Congressman Ross To Hold Hearing On Reforming Federal Pensions
What’s Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander
Chairman Ross to Hold Hearing on Ending Pension Privileges for Members of Congress and Reforming Federal Pensions to Protect the Taxpayer
Washington, Jan 20 -
Lakeland, FL – Congressman Dennis A. Ross (R-FL) today announced he would hold a hearing on reforming Congressional pensions and ensuring that Members of Congress are treated no differently than the rest of the federal workforce. In addition, the hearing will explore options in reforming the entire federal pension system, Congress included, to bring it more in line with the private sector workforce. Read more
USPS: No Deduction In Pay Period 27 For Dental and Vision Plan
In accordance with federal regulations governing Federal Employees Dental and Vision Insurance Program (FEDVIP) enrollment, premiums are deducted for 26 pay periods, not for the entire benefit year. Therefore, employees currently enrolled in FEDVIP will not have premiums deducted in pay period 02-2012 (covering the paycheck issued on Jan. 20). Premium payments for enrollments continuing in 2012 and for new open season enrollments — effective Jan. 1, 2012 — will be deducted in pay period 03-2012 (covering the paycheck issued on Feb. 3).
Premium deductions for other programs such as Federal Employees Health Benefits and the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program will not be affected. Regulations governing these programs require premium deductions based on the benefit year.
USPS Reinstates Relocation Leave For Postal Execs
Handbook F-15-A Revision: Reinstatement of Relocation Leave for Eligible Executive and Administrative Schedule
Employees
Effective September 19, 2011, relocation leave for eligible executive and administrative schedule (EAS) employees has been reinstated. Handbook F-15-A, Relocation Policy — Non-Bargaining Executive and Administrative Schedule Employees, is revised to include relocation leave for eligible EAS employees.
[Add new subchapter 26 as follows:]
26 Relocation Leave
EAS employees are eligible to receive paid time off generally for the packing, delivering, and unpacking of household goods or at their manager’s discretion as long as it is related to relocation. Employees are authorized to use up to 5 days (8-hour increments) of relocation leave. These days do not have to be consecutive. This leave is also available to the employee’s spouse, if he or she is also employed by the Postal Service. Relocation leave is charged to Code 080 in TACS.
USPS eliminated the Relocation Leave policy effective August 17, 2009 as part of major changes to Handbook F-15-A, Relocation Policy — Nonbargaining (EAS) Employees
- Relocation leave is eliminated.
2-5.1 Relocation Leave
You are eligible for a maximum of up to five days of relocation leave (code 80). This leave is in addition to any other authorized travel time. It may be taken consecutively or as individual days but must be used by the time you settle into your new home. An actual physical move of the employee’s household is a requirement for eligibility for relocation leave. Your spouse may be eligible for relocation leave if the following conditions are met:
• Employed by the Postal Service.
• Moving with you.
• Awarded a position competitively.
• Successful candidate for a bid position at the new location if a bargaining employee.
Note: Not applicable to external hires or if transferring from another government agency.
In 2009 USPS OIG issued an Audit Report on Postal Service’s Relocation Policy. The OIG found
In CY 2008, the Postal Service spent $73 million for relocation benefits for more than 2,000 employees.3 In our view, some of the relocations that occurred during this period were exorbitant. In one instance, the Postal Service paid over $1.9 million to relocate a vehicle maintenance program analyst intrastate. The majority of this cost came from a $1.7 million loss on the sale of this employee’s home.
In another instance, as cited by the national media, the Postal Service paid $1.2 million to purchase an employee’s home through its real estate management firm. The revised February 2009 relocation procedures (including the $1 million home purchase ceiling)were not in place at the time the employee took a lateral transfer and relocated from South Carolina to Texas. The Postal Service has paid over $75,000 to date to move this employee. This includes $16,075 for the employee and his spouse to take a house hunting trip, including per diem and temporary living expenses. These costs were paid using a lump sum reimbursement process.
Although USPS issued revised relocation policies on August 13, 2009 the OIG recommended:
Consequently, until such policies associated with vacancy announcements and benefit limits are implemented and the Postal Service’s financial situation improves, we believe the Postal Service should consider freezing its relocation benefits program.
USPS: PreFunding Retiree Health Benefits Raises Overall Labor Costs
According to USPS:
Compensation and benefits costs represent approximately 65% to 71% of total operating costs. However, when workers’ compensation and retiree health benefits, including the legally mandated prefunding of the retiree health benefits, are added, total personnel costs increase to approximately 77% to 80%. Although many significant steps have been taken to decrease compensation and benefits costs in response to declining mail volume, many of these costs remain fixed and beyond the Postal Service’s control due to its participation in federal programs. Contracts with postal unions are negotiated for a fixed period of time, usually three to five years. They cannot be modified during the contract period
except by mutual consent. Retirement benefits are not determined by management but rather by the federal government, and healthcare benefit costs mandated by law or contract continue to rise well above the rate of inflation. In addition, the Postal Service’s ability to adjust its workforce and network infrastructure is limited by contractual, statutory, regulatory and political obstacles.
Employer contributions, as a percentage of employee basic pay for FERS will increase to 11.9% in 2012. Employee contributions for the past three years, as a percentage of employee basic pay were 7.0% for CSRS and 0.8% for Dual CSRS and FERS.
The number of employees enrolled in each of the retirement plans at the end of 2011, 2010, and 2009 is as follows:
Retirement Enrollment by Program
(Actual numbers) 2011|2010| 2009
CSRS- 79,014| 90,480 |110,024
Dual CSRS- 4,551|5,206 |5,947
FERS- 473,686| 488,222| 507,157
Total Enrollment -557,251| 583,908 |623,128
Editorial: FERS & CSRS Disability Retirement – Defending a Necessary Benefit
Filed under: Articles, Benefits, CSRS, FERS, postal, postal news
An exclusive article to PostalReporter.com written by Attorney Robert R. McGill
Does the Emperor receive his standing because of his hereditary anointment by the gods, or because of his superior governance abilities? Or, by giving generously to the lords and vassals and currying favor among them, does he retain power? Or, by giving lifetime gifts to the masses? Fear the emperor who consolidates power by doing the latter; for mob rule knows no boundaries, laws, or heavenly dictates. Power by lawlessness is indeed the origin of the reign of terror. – From, The Shadows of Machiavelli
Article 1, Section Eight, Clause 7 of the U.S. Constitution specifically empowers Congress to “establish Post Offices”, and to that extent, it is always important to recognize that the U.S. Postal Service is not merely a convenience or a Federal mandate which merely exists because some Senator or Congressman decided that it would please his or her constituents; rather, the Founding Fathers recognized the necessity of establishing a network of interstate commerce and communication between the various states, and the importance thereof.
As a Constitutional creation, the Postal Service deserves a special place in the budgetary process and decision-making deliberations during these times of debt-reduction efforts, of political conversations and debates. Where it is a Constitutional creation, the employees of such an entity should be provided with a compensation package which is commensurate with its status as a recognized and vital part of the Federal government. Federal Disability Retirement should remain a part of every Postal Worker’s compensation package, for reasons which are Constitutional, pragmatically justifiable, and because it is a progressive paradigm of cost-savings. Read more
PMG Video To Employees discusses proposal to move away from current Health Care Plan
Filed under: Benefits, politics, postal, postal news, usps, USPS News Link
In his latest “State of the Business” video to employees, PMG Pat Donahoe says the proposal to move away from the current Federal Employee Health Benefits Plan (FEHBP) to a USPS-sponsored benefit is a vital element of a more sustainable business model.
“This all ties into the larger picture of what we’ve been talking about over the last several months regarding legislative change,” said Donahoe. “The whole idea and aim is to secure a strong financial future for the organization, the industry and for you as an employee.”
Donahoe acknowledged that employees are used to the FEHBP and feel comfortable in knowing they’re part of a large plan. “But that doesn’t mean it’s the best plan or the plan that offers the best flexibility for you or the Postal Service as a business,” said Donahoe. “By pulling this piece of our costs away from FEHBP, we’d be able to save about $500-700 million a year.”
The PMG said this proposal is the same business model followed by other large companies with extensive employee bases such as General Electric and IBM. “These companies leverage their size to get the lowest cost and best value for their employees,” he said. “This is the model USPS wants to follow.”
“While all of us have been taking great steps to reduce our costs, the health care cost is one we’re unable to address in its current model,” said Donahoe. “We need to change this. We need the support to own this program to maximize the benefit to you as an employee and to the Postal Service.”
The Postal Service’s proposal will require congressional approval. It will allow USPS to establish its own health benefits program.
source: USPS News Link Read more
Video: Rights Of Postal Workers Under Attack
Filed under: APWU, Benefits, postal, postal news, usps, videos
“The U. S. Postal Service is facing financial problems that was created largely by Congress. Now Congress wants to strip Postal Workers of their Union rights. MSNBC Ed Schultz talks with Cliff Guffey, President of the American Postal Workers Union on what’s being done to protect postal workers.”
“How much do you know about the United States Postal Service? You hear a lot of negative comments about their finances, don’t you? Well, earlier today,I spoke to the postal workers in Orlando, Florida. These are men and women in the same boat as Republican employees in states like Wisconsin and Verizon workers across the country on strike right now.They’re fighting for their jobs, their rights and their futures.” Read more
OPM Posts New And Revised Leave Fact Sheets
OPM has posted eight revised leave fact sheets on their website:
Sick Leave (General Information)
Sick Leave for Personal Medical Needs
Sick Leave for Family Care and Bereavement
Sick Leave to Care for a Family Member with a Serious Health Condition
Emergency Leave Transfer Program
Voluntary Leave Transfer Program
They have also posted three new fact sheets:
Definitions Related to Family Member and Immediate Relative
Funeral Leave and Other Bereavement Options
***
Most of these duplicate what is in the ELM. In particular postal employees should see “Effect of Extended Leave Without Pay (LWOP) (or Other Nonpay Status) on Federal Benefits and Programs.” This is the best explanation of the effect of LWOP on federal benefits that I’ve seen anywhere.
Don Cheney
How The Government Shutdown May Affect Current and New Federal Retirees
The National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association (NARFE) has compiled information on how a Government shutdown will affect Federal Workers and Annuitants. The information below covers areas which may apply to Postal Workers:
Annuity Benefits: Judging from similar government shutdowns in the past, and the fact that OPM retirement operations are not funded through general revenues, retirees should expect to receive their annuity payments deposited into their accounts or received in the mail, on time as usual. OPM sends annuity payment tapes to the Department of Treasury in the middle of the month prior to the payment date so that Treasury has time to process the payment tapes/cut checks and ensure that annuity payments are received by the first of the month.
Health, Life, and Long-Term Care Benefits: Federal Employee Health Benefits Program, Federal Employees Group Life Insurance, FEDVIP (dental/vision insurance), and Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program premiums will continue to be withheld and paid by OPM. There will be no interruption in insurance coverage.
Retirement Processing: For those newly retired employees, a government shutdown may delay the processing of your paperwork by your agency, prior to your records being sent to OPM. For those recent retirees whose retirement OPM has already begun to process, there should be no additional delay caused by a government shutdown for the reasons given above.
Retirement and Benefits Information: OPM staff responsible for answering the retirement and health benefits questions asked by federal workers and annuitants will be available during the shutdown. If there is a shutdown, NARFE members will continue to have access to this information by calling or e-mailing the NARFE Retirement Benefits Service Department.
Thrift Savings Plan: The Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board has stated that a federal government shutdown would not affect the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) since it does not receive annual appropriations from Congress. The TSP would operate during such a period as usual.
Other Federal Benefits
The Department of Veterans Affair’s (VA) operational plans are still being finalized, but our current understanding is the following:
Thanks to advance appropriations (a two-year budget cycle), VA will continue to provide 100 percent of health care services to enrolled veterans through VA medical facilities across the country. Veterans’ medical appointments will not be canceled or delayed in the event of a partial governmentwide shutdown.
Advance appropriations, received from Congress, account for more than 80 percent of the VA’s discretionary appropriations.
While there will be a reduction in benefits staffing, the VA has taken measures to ensure, in the short-term, that veterans currently receiving VA benefits will continue to receive those payments on a timely basis and without interruption.
The VA will also continue to provide final resting places at our national cemeteries in the event of a partial governmentwide shutdown. Some cemeteries may operate on a modified schedule.
Some VA services that may be suspended in the event of a partial governmentwide shut down involve answering consumer inquiries by e-mail, telephone or mail, routine recruiting, hiring and training, and fraud investigations.
Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid: Others, like the Social Security Administration and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, operate under indefinite appropriations. In such cases benefits payments continue to be issued and honored by the Department of the Treasury because there is no lapse in the relevant appropriations.
Complied by the NARFE Legislation and Retirement Benefits Service Department on April 7, 2011
USPS OIG: OPM’s Long History Of Miscalculations Involving USPS Benefit Funds
Today, the USPS Office Of Inspector General responded to the OPM Office Of Inspector General’s “A Study of the Risks and Consequences of the USPS OIG’s Proposals to Change USPS’s Funding of Retiree Benefits”
OPM’s study concluded:
While we understand that the USPS is having financial difficulties, the OPM’s administration of the law has not caused this situation. The OPM has complied with the law as written on all accounts. To say otherwise is both inaccurate and obscures the true causes of USPS’s current crisis.
We believe that these proposals would have a lasting negative impact upon the retirement programs and trust funds but have little, if any, positive impact upon the USPS’s ultimate long-term profitability. Instead, the result of these proposals would be to shift costs from USPS ratepayers to the American taxpayers.
But the USPS OIG tells a different story:
Our reports focused on the latest of OPM’s long history of miscalculations involving Postal Service benefit funds:
• In 2002, the Postal Service’s pension fund was found to be overfunded by $78 billion. Congress corrected this in 2003.
• In 2003, OPM attempted to make the Postal Service responsible for $27 billion in military service pension obligations for Postal Service employees. Congress refused to accept this attempt.
• In 2009, we found that the OPM used an exaggerated 7 percent health care inflation forecast instead of the 5 percent industry standard, resulting in an overpayment of $13.2 billion by 2016. Congress ordered OPM to review it and they changed it.
• The Postal Service has been overcharged $75 billion for its share of the CSRS pension payments. In essence, for 40 years the Postal Service paid its own and the federal government’s inflationary costs.
OPM typically responded to these findings with initial denial followed by major corrections. In such a history of errors, one would expect to see some balance.
• Errors are normally random, but without exception these have disadvantaged the Postal Service.
• Self discovery by OPM of such substantial miscalculations should have occurred.
• Self correction by OPM, charged with fund administration, would also have been expected.
This is not about the financial condition of the Postal Service, but that the Postal Service was overcharged and subsequently overpaid into benefit funds. In the Unites States there is the rule of law and the accounts must be settled. This issue is fundamentally about righting an inequity.
Read USPS OIG’s full response
U.S. Postal Services OIG’s Response‐‐‐ OPM OIG Issues Study on USPS OIG’s Proposals Regarding the Funding of USPS Retiree Benefits.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the OPM Inspector General’s study reviewing our recent reports about the mischarges and overfunding of the Postal Service’s benefit obligations. Both the postal pension and health funds are administered by OPM and are accounted for separately from the federal government’s benefit funds.
Our reports focused on the latest of OPM’s long history of miscalculations involving Postal Service benefit funds:
- In 2002, the Postal Service’s pension fund was found to be overfunded by $78 billion. Congress corrected this in 2003.
- In 2003, OPM attempted to make the Postal Service responsible for $27 billion in military service pension obligations for Postal Service employees. Congress refused to accept this attempt.
- In 2009, we found that the OPM used an exaggerated 7 percent health care inflation forecast instead of the 5 percent industry standard, resulting in an overpayment of $13.2 billion by 2016. Congress ordered OPM to review it and they changed it.
- The Postal Service has been overcharged $75 billion for its share of the CSRS pension payments. In essence, for 40 years the Postal Service paid its own and the federal government’s inflationary costs.
OPM typically responded to these findings with initial denial followed by major corrections. In such a history of errors, one would expect to see some balance.
- Errors are normally random, but without exception these have disadvantaged the Postal Service.
- Self discovery by OPM of such substantial miscalculations should have occurred.
- Self correction by OPM, charged with fund administration, would also have been expected.
Regarding the matter that was reviewed in the OPM report, the Postal Service Office of Inspector General has the following observations:
Our reports concerning the mischarges and overfunding of Postal Service benefits relied on the work of an actuarial firm that was under contract to the OIG. That firm had previously done work for OPM in the benefits fund area. Our work was independently reviewed by a second actuary employed by the Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC). In contrast the OPM characterizes their study as an analysis based on the work of others, but without independent actuarial assistance.
The OPM study makes the following points in their review:
1. The taxpayers will sustain losses if the funds are restored to the Postal Service.
2. The Postal Service would use the returned funds to subsidize operations and not for benefit funds.
3. OPM is unable to correct the overcharges because of their limited authority.
4. The study endorses 100 percent prefunding requirement for Postal Service benefit funds.
In response to the OPM, we have some observations on each of their points:
1. The Postal Service benefit funds are funded entirely by postal employees and postage from American citizens and businesses. Postal Service contributions should not supplement federal employee contributions and federal employee contributions should not supplement Postal Service contributions.
2. If benefit fund overpayments were returned, the money would not be used for Postal Service operations. The proposal is to use the surplus to make annual benefit payments. Using
employee money for postal operations would be as wrong as putting it in the federal employee benefit fund; both are improper.
3. The Postal Inspector General and Senator Collins believe that OPM could correct this funding issue using their own authority. OPM has responsibility for accurately and fairly administering these funds.
4. OPM recommended 100 percent funding levels for both the Postal Service’s retirement and healthcare funds. However, the report is silent on the adequacy of OPM’s government
prefunding level of 40 percent for retirement and 0 percent for healthcare.
This is not about the financial condition of the Postal Service, but that the Postal Service was overcharged and subsequently overpaid into benefit funds. In the Unites States there is the rule of law and the accounts must be settled. This issue is fundamentally about righting an inequity.
source: National League Of Postmasters Of US