rate Setting
"Because of these unprecedented productivity increases, there is strong reason to believe that Postal Service revenues could be sufficient to support universal service, if rates are properly set.
"The APWU has been a vocal critic of unfair rate-setting that benefits some very large mailers at the expense of consumers and small businesses. Even more important than the issue of fairness in rate setting, however, is the issue of the ability of the Postal Service to survive.
"The Postal Service's own data show that worksharing discounts provided to major mailers exceed the costs avoided by the Postal Service. These excessive discounts cost the Postal Service hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenue every year. The Postal Service cannot break even if it continues to artificially subsidize major mailers hundreds of millions of dollars every year.
"This problem was acknowledged by the Presidential Commission's recommendation that all future discounts be limited to the costs avoided. This is simply not good enough. That horse has left the barn and we need to get it back to preserve universal service in the public interest.
"The current business model is not responsible for the relative contribution level between first-class and standard mail. Even if first-class mail continues to grow, despite the inroads of technology, the question of dividing institutional costs between all classes of mail will remain. At present it takes approximately three new pieces of standard mail to make up for the loss of one piece of first-class mail. This distribution of cost is a political decision that will be unresolved by postal reform. So, even with robust mail growth far into the future, postal rate makers must revisit the distribution of cost with or without postal reform."
Workforce-Related Recommendations
"[The Commission's] workforce-related recommendations are outrageous and totally unacceptable to me and to the workers I represent. ... On the subject of workforce issues, the Report is fundamentally dishonest.
"The Report repeatedly states that the Commission supports the right of postal workers to engage in collective bargaining. Nevertheless, it recommends the establishment of a three-member Postal Regulatory Board, appointed by the President, which would have the authority to set the compensation of postal employees.
"It is completely inconsistent, and totally unacceptable, for the Commission to espouse a commitment to collective bargaining while simultaneously recommending that postal compensation be dictated by an appointed board, separate and apart from the collective bargaining process.
"Another example of the Commission's arrogant disregard for collective bargaining is the recommendation that existing no-layoff protection be prohibited by law. The Commission Report acknowledges that this protection is wholly the product of collective bargaining, but nevertheless recommends that it be prohibited.
"The Commission seems to believe that postal workers are foolsÉ. Disingenuous platitudes appear in the ReportÉ [Yet] in contrast to these statements, the Commission's specific recommendations are an invitation to open conflict with postal employees. The Report paid lip service to the importance of good labor relations, while making recommendations that would ensure labor conflict."
Collective Bargaining
"The Commission's recommendations to change the collective bargaining process are unwise and would be counterproductive. ... Over the years, the parties have negotiated every subject identified by the Commission - health benefits, flexibility, retirement, no-lay-off protection, wages, two-tier workforce and many others. When the parties have disagreed, they have used "last best final offer" (LBFO), fact-finding, mediation, fact-finding-mediation; and, at least once, the parties' mediator became the neutral interest arbitrator. But more importantly, most often we have agreed at the bargaining table and concluded negotiations without outside interference.
"Each negotiation session brings its own challenges, and the best way to meet these challenges is to permit the parties to mutually agree to adjust to the conditions at hand, rather than to impose a fixed statutory process. We know how to reach agreement, and the Postal Service and the unions have done so 65 times over the 32-year period of collective bargaining."
Benefits
"The Commission urged Congress to consider removing postal employees from federal retirement and retiree healthcare plans. This would be a diametrical departure from appropriate public policy. We categorically reject the contention that it would be appropriate for postal employees ... to be paid fringe benefits that are less than those provided to other federal employeesÉ.The same is true of workers' compensation benefits.
"In recent years, postal workers have repeatedly stood on the front lines of homeland securityÉ. It would be an insult to their courage and dedication to suggest they should be afforded something less than federal status."
The Most Urgent Need
"In conclusion, I want to return to the most urgent needs of the Postal Service. The Service needs to be relieved of the burden of paying for military retirement, at a cost of $27 billion. It also needs to be permitted to make appropriate use of the savings from the re-calculation of CSRS contributions, estimated at $10 billion. In addition, OPM's effort to shift to the Postal Service federal service retirement costs - estimated to be approximately $86 billion - must be reversed.
"This is not process or procedure; this is real money, and any serious effort at reform must begin with relief from these burdens."
Passing the Secretary-Treasurer's Torch
Robert L. Tunstall, who served as the APWU's secretary-treasurer since 1998, announced his retirement at the union's National Executive Board meeting on Feb. 4. Bob did an outstanding job as the union's chief financial officer, and I know the officers and members of the APWU join me in thanking him for more than 30 years of service to the union. We wish him well in retirement.
At the board meeting, I recommended Terry R. Stapleton, the former Southern Region Coordinator, to become the union's new secretary-treasurer. I also recommended that Frankie Sanders, a former Clerk Division National Business Agent from Dallas, serve as the Southern Region Coordinator. The executive board voted to accept my recommendations.
I have great confidence in Terry Stapleton and Frankie Sanders, and I am certain that the secretary-treasurer's office and the southern region will continue to function in the best interests of our members.
