The U.S. Postal Service proved this week what mailers have been saying for weeks -- that it is seeking exigent rate increases without first having done everything it can to reduce costs.
Specifically, it demonstrated that it still has excess career employees – many of whom are eligible for retirement – yet is doing nothing to reduce those numbers. Before the Postal Service is granted rate increases that require bending, if not breaking, the law that governs postal rates, postal executives need to explain why they are discouraging employees from retiring when they should be encouraging early retirement.
The Postal Service provided the first piece of evidence against itself on Monday when it answered the Postal Regulatory Commission’s query, “Please provide the percentage of [flats] pieces currently processed in a non-optimal fashion by manual sort.” The Postal Service’s answer: “30 percent of volume was handled manually in FY 2009.”
A surplus of equipment, a dearth of automation
The Postal Service has enough equipment – in fact, a surplus of equipment -- to avoid virtually all manual handling of flats. Mailers have been claiming for years, without refutation from the Postal Service, that the only reason for so much manual handling is to keep “automation refugees” (excess employees) busy. Imagine a farmer who kept a combine idle while having his workers harvest with machetes, or a construction company turning off its backhoe so its employees can move some dirt with shovels.
What is the Postal Service doing to reduce its excess employment levels? Nothing. Stephen J. Masse, vice president of finance and planning, told the PRC today that the Postal Service has no plans to offer early-retirement incentives and is waiting for attrition to reduce its employment levels.
In fact, the Postal Service is doing worse than nothing. Its practices discourage retirement by providing many employees with estimates of retirement benefits that are too low. Dead Tree Edition explained the problem in The Postal Service's Early-Retirement Snafu and PostalReporter documented the situation in more detail a year ago. But the Postal Service seems to have done nothing to correct the problem.
Some have told me that federal bureaucrats and regulations tie the Postal Service’s hands in this matter. If that’s true, why aren’t postal officials raising a stink with Congress? And why aren’t they communicating better with employees about the issue rather than leaving that to the unions.
It makes you wonder whether the people at L’Enfant Plaza who provide estimates of retirement benefits are the same ones who allowed the government to overcharge the Postal Service $75 billion in pension costs.
USPS officials are rightly arguing that the federal government should return those pension overpayments to the USPS. Their case would be stronger if they committed to putting some of that money aside for early-retirement incentives that would help reduce the Postal Service's workforce, which constitute 80% of its costs.
It could even get creative -- for example, letting employees in an overstaffed facility bid to retire early, with the lowest bids winning. Some employees might be more willing to retire from career positions if they could switch to part-time or on-call status without their pension benefits being harmed.
Previous articles in the “tough questions for the Postal Service” series:
26 comments:
Exactly, the postal service should
offer early retirements to postmasters and move excess employees to their positions. When
they offered retirements last year not even 1/4 of who they expected
took the retirement. They need to
decrease their employees.
If the USPS gave and Early out incentive to the Civil Service employees, they all have at least 20+ years in and 75% would glasdly leave. How about three years to service time and $20,000. In the end USPS will save billions in all aspects.
have the post office get the 75 billion it over paid in the pension funds over the years and ues some of that money to offer an ATTRACTIVE early retiremnet severance package. one thought. add 5 years to our pensions and 25,000 in cash. that would get a lot of city and rural carriers to go. i would take it.
I am a retired Postal employee. I loved my job as a cerrier and supervisor so I wasn't one of those "disgruntled" employees. I think that L'Anfant has gotten to arroigant under the leadership of Potter. There is an aire of "smugnis" with all of the vice presidents. Jobs being created. So many reports that need to b e done every day that supervisors can't do their jobs Potter could do something to make retiring more attractive but chooses not to and blames the beuracracy like kids blame "I don't know". An investigation into L'Anfant should be the priority, not whether or not we should have 5 day delivery or raising the cost of doing business for periodicals.
Oh stop whinning!! Between the big mailers and the USPS Exec. branch, the USPS could save billions of dollars by doing a little cutting . The Exec', have bloated their ranks so far above the number of career emplyees eliminated, the company is going backwards. Just why do they need 45% more Exec's with a $15 billion price tag to handle a 25% decrease in career employees, who by the way do the actual work for the public, with only an $8 billion savings. If they really wanted to do something to HELP they would stop putting the big Mailers before the public they are mandated to serve.
They also could step up and offer to return to 2007 pay rates and staffing numbers along with what is left of the career employees at the negotiating table this fall. That would be a massive break for the Postal SERVICE. But, the Exec's. wont do anything like that,nor will the union leaders. The only thig wrong with the USPS is massive greed on the part of ALL involved. That definately includes the BIG MAILERS.
thats ok too, Don't offer an early retirement package. I'm working on my 32nd year. every year I stay longer than 30 years I get a 2% increase in my pension. I'm actually staying just for spite now, padding my montly pension. either way, the post office is going to Pay.
As a 58 year old maintenance employee with 38 years I like the idea of being able to retire and still work in the department on a part time basis or possibly on call. Do that and I'm out of here. PS. NO WEEKENDS
Five years and fifty thousand and I'm out of here plus another 200 thousand employee's
I'm an official member of the KMA Club and I say Show Me The Money!!! and I will gladly reduce their EAS compliment by one. 35 years is long enough. All they need to do is throw me a bone and I'm outa here!
Why do all the pro privatization advocate stakeholders always cite, "reduce the Postal Service's workforce, which constitute 80% of its costs." Has that 80% number been verified recently? Or is it that it just sounds good for argumentative purposes.
Also FYI, the inflated percentage volume number of 30% manual flats processing is not due to the USPS looking for work for the "refugees." The work that manual flats processing performs is to process the flat pieces that the mailers (all mailers including the ones receiving workshare discounts) enter into the mail stream that cannot be processed on automated mail processing equipment. Just because a mailpiece has postage and an address does not mean it is machineable even though it has been accepted into the mail stream.
A situation not being mentioned anywhere that is contributing to retirement eligible employees not retiring is the intolerable delay between retirement date and receipt of full retirement pay. The final numbers are taking more than 7 months to compute. A retiree is getting a reduced retirement check for over 7 months before they finally get their full payment. Many people are staying until the USPS gets it together and pays in a more timely manner. I can calculate my retirement in 30 minutes on my calculator, so why does it take 7 months for the USPS to do it?
On fllat machines just start them up nothing gained nothing lost.
Retirement # of employee and management has to be decreased.Under 55 penailty has to go.25000.00 is the
max alowwedwith 5 years.Offer health insurance to all people who wish to leave at a fair rate.
Allow full timers to become part timers without
penialty.Bring back 701 rule for carriers.Allow unlimited lwop without the 80 hr rule.
I am a clerk at 02132 with 40plus years.i just have enough work for a 6 hr day and that is the tip of the iceburge.
Changing office hours and reassingingnpeople does not take an act of congress it takes Balls for which the powers to be are lacking.
Everybody has been responsible for the upsp downfall so lets do something concrete.EDSO50@aol.com
Offer vera again with no penalties! I dont need extra money have 26 years age 58. Just cant afford to loose 5 percent for every year. Have to be 55 with 30 years or 60 with 20 years. Change the rule. Incentive would be nice but willing to leave now with no penalties. Downsized and ready and willing to move on. Just cant afford to with penalties.... 5 percent for each year? Who could live on that? Also have to be 59 1/2 to touch tsp. Etc....they make it very hard to Retire. I know we are lucky to have a job and Retirement but thats the reason most of us are there. Let you people go and hire someone without a job to take our place see what you get for 7 bucks an hour.....
I am a postal employee of 31 years and age 51. If they would give up to 5 years on either end (service or age)that would enable many to be able to go with out a penalty. I would go. Even though it means about a 45% cut in my current salary it would be well worth it for peace of mind. I use to be VERY proud to work for the USPS. Now it is just a job. Very sad. The decisions and changes over the years have been downhill. In addition I have a boss who is unbearable as well as his boss. I thought we were suppose to manage with dignity and respect and not use persoanl agendas and feelings dominate. Well I hope the USPS will ask OPM for the OK to give the time so many of us who are CSRS will hit the road. They want us to go. Saves them money too.
Well. I have read and truly understand all comments..... My constant question is this "Why get rid of the WORKERS"? IN my experiences we have too many supervisors with bloated paychecks! Half of them sucked as carriers! Or Clerks! I have worked on both sides of the fence and have found that seasoned personel don't need middle management! Most of them don't even know what they r doin! WE have to teach them....And that goes for some Managers (acting)as well! I have experienced three supervisors that have NO CLUE! And you have to gently tell them things outa respect! Get rid of those!!!! Talk about savin money!
why am I always hearing from the people with not enough time IN or not old enough TO retire to be able to retire without any penalty?
how fare is that to a person who HAS put the time in. Believe me, if there was an incentive to go, there are plenty of us with the time and age that would go so that they wouldn't need to throw you rookies a bone.
Well then why don't you RETIRE already! You old people are greedy that's why.
This post is for throw Rookies a bone.
Maybe you have nothing better to do and think your gone to live forever? I think 26 years in and age 58 should be able to retire without penalty and if you don't like what I think then keep working cause it sounds like you either need to or like your job and have nothing better to do. Some of us want to move on and don't need a cash incentive. If that's what your waiting for then I hope you get it. We all have needs and wants. And your know better cause you stuck around for longer than you had too. That's your choice. If I was you and had my exact time in I would go before this new contract cause they are going to hurt so many of us that are so close but no go. This isn't just about you we all have worked hard for retirement and like I said before that's why most of us stuck it out this long to RETIRE and move on. So with that said hope we all make it somehow. Don't let this become a war between employees we all deserve to Retire some with less money than others. Don't make this just about yourself.
For the people who want to retire early WITHOUT a penalty. I understand. Its only human nature to want SOMETHING for NOTHING.
Good Article, however, I would clarify one thing. The 30% manual flat volume is not to keep excess automation people busy.
In my facility, and I'm sure many others, our automation is maxxed out. All machines running, all the time.
The reason, I believe, for the large amount of manual flats is two-fold. First, the AI-FSM and FSS are not performing as well as expected. So, some of the volume they cannot process is sent to manual.
Second, and more troubling, is that much of the manual mail has been damaged, torn, wrinkled, or otherwise rendered non-machinable by one of the USPS' wonderful machines.
The AI-FSM (or Shredder, as we call it) churns out approx 60 tubs of "reject" mail per night. This damage did not occur on the FSM 1000. However, in the USPS zeal for faster and faster, damage control has become a casualty.
For all you folks who talk about the early retirement penalty; It is NOT a PENALTY!!! You collect a check for a longer period of time than if you began your retirement later. If you retire at 50 live until 90, then you will have collected more money than the next guy who retired at 60 unless they reduce your pension by a certain percentage. Why can't you people understand that???
http://www.opm.gov/retire/pre/fers/eligibility.asp#Immediate
Early Retirement (Vera) no penalty for FERS but if you retire without Vera than read the above link. For instance I loose 10 percent of what I already earned if I dont wait till I am 60. My family doesn't live to 90 years old. Plus Fers has a suppliment that is part of the retirement and you have to be 20 yrs in and be 60 or 30 years in and age 55. With Vera you have to be 55 with 20 years in. Now with that said If I wanted to retire now with 26 years in at age 58 I would have to wait on my suppliment for two years and only get less than 900 to live off of for a month. Cant touch TSP till your 59 1/2. I dont want something for nothing just stating the facts. I will stay two more years and hope I still have a retirement to look foward too and hope for the best. Like I said before if I could leave I would but now do you see why we have to wait?
Good Luck to all
$30,000 would get rid of a lot of older, read-to-retire workers, who are only staying because of the economy; or are just staying out of spite. No other incentives needed--just a little cash and-- mass exodus!
Postal workforce labor costs 80%.
You are obviously counting the cost of management at the national level. There are way too many vice presidents at national. They need to cut there first before they reduce the number of craft employees. Common on Potter, show some leadership and cut YOUR staff to the bone. Anonymous says to change delivery days to 2,3,4 days.
That's a death blow to the postal service. Let give the postal destroyers another reason to privatize the po. It's more like 6% night differential. Congress will never admit that they have stolen, let alone payback $75 billion from the po. This money should ALL go towards the prefunding retirement costs of $5.5 billion for the next 10 yrs.
If they want to get the biggest bang for the buck in early retirement incentive, they should give $5k per year for every year under the minimum retirement age(m.r.a). For example: Somebody with 25 years service and has 10 years to m.r.a would get 50k. A lot, yes but is less than the 55K+benefits the employee would receive per year for the next 10 years.
u dont have to be 59 1/2 to touch tsp, just 55, at least under csrs. if fers is same retirment age, 55, same applies. just went through ret counseling, its also alluded to in the ret videos, but its not really put out there
Post a Comment