Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Pensions: Another Government Rip-off of the Postal Service

"A billion here and a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking real money."
-- attributed to the late Sen. Everett M. Dirksen

The U.S. Postal Service isn't a money-losing operation, just a victim of unfair pension accounting by the federal government, a report from USPS's Inspector General indicated today.

"The current system of funding the Postal Service’s Civil Service Retirement System pension responsibility is inequitable and has resulted in the Postal Service overpaying $75 billion to the pension fund," Inspector General David C. Williams states in the report's introduction.

"Today, the Postal Service continues to be assigned an unfair share of CSRS liabilities," the report says. "Ending the unfair allocation of CSRS liabilities . . . would put the Postal Service on a sound financial footing."

The controversy involves people who worked for the Postal Service both before and after 1971, when postal operations were moved out of the federal government into the (theoretically) independent USPS. The government and USPS are supposed to share the cost of the pension liability, but the OIG report objects to the way the government's Office of Personnel Management allocates the costs:

"As demonstrated in this paper, for employees who worked half of their careers with the United States Post Office Department (USPOD) and half with the USPS, the Postal Service is assigned approximately 70 percent of the cost and the Federal government 30 percent. For an employee who worked 30 years, 20 years before 1971 and 10 years with the USPS, the Postal Service is assigned 50 percent of the cost."

Williams' introduction concludes: "The Postal Service was intended to be self-sufficient. More importantly, ratepayers should pay no less and no more than what is required to fund the Postal Service’s operations. Now, as the Postal Service faces a challenging future, it is particularly important that the Postal Service’s responsibilities be clearly delineated and separated from those of the federal government. The true costs of funding postal operations ought to be absolutely clear."

Related Articles:


Anonymous said...

Where is Obama now and his precious FedEx and UPS? Not only does this need to be rectified, but Obama owes the Postal Service a public apology on national TV.

Anonymous said...

Whatever the Postal Service Office of the Inspector General says.remember one thing. If their lips are moving......They Lie!

National Whistleblower said...

A holocaust is what it is. A Postal Holocaust.

Anonymous said...

I have watched the post office promote a level-7 mechanic to be an operations supervisor for the last two years of his service,so he would recieve a higherwage the last two years and that wage is what his retirement was based on ,and generally when you hire in as a maintenance worker you dont get to cross crafts the last two years of service. I have also watched managers get a promotion too postmaster of atlanta ,and then take 40,000.00 dollars out of operatinail cost to through them selve's a party including 20,000.00 dollars to videotape thier party and thier initials being Marjorie Brown, and having poeple like Bill Campbell (ex-Atlanta mayor) attend along with many other notable characters.And I believe these actions alone will sink a bussiness when there are no watchdogs over management,and no one from above holding anyone accountable.when the lower levels in management can do as they please they generally will.