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

Advanced Search

Printer-Friendly Page

---

---

---

Postal Reform:
Smooth Sailing in Doubt

(This article first appeared in the November/December 2005 issue of The American Postal Worker magazine.)

Though the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee overwhelmingly approved its version of postal reform legislation (S. 662) on July 14, further action in the near future is uncertain for a variety of reasons.

The House passed its version of the bill (H.R. 22) on July 26, but at press-time the Senate was preoccupied with such things as Supreme Court nominations and hurricane relief legislation, and had yet to act on a slew of “must pass” appropriations bill to fund the government in Fiscal Year 2006.

In another complication that could further delay action, the USPS Board of Governors raised several concerns about the legislation. In a Sept. 20 letter to congressional leaders, the governors complained that the pending legislation is flawed because it:

• Gives too much authority to the postal regulatory board proposed in the legislation. The governors charged that this will interfere with their role in managing the Postal Service.
  
  
• Does not go far enough in streamlining the postal rate-making process. The governors said they need more authority to quickly adjust rates due to economic developments such as increases in fuel costs.
  
  
• Fails to repeal a provision in the Postal Reorganization Act [Title 39, Section 1005(f)] that ensures that benefits for postal workers do not fall below those established in 1971.

In addition, the governors noted that the Bush administration opposes two important provisions in the legislation that are strongly supported by postal unions, the mailing industry, and the governors themselves:

• Allowing the Postal Service to retain the funds saved by ending billions of dollars in overpayments to the Civil Service Retirement System; and
  
  
• Returning military-service-related retirement-benefit obligations to the U.S. Treasury.

The governors implored the lawmakers to insist that these provisions be retained in the final version of the legislation sent to the White House. Otherwise, they said, “we have serious reservations about the continued ability of the Postal Service to maintain the level of universal service at reasonable rates now enjoyed by the American people.”

The governors thanked senators for including a provision that would reduce workers’ compensation benefits for postal employees who are injured on the job by creating a three-day waiting period before continuation-of pay begins if a worker’s absence period is less than 14 days. The Senate bill would also force eligible workers into retirement if they are disabled as a result of an injury. Showing favor for the Senate workers’ comp provision, the governors said a similar provision “is notably absent” from the House bill.

Following the board’s letter, APWU President William Burrus told congressional leaders that the union is strongly opposed to the governors’ positions on employee benefits and workers’ compensation.

Burrus said, however, that the APWU shares the governors’ concerns about provisions that would grant excessive power to the new Postal Regulatory Board. “We have consistently maintained that the legislation in both houses of Congress must leave the Governors with the authority they will need to oversee the business of the Postal Service,” he noted in a Sept. 20 letter to lawmakers.

As currently written, both the House and Senate bills would limit postage rates based on the Consumer Price Index, and would give authority for establishing service standards to the Postal Regulatory Board. The union has long asserted that strict limits on postage rates would result in wage caps that would undermine collective bargaining. The union also contends that allowing a politically-appointed regulatory board to define standards would weaken service.

Concern and Consternation

The Board of Governors’ letter has caused much consternation among some postal reform proponents, who fear it might derail legislation they have sought for years.

In another development, several major mailers are now opposing the legislation unless a provision to limit excessive “worksharing” discounts is removed from the bill. The APWU strongly supports limits to these discounts.

It is still possible that Senate will ultimately consider and pass its bill this year, but the packed agenda and lingering disputes will make that process a very complicated one. Stay tuned.

Bush Reverses Ruling That Permitted 'Katrina' Contractors To Pay Unfair Wages The November/December issue of The American Postal Worker magazine reported on the suspension of the Davis-Bacon Act’s “fair pay” requirements for contractors awarded Hurricane Katrina rebuilding projects. Shortly after the magazine went to press, the order was rescinded. Bowing to sagging poll numbers and under siege by an aggressive campaign led by labor unions, the Bush administration has announced a reversal of the executive order that suspended fair-pay requirements for workers involved in Hurricane Katrina reconstruction projects. President Bush ordered the suspension of the Davis-Bacon Act requirement that workers involved in federal efforts to rebuild the hurricane-ravaged Gulf Coast be paid the “prevailing rate.” Davis-Bacon sets a minimum wage scale (the average pay for a region) for workers on federal construction projects. With the reversal of the presidential order, employers awarded federal rebuilding contracts will not be allowed to pay workers sub-standard wages. The prevailing-rate wage rule went back into effect Nov. 8. An effort led by Rep. George Miller (D-CA) had threatened to overrule the administration’s initial decision. Miller was able to force a congressional showdown on the suspension of Davis-Bacon under a little-known provision of the National Emergencies Act, which, if invoked, forces Congress to vote on any law that the president has suspended. Miller had wide support for a resolution (H.J. Res. 69) he sponsored to overturn the president’s executive order. Significant support for Miller’s efforts came from GOP representatives Steven LaTourette (OH) and Frank LoBiondo (NJ), who organized 37 other House Republicans to sign a letter urging President Bush to restore the Davis-Bacon fair-wage requirement. The House would have been required to vote on Miller’s resolution by Nov. 4, and all indications were that the measure would have passed in both chambers. Miller’s efforts were aided by more than 350,000 e-mails and letters to Congress from union members demanding that fair wages be reinstated in the Gulf Coast, where the average annual wage for full-time skilled workers is less than $20,000. As expected, contractors overseeing rebuilding projects condemned the reversal. The Republican Study Committee, a group of conservative lawmakers, also opposed the change. Union leaders hailed the congressional action and ensuing results. “President Bush has done the right thing by reversing his decision to suspend the prevailing wage — but it’s only the first step,” said AFL-CIO President John Sweeney. “He must now reinstate affirmative action requirements for contractors in the Gulf and end his attempts to slash programs for working families while adding new tax breaks for the rich.”

 

 

 

[back to top]