What if your credit card company told you: “You will charge a million dollars on your credit card during your life; please enclose the million dollars in your next bill payment. It’s the responsible thing to do.” Doesn’t seem quite right, does it?

Well, that’s what the U.S. Postal Service’s requirement to prefund its long-term pension and healthcare liabilities is like. The Postal Service is required to pay the full estimate of its liabilities, currently estimated at nearly $404 billion, even as that estimate moves around and is based on assumptions that are highly uncertain and can frequently change over the life of the liability. Our recent white paper, Considerations in Structuring Estimated Liabilities, evaluates these assumptions and other considerations and shows the Postal Service is closer to being fully funded, or potentially overfunded, when certain assumptions are reasonably adjusted or considered.

First, let’s look at current funding levels. The Postal Service has set-aside cash totals of more than $335 billion for its pensions and retiree healthcare, exceeding 83 percent of estimated future payouts. Its pension plans are nearly completely funded and its retiree healthcare liability is 50 percent funded – much better than the rest of the federal government. But getting to this well-funded position has been painful. The Postal Service’s $15 billion debt is a direct result of the mandate that it must pay about $5.6 billion a year for 10 years to prefund the retiree healthcare plan. This requirement has deprived the Postal Service of the opportunity to invest in capital projects and research and development.

As things stand now, retiree healthcare, pensions, and workers’ compensation are unfunded by about $86.6 billion. But our paper says any discussion of unfunded liabilities should take into consideration assets that could be used to satisfy the liabilities, such as real estate. The Postal Service’s real estate assets have a net book value of $13.2 billion. But fair market value of these properties is estimated as high as $85 billion. Neither is factored into the Postal Service’s ability to meet future liabilities.

In addition, the liabilities are not exact or static amounts and they require certain assumptions, such as interest rates and demographic inputs, to estimate the future costs of these programs. For example, interest rates are at historic lows. Even slightly higher interest rate assumptions would reduce or eliminate the estimated liabilities.

Our paper details how different assumptions and considerations would affect the liabilities. Basically, if the Postal Service’s real estate assets were considered and one other assumption adjusted, the long-term liabilities would be overfunded.

Mandating 100 percent prefunding of future liabilities that are frequently changing and highly uncertain could unnecessarily damage the Postal Service, inflate prices, and overfund future liabilities.

Share your thoughts on our paper. Do you agree or disagree with the overall premise of the paper or have additional insight to share? 

Comments (74)

The most direct way to report fraud, waste, misconduct within the Postal Service is via our Hotline form

Leave a comment

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
  • anon

    i believe that the "healthcare liabilities", or the "healthcare benefits" commonly referred to in the press, are the solely the post office's share of health insurance premiums. i'm concerned that someone not familiar with FEHB will think that the post office is paying directly for healthcare and thus feel that this should be made clear in any discussion. otherwise a good article.

    Nov 16, 2017
  • anon

    Love you guys and gals. Underfunded, people flip crap at you all the time and you keep delivering on time and in the right place. Thanks for the hard work and dedication. g

    Sep 03, 2017
  • anon

    I’m not sure if you’ve seen the movie Dunkirk or not, but this article reminds me of it. Both show a dire negative outlook without looking at the big picture. The movie Dunkirk shows the horrors on the beach, air, and ocean around the evacuation of Dunkirk, but fail to show its importance in the overall military strategy of the war, the ties to the evils of Nazi Germany, or how this successful retreat enabled the invasion of Normandy to be successful. The movie had no back story, and no context. Anytime someone outside the USPS discusses the financial situation of the Post Office their ignorance is clear as day, but I’m frequently amazed at how little managers within the organization understand and also show little knowledge of its history and context to the current financial situation. I’m no genius but those who are afraid of privatization or a financial dissolve of the USPS have no idea what is going on. Thank you for explaining in layman’s terms the odd situation that the USPS faces, but I feel that even this article misses the mark. Although this article comes as close to research journalism as I’ve seen, (something the mainstream media has replaced with headline sensationalism.) It shows a dire outlook which lacks context of the overall strategy that appears to be at play. We really should be asking who lobbied congress for the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 and why? Is it really a good thing or not? The USPS is a quasi-government business that has many odd restrictions. Is the USPS allowed to generate a profit? How can an organization this large function with a no profit requirement? What happened to its profits prior to 2006? If the USPS found a way to legally keep its profits is that good or bad? Since the financial loss is only on paper and only an unmet financial obligation to a legal prefunding requirement there really isn’t a loss at all. If the USPS can continue to show a financial loss it can continue to improve business processes, limit increased labor expenses, and squeeze unproductive waste out of the organization. While the loss gains media headlines doesn’t it play into the overall strategy of reduction? How much of the legal prefunding requirement is able to be met each year, and if even a portion of that prefunding is met doesn’t that preserve congress from siphoning off the profits? With the current state of social security isn’t it a good thing to mandate savings when the end result is improved productivity, less waste, a sense of urgency, and management leverage over the labor force? The result is also retained “profits,” and future savings something that wasn’t possible prior to the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006. Financial reform is needed, but should that reform turn into profits, where do they go? Who becomes successful in lobbying for them? Decreased shipping prices, increased pay structures to the work force? I wonder is the OIG fully on board with what I believe is a “hidden agenda” in plain sight. The financial conundrum requires deep legal, political, and financial awareness that I often feel is grossly overlooked. Because of its complexity the media and public will likely never understand or hinder the apparent strategy. May you continue to fight for what is right and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse in the most effective way possible.

    Aug 14, 2017
  • anon

    Thank you for pointing this out. I recently returned from the National Convention of Postmasters and Managers (in Louisville KY) and the PMG said in her presentation that the USPS lost revenue the last two fiscal years because first class and advertising was dropping ... still. I don't recall that she ever provided the complete information, as you have, about our entire debt. But, it wasn't a healthy picture she painted for our future. She noted we would eventually become a parcel delivery service. Since the entire world has stopped corresponding via the written word, and children are no longer taught what a letter is or how to write in cursive, hold a pen, address an envelope let alone buy a stamp, it is plain to see what will become of card companies and the USPS. I enjoy the speed with which we can dispatch information via computer, but I am concerned that children at VERY young ages are relying on them as problem solvers perhaps to the detriment of being able to think for themselves.

    Aug 12, 2017
  • anon

    This is absolute nonsense. Congress should never have required this level of pre-funding in the first place. I do raise my eyebrow at the "Government workers were not required to enroll in Medicare!" part (seems like a no-brainer) but perhaps there was something going on there that explains that.

    Aug 09, 2017
  • anon

    The politicians, for whatever reason, are trying to privatize our Postal System and for all intents and purposes they have done. Part of the problem is the competition from UPS, FEDEX, DSL and others. As the USPS has to keep increasing postage to meet the ridiculous mandate set by self serving politicians more business is lost to UPS and other shipping companies. If the politicians would let the post office out from under this unbelivable burden they would be able to improve service, lower postage rates which would stimulate more business for USPS. My husband and I are retired and I don't send Christmas cards anymore because I just can't afford it. The whole situation is absurd and needs to be fixed. We have the best postal system in the world and we would like to keep it.

    May 30, 2017
  • anon

    the wrecking crew is trying to close you down so you'll be forced to sell off or privatize. i'm surprised the worthies in congress haven't forced you to take this information down. still, thanks for the post; everyone should know about this, but also the motive behind it. the vultures await your demise, which is directly linked to ours...[assuming the One Percent isn't reading this].

    May 14, 2017
  • anon

    This is the most outrageous thing I've ever heard. Hyperbole notwithstanding, I agree wholeheartedly with your paper. This information needs to be widely distributed.

    Feb 24, 2017
  • anon

    I think that it's the craziest thing I ever heard if the rest of the government had to prepay their pension the government was forced to shut down because they are horribly mismanaged. If the United States Post Office did not have to prepay the pensions and all the liabilities FedEx and UPS would not exist. The post office actually makes money every year but there's no company in the world that has the prepaid a pension and liabilities the way the post office do. I really hope president Trump take a look at this and realize it's hurting business it's hurting their growth and people realize that the post office could be so much more. Allow for 50% prefunded pensions and watch the post office grow. It's the only government agency that's actually profitable that I can think of.

    Feb 22, 2017
  • anon

    $15 Billion in debt, $2 Billion fist quarter operating loss last year, and making deliveries of candles on Sunday's from Amazon because I am a Amazon Prime member. Doesn't seem like a business I would invest my money.

    Feb 12, 2017
  • anon

    If the employee leave before retirement and gets a refund. What happens to the rest of the funds left in his basic plan?

    Jan 22, 2017
  • anon

    I expect my USPS to be fully funded and fully staffed in order to provide timely and efficient service. Having Congress starve the post office in order to fill an agenda to privatize it is not acceptable. What will it take to get Congress to support USPS and quit the game playing?

    Dec 21, 2016
  • anon

    My close friend who is a veteran and a senoir citizen paid the money for a post offfice box for six months and he had a friend named eddie dehl also fill out paperwork so he could use the box to. Well your staff members failed to put the information in your system even though they paid for it and were told on many occasions the p.o box was fine. Well it wasn't they were never added into the system and Albert the main p.o. box holder has been waiting for over a month n a half for this check and is now on the street. It was uour employess mess up and I think the very least u could do is compensate him by either over nighting his check to him free of charge or refund his money. I will be contacting all the news stations about not only the poor treatment but the lack of compassion u showed to a vetran and senior who did nothing wrong but trust you would do your job. It truly discusses me and if anything happens to this poor old man while on the street u can expect a law suit that will not only bury u but show how ruthless u really r. Thank u for your time on this matter.

    Nov 25, 2016
  • anon

    I believe that corporations which compete with the U.S.P.S. have lobbied congress to enact laws which damage our postal service. This is outrageous. Citizens and businesses need a strong U.S. postal service. I've lived in countries with weak, unreliable and even corrupt postal services and it makes doing business very difficult because customers' products which are mailed often do not arrive. Every U.S. citizen has a right to affordable and reliable mail. It is time to end the USPS pre-funding and investigate the corrupt law makers who enacted this law to see what their ties are to Fed Ex, UPS, etc. It is also time to see who is making money off the sale of USPS real estate. In the past I used to vote for CA Senator Feinstein but I am now very concerned about her family's profits relating to post office sales.

    Oct 25, 2016
  • anon

    A lot is actually undisclosed to deceive us into thinking differently than what reality actually shows. All of the properties and assets of the post office benefit from not being taxed by the government showing it does not actually compete "apples to apples" with FedEx and UPS. They are also given the only legal monopoly in the US, a huge advantage over other competitors. Also the employees of the postal service are paid far above the private sector even with all their advantages. The post office should prefund a pension and retirement fund since all indications of its progress are going down due to the internet and electronic management. They are given every advantage possible over competitors and still cannot manage to meet guidelines necessary to stay in the black. They cannot blame it on prefunding either considering their advantages granted to them by the government are approximately a $18 billion dollars in subsidies according to fortune.com. It does not take a genius to see that the system is not working. Plus take into account the fact that the majority of their mail is not for people but for businesses, another misleading statement, so why should taxpayers bear the burden of the debt if they go under. The bulk of the mail I receive is "junk" mail as I am pretty sure is the same for most Americans the have a technological connection to the world. Technology is not declining either as older Americans not tech savvy pass away and younger people move into the workforce and pay bills, the traditional mail carrier job will continue to decrease. This situation will only get worse and will end up costing taxpayers a fortune when they finally do fold, which is why prefunding is necessary. I am sorry to say it as so many employees will be affected but they should be privatized and brought into reality and these employees should be transitioned into this private sector with realistic payscales and benefit plans. No other company in the US gets more advantages than them and they still cannot make it work.

    Sep 20, 2016
  • anon

    Ryan, you do know that the postal service is not taxpayer assisted at all right!? The post office has been profitable it's average net gain a year has been 4.8 billion dollars but with the mandate that they prefunding a retirement with payment of he amount of 5.8 billion dollars a year for people that haven't even started to work at the post office yet. Does that make since to you? We have been told that the post office is in trouble well if Congress would stop using it as a slush fund it would be fine. The other problem I have is it was found that the math that Congress was using to calculate the total amount of payments were wrong so the entire time the payments were made it was over funding stopping the post office from valuable funds that could upgrade the technology and training of existing employees and future. That is why Congress put forth the Postal Reform act of 2016 to fix the the issues that were caused by the Postal Reform act of 2014. The post office needs new vehicle's, new technology and new training for supervisors and employees a like. How do you do that when you are doing something that no other companies (government agency or private sector) is demanded to do or has chosen to prepay pensions for people that haven't even began to work there?

    Mar 04, 2017
  • anon

    Exactly.

    Jan 01, 2017
  • anon

    Clearly the majority of the comments posted are negative and meant to tear us further apart vs bringing us together, as a UNION. I'm not saying that the usps is or isn't mismanaged but name an entity that isn't mismanaged. Historically, the usps and the ssa are well respected entities, far higher than other entities that are part of the federal, state or private and public systems and even foreign entities. I'm sure that everyone has stories both good and bad of the usps, but I have had far fewer bad experiences with the usps, so my trust in the usps and ssa is far far far higher than for any other entities and I can't speculate on how well a "privatized" usps would be, the thing that is broken is the mandatory prefund requirements that NO other entities have the congressional mandate to do, if you're upset with the usps, direct your anger and outrage at the politicians who mucked it up. Get rid of the prefund requirement and the rest of the issues and problems that have resulted from it will phase out quickly as the usps recovers from the moronic prefund requirements enacted by the US Congress during the first 8 years of this century, Bush Era.

    Sep 15, 2016
  • anon

    I totally agree with your paper. A year ago I moved from Scottsdale, AZ to Tucson, AZ. When I mail a bill or letter to someone in Tucson, it first goes to Phoenix and then back to Tucson, taking at least two days. I have known for years that Republicans made the stupid law regarding funding and from time to time have voiced my opinion against it. When I moved to Tucson a year ago and discovered it took two days to have mail delivered locally, I contacted Congresswoman Martha McSally's office to complain. It was only today, August 19, that a representative from Washington, D.C., called me regarding that issue to say they were "working on it." Of course someone called me--it is an ELECTION year. I would NEVER vote for a do-nothing obstructionist Republican. I just wanted to let you know I am aware of the postal service's issue caused by stupid Republicans, and I am on your side.

    Aug 19, 2016
  • anon

    An indication that the USPS is Ms. Managed, is that it feels it needs to review POSTS and COMMENTS before the post appears, meaning, what is being seen is not entirely the whole picture. My father fought in WWII against such people. The Inspector General in hiding something, is not transparent. Considering, anything the Inspector General has to say is negligible. Most definitely, they'll have some asinine response to their actions instead of allowing We the People to make that determination. The Inspector General, in so doing, has lost ALL credibility. If the IG thinks otherwise, clean up it financial woes, tomorrow, 8 am sharp. My company is clean! The IG had DECADES to address this issue and elected NOT to address it. Hence, my children and theirs will PAY for the USPS DEBT, according to the GAO. Fix it tomorrow IF you claim any credibility.

    Aug 12, 2016
  • anon

    In 1968 when we boys first discussed the Ms. Management of the USPS, the cost of a stamp was 6 cents. Today, in 2016, the cost is 49 cents that's an 817% difference in 48 years. Below are other daily expenses compared on Google for the same period. Comparatively, on daily consumables: loaf of bread 672% gal of milk 350% eggs 398% automobile 1120% house 1338% This is a pretty good indication that the Citizens of the United States are not managing their country, rather, have allowed others to usurp their power. The USPS is managed by the president, the executive branch of government, through appointments. Considering its position today, it is intellectually deprived and needs to reconsider its method of operation, if it has any hopes of sustainability. The USPS is not postured to reconsider.

    Aug 12, 2016
  • anon

    Al Toman, you forgot to factor for CPI. 6 cents in 1968 == 42 cents in 2016. 49 cents is about 17% over 42, not 817%!

    Nov 01, 2016
  • anon

    $15 mil is the limit, the USPS has not paid off that limit, btw, it is the money of We the People of the United States and we want it back, earning interest for REAL expenses FOR the PEOPLE, about 320,000,000 of them. USPS is at $125 BILLION in unfunded liabilities, that's $25 Bil UP from 2013. If this article wants to RESOLVE the issue, you had plenty of time, FUND the liabilities, tomorrow by 8am sharp. We in high school knew that there was an issue with the USPS back in 1968. If high school boys understood the USPS was on the wrong path, why does the USPS remain CLUELESS? Donahue walked away with $4 mil in his pockets. Anyone posting here, who thinks otherwise, show us YOUR $4 million cash! You have been challenged. The USPS needs to be MANAGED or shutdown. This issue did not happen overnight. It was on an unsustainable path for decades. My business, decades later, is healthy, comparatively. Stay well, a.t.

    Aug 12, 2016
  • anon

    So true, not taking into account downsizing of # of career employees, employees that have died, lies already retired, employees that quite or are terminated, etc.

    Jun 18, 2016
  • anon

    It is ridiculous to think that retirement and post-retirement health care benefits must be prefunded. No private company does this and for sure the US governent and State governments do not. You should seek to privatize the postal service and avoid such draconian retirement funding requirements.

    Jun 05, 2016
  • anon

    Andrew, you need to brush up on your politics. The political game by those in the pocked of big business are doing this to BANKRUPT the USPS. Corporate lobbyists pressured lawmakers to pass these absurd laws to pre-fund everything in order to eliminate the Postal Service. So, no, privatization does not help. We need to have public services that serve the public -- not serve to make rich people richer.

    Jun 19, 2016
  • anon

    why would they do that ? Fedex AND UPS need post office air assets (government subsidized) to stay in bussiness. If the post office went under so would FedEx and UPS. What people think of as the free market doesn't really exist. They say that capitalism and individual inisative built america , this of courses is propaganda. Free land built america, wether for the railroads or homesteaders or indenteted servants (7years for 50acres). Labor & Land =wealth, capital is a mere force multiplier, when capitalists buy a productive bussiness they are buy a share in other mens labor. For all the land in the world and all the seed corn besides will not plant its self. All economic and political power is about getting control over labor for without it you can do nothing.

    Feb 27, 2017
  • anon

    Savvy analysis , For what it's worth if people are looking for a Packing List , my wife discovered a sample version here PDF sites

    Jun 03, 2016
  • anon

    You get home and find a slip saying a certified letter is waiting for you. It could be IRS notifying you they're about to take everything you own. The post office is closed. No good. The next day, you will hike to the post office. On the front door is a notice saying guns are not allowed inside, but there is nobody there to leave your gun with. Obviously, the sign does nothing to stop a violent criminal, but what about law-abiding citizens? Are we supposed to leave our guns at home? What if we need the gun en route to the post office, or en route home?

    May 11, 2016
  • anon

    Well, maybe you leave it in the car like most us do when we see a sign like that or yes, leave them at home. Or maybe go with another person who waits outside with your gun. This is not that hard.

    May 17, 2016
  • anon

    Bush and the lame duck Congress stuck this poison pill in a bill in 2006.their intend was to kill postal service so they could turn it over to private companies. All these people on the right say how much they love the Constitution but it says in the Constitution the government shall start a postal service not FedEx not UPS.

    May 11, 2016
  • anon

    What we are seeing is a huge account for the next theft that will occur by our government supported Wall Street, Big banks etc. If is not put where then feds etc can not touch it, it will be another victim of government and corporate leeching of all American wealth.

    Apr 12, 2016
  • anon

    Republicans in Congress have little concern about the retirement benefits of unborn postal employees. I believe they are working to destroy the USPS and transfer mail delivery to privately held companies who will raise rates and make a fortune.

    Apr 08, 2016
  • anon

    So, if these requirements are such a big problem, why is the bureaucracy and the union so opposed to spinning off the USPS as a private concern? If private businesses of similar size can get away without having to pre-fund their future retiree benefits then the USPS Inc., as a private business could do the same, right? Then they could operate like all other private businesses. Why not let the USPS stand or fail on it's own?

    Apr 01, 2016
  • anon

    Because spinning off the USPS is a TERRIBLE idea...and ALL the for-profit delivery services (you know, like UPS and FedEx) are totally AGAINST it!! And why? Because they DEPEND on the USPS to do many of their deliveries for them! Yup. It is FAR more cost effective for them to hand off deliveries in, say, rural areas, than for them to do it themselves.

    Apr 07, 2016
  • anon

    I get mail 6 times a week. My biggest barrel on trash day is the junk I get from the mail service. My comment often is "I have trash delivery 6 times a week and trash pick up once a week". With today's electronic communication the need for 6 day delivery is about the same as the need for the pony express. If we cut deliver to 3 time a week the long term savings would be huge, the current mode of operation is completely irresponsible.

    Feb 24, 2016
  • anon

    Try getting your packages thru the computer

    May 11, 2016
  • anon

    The mail should be delivered 7 days a week. One does not compete by delivering less.

    May 08, 2016
  • anon

    A shorter delivery week doesn't meet with statutes in law, i.e. court summons and legal communications are routinely delivered through the mail.

    Apr 10, 2016
  • anon

    The Postal Service is a great 240 year old institution. It is a part of the fabric of our American society. It is a national treasure that has to be kept functioning and vital, for every ones sake.

    Feb 18, 2016
  • anon

    Is this why USPS price hiked 20+% over night?

    Jan 23, 2016
  • anon

    Excellent job in making these payments. Retirees should never have to worry about the stability of their benefit programs - and their retirement pay... I had read somewhere that this plan was put in to place so that the only solution was to privatized the Postal Service. I guess you don't need to be privatized at this point. I think Congress should do something to drastically reduce these payments because I agree with your analysis. Not knowing much about all of this, I just hope they can't tap in to these funds and put you right back to where you were. Again, excellent job, kudo's all around to the USPS.

    Nov 27, 2015
  • anon

    Exactly - you don't know much about all of this but as long as you get paid and someone else like Congress will find a way to pay for all of it, great for you, and while the private businesses compete and nothing is certain for their employees. The USPS is exactly what is wrong with America these days - another government run business that is mismanaged and can't pay its bills and therefore goes into more debt and steals from the taxpayer. And now you are saying kudos for them while they are robbing Peter to pay Paul. Nice one!!

    Apr 08, 2016
  • anon

    "The USPS is exactly what is wrong with America these days - another government run business that is mismanaged and can't pay its bills and therefore goes into more debt and steals from the taxpayer" - Matt You don't know what you are talking about and you sure as heck don't know anything about accounting and financing processes for a business. This is NOT about the post office being able to pay it's bills. If you actually read the article, the post office is operationally profitable. The ONLY thing that pushes them into the red is the Congressionally-mandated pre-funding for health and retirement accounts. Congress put this burden on the Postal Service KNOWING that the result would be to push them into the red. I challenge you to find ANY large company - and the USPS is a HUGE operation - that has pre-funded their retirement and health-care expenses to 100%. It would be a patently unsound business decision - period. It starves the existing operation, stifling innovation and modernization. I believe that the goal here is to build up a reserve from which Congress can 'borrow' replacing the actual money - with IOUs. If you remember what happened to Social Security you know how this would work. Somewhere down the road, someone will point with horror at the huge unfunded liability in the pension funds and the tax increase that will be needed to put the money they borrowed back. Basically, they will behave as if, when they replaced the money with IOUs, they had NO INTENTION of EVER making good on them - which, in fact, they didn't. They will blame the post office for mismanagement (just like you did), ignoring the fact that it was THEIR decision to replace the money which had been set aside with (now worthless) IOUs. They will 'stand strong' against raising taxes on their constituents. They will come up with the solution - give the post office assets and liabilities to a private company, giving the company a monopoly on mail delivery. As a private company, they will be able to set the rates and service levels as they like. It may cost a nickel send a letter from Chicago to NY City while it costs $7 to send a letter from Chicago to Peoria. It may sound cynical but, it wouldn't surprise me if the selection of which company should get to run this highly-lucrative business were based on say, campaign contributions.

    Apr 29, 2016
  • anon

    USPS PAY YOUR BILL!

    Oct 07, 2015
  • anon

    What are the first 10 post offices you'll close and sell to meet your obligations?

    Sep 14, 2015
  • anon

    Every single self employed and privately employed person in the nation must fund their own retirement, not shove it off onto the backs of future employees. The problem isn't the fact that only the post office has this requirement, it's that no other public sector workers do.

    Feb 19, 2015
  • anon

    I also don't have to do it 75 years in advance.

    Nov 12, 2015
  • anon

    No, the USPS is NOT required to pre-fund 75 years in advance. That is a myth perpetrated by those who do not understand the requirement or those who have an agenda other that presentation of the facts. This 75-year myth has been debunked by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. The USPS has no requirement to fund 75 years’ worth of benefits. The requirement is to fund only the actuarial calculation of the future liability of their current or former workforce. For accounting purposes the USPS must estimate the future liability over a 75 year period. This 75 year issue is only an accounting exercise, however; the funding requirement is limited to the actual liability for the benefits already accrued by the USPS workforce. This pre-funding requirement is quite reasonable and should be required of all post-retirement benefit schemes, both public and private. The intent is to ensure that the growing unfunded liability for retiree benefits for current employees is covered by well-managed investments that grow for the benefit of the workers. The workers earned the benefits with their work, so USPS (and other government agencies and private companies) should set aside funds for them -- as they are accrued, not later. Universal adoption of this rule would prevent the USPS and other institutions from raiding employee’s accrued benefit funds and would eliminate potential taxpayer liability due to benefit plan fund mismanagement.

    Dec 11, 2015
  • anon

    In 2000, 2001 USPS employees were made to pay in extra to their retirement accounts , known as CSRS and FERS, under the 1997 budget reconciliation act law for BUDGET Reasons only according to NALC Legislation fact sheet of 2003. The President and both sides of Congress thanked the Postal Workers for their "sacrifice", while others were getting tax cut payouts in the US Mail. The increase was removed from the Presidents budget in 2003. And New Legislation began on CSRS. A request was made for a ' hypothetical postal funding ' of CSRS by the author of the PAEA and several other Senators. A letter to the honorable Jim Nussle was written and sent on January 27, 2003, www.cbo.gov/publication/14255, in which a lowered amount was to be paid in to CSRS by the USPS. Following that the Envelope Mailing Association Institute met with the Presidents Commission on Postal Studies which can be found online at govinfo.library.unt.edu/.../comments/organizations/ema.foundation.pdf dated Feb. 12, 2003, in which the USPS was found by OPM to overfund CSRS by 71 billion and GAO 103.1 billion , due to this matter the USPS was to legally be recognized by Congressional legislation, on the matter, and get a lowered amount from 32 billion to 5 billion . The 5 billion was to be paid forward over 40 years time , having no effect on the USPS, the public, its workers, the federal budget or federal budget scoring. But due to the alec/Koch cabal pursing the privatization of USPS for Ups and FedEx, ( see article on line with search , April 2012, Bob Sloan , voters league transparency project . net, and www.kochcash.org/koctopus ) the congressional budget office came on board and stated if the USPS was to get a lowered amount to pay forward then the USPS would not raise stamp rates. according to further information, the USPS Post Master General Potter, agreed not to raise stamp rates ( GOP ) for 3 years from 2003 until 2006. He received pay per performance bonus money and eventually retired with 5.5 million . The PAEA was passed by voice vote , and the effect on the USPS began. Non replacement of attrition orders began to be given to cut back on the working forces of the USPS due to having CSRS and FERS overfunded and now the PAEA. Over 925 have died directly or indirectly due to the effect of the PAEA. Safetyfirstusps.com /fallen-postal-workers lists a few. not all. So for having too much money and needing more prefunded, workers have died. When will enough money be for retirement for deceased workers , is there an answer for the ones that have passed that don't get the retirement and are dead due to the prefunding mandate? Looking out for a mandate by the alec Koch in order to take down the USPS, which predates the forming of the Nation and Constitution is a reason for orders of non replacement so a USMC/USPS can die for having too much money in retirement in the first place , this is a Congressional standard?

    Feb 19, 2015

Pages

Share this post


Recent Comments

Monthly Archive