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

Advanced Search

Printer-Friendly Page

---

---

---

Postal Reform in Conference

(This article was first published in the May/June 2006 issue of The American Postal Worker.)

Because bills passed by the House and Senate on the same subject often contain different provisions, a "conference committee" made up of members of both chambers must be formed to resolve differences between the bills before final passage. Accordingly, a conference committee will soon consider the different versions of the postal reform bills passed by the House on July 27, 2005, and by the Senate on Feb. 9, 2006.

This is a critical step in the legislative process: Important provisions can be added or dropped in conference, and the version of the legislation approved by the conference is not subject to further amendment when it is returned to each chamber for final passage. The APWU is on guard against changes that would undermine the interests of postal workers and consumers, and we have been sharing our views with key members of Congress.

Republican senators serving as conferees are Susan Collins, (ME), Ted Stevens (AK), George Voinovich (OH), Norm Coleman (MN), and Bob Bennett (UT). Democratic senators on the committee are Joe Lieberman (CT), Tom Carper (DE), and Daniel Akaka (HI). As we go to press, House conferees have not yet been named, but when they are the process will get under way fairly quickly. Once the conference committee has completed its work, the final bill will be returned to both chambers for another vote; if adopted, it would be sent to the president for his signature.

Key Provisions

Below are some of the issues we will be keeping close tabs on during the conference process. In some instances, the bills currently contain provisions that we support, so we will work to see that they do not change. In other instances, there are provisions that trouble us, and we will be pressing for modifications.

In April 2003, the president signed into law the Postal Civil Service Retirement System Funding Act (P.L. 108-18), which transferred to the Postal Service responsibility for funding the government's share of contributions to the military pensions of employees covered by the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS). This means that the Postal Service is obligated to pay the retirement benefits for a civil service retiree's time spent in the military, something no other federal agency is responsible for. The liability for assuming this cost has grown to approximately $30 billion. A provision found in both bills, however, would transfer this liability back to the Treasury — which the White House opposes. Here we need to make sure that it is retained by the conferees.

Another consequence of P.L. 108-18 was that the Postal Service's contribution to the Civil Service Retirement System was reduced by nearly $3 billion a year. This reduction was caused by the discovery that the Postal Service had been overfunding that account. P.L. 108-18 did not allow the retention of those yearly overpayments, instead directing that they be placed in an escrow fund. Both bills would allow the USPS full access to the escrow fund, which is approaching $10 billion. The White House also opposes this provision, so again we will have to fight against modification.

The Final Bill

Both bills would keep postage rate increases below the rate of inflation, with the Senate version being slightly more restrictive than the House version. We believe there must be reasonable exceptions so that the rate cap can be exceeded when economic conditions warrant. In addition, we feel it is reasonable that the implementation of a rate cap should be flexible and phased in over a longer period of time than the final bill could call for. We also feel that the Postal Service should be allowed to "bank" any surpluses occurring during that period.

The Senate bill, but not the House version, would reduce Workers' Compensation Program benefits for workers injured on the job. We will work to assure that this objectionable provision is not included in the final bill. We will hope to retain a provision that limits excessive "worksharing" discounts for large mailers. We have long maintained that many of the discounts currently given to mailers who perform mail-processing work exceed the costs avoided.

It is important to keep in mind we are not the only ones with an interest here. You can be sure that entities with totally different points of view also will be trying to influence the conference committee's actions. As the process lumbers along, we will keep you posted through APWU News Bulletins and on these Web pages.

[back to top]