Video: Senator Tester Says Postal Execs Should Not Receive Outlandish Salaries and Benefits for their work
Filed under: pay, politics, postal, postal news, usps, videos
During hearing of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee on the 21 Century Postal Service Act , Senator Jon Tester (D-MT) pushed to hold the Postmaster General more accountable for the Postal Service’s actions.
“Tester said that public service is “an honor” and that public officials shouldn’t be receiving outlandish salaries and benefits for their work, especially when the Postal Service is facing difficult times. In Fiscal Year 2010, the Postmaster General received $800,000 in total compensation, including over $270,000 in salary and bonuses, despite the fact that the Postal Service lost $8.5 billion in 2010 and has shed nearly 20 percent of its workforce since 2006.” Read more
USPS Issues Final Decision on Postmaster Pay Package
Filed under: pay, pay info, postal, postal news, Postmasters, usps
for Fiscal Years 2011-2015. Postmaster Salary Range Increase of 6.5% from January 2013 through January 2016.
“Severe Financial Difficulties” Cited, as PFP Salary Rating Applications are Suspended for FY 2011 and FY 2012.
After 4 months of pay talks between representatives from both Postmaster organizations and the Postal Service, today the Postal Service issued a final decision concerning changes in pay policies, schedules, and fringe benefit programs for Postmasters.
Below is a jointly released statement from NAPUS President Bob Rapoza and League President Mark Strong, both leaders expressed disappointment that many of the proposals they presented were not included in the pay package.
“During the past four months, NAPUS and the League have been engaged in pay talks with the Postal Service. During this time we presented our case and put forth our best arguments to no avail due to the current financial condition of the postal service Today we received the final pay package delivered to our offices..”
“At the beginning of Pay Talks the postal service had projected a loss of $8.5 billion and now, 120 days later, the projected loss is $10 billion. This financial crisis we are in is through no fault of the more than 26,000 Postmasters who work extremely hard to manage the postal services most critical operations and provide universal service to the American public. While realizing that the financial condition of the Postal Service dictated the tone of the pay talks process, we believe that some of our recommendations could have been included in the package without adding significant costs to the program.”
“The Pay Package includes a 6.5% increase in the minimum and maximum salary ranges of the EAS pay schedule from January 2013 through January 2016. However, PFP Program ratings will be suspended and not be applied to salaries for FY 2011 and FY 2012. A determination as to whether PFP ratings will be applied to salaried for 2013 through 2015 will be based on the economic condition of the Postal Service during those years.”
“The Performance Evaluation System (PES) is discontinued and a joint work group will be established by the Postmaster associations and the Postal Service, to determine how to incorporate the compensation portion of the discontinued PES into the NPA component of the PFP Program.”
“It is not just Postmasters that will have to manage without a pay raise in 2011 and 2012. The entire federal work force is in the same boat and there are a lot of people around the country who’ve lost their jobs, and others who seen a decline in wages.”
For more information on changes to leave and health benefits contributions, please click Pay Package 2011-2015 to see the entire EAS Pay Package for Postmasters (FY 2011-2015.)
Charlie Moser
November 9, 2011
OIG Says USPS Lowered 2009 Pay for Performance Scores To Save money
The Office of Inspector General for the U. S. Postal Service has issued an audit report on the 2009 Pay- for-Performance program. On August 27, 2010 NAPUS and the League filed a joint letter to the OIG requesting their assistance with an investigation into Postmasters’ 2009 Pay-for-Performance program’s final core requirement ratings and appeals. Our request for an investigation was not based simply on reduced monetary payouts due to manipulation of the program. Rather, we requested this investigation based on the failure of the U.S. Postal Service to comply with the administrative rules of the PFP. It appears from the OIG’s report that the OIG found that the Postal Service did fail to comply with the rules. Read more
Pay Talks Between USPS and Postal Management Associations Underway
From the National Association of Postmasters of the US:
Pay talks between the U. S. Postal Service and the management associations are now underway. The Postal Service has submitted proposed changes in pay policies and schedules and fringe benefits for Postmasters for the period covering fiscal year 2011 through fiscal year 2015. NAPUS and League representatives will now enter the consultative process to discuss the proposed changes with the Postal Service, which will include providing the Postal Service with a list of pay issues on behalf of Postmasters.
While specific details of the pay consultations will remain confidential, updates on the talks will be provided on the NAPUS website as they become available.
NALC: Latest COLA Stands At $1,019
PRNote: With one month to go,$1019 may be the second largest COLA in bargaining history
Ninth contract Cost Of Living Adjustment (COLA): $1,019 annually.
The projected accumulation toward the ninth and final contract COLA under the 2006-2011 National Agreement stands at $1,019 annually following the June release of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for May.
This final COLA of the National Agreement will be based on the July 2011 CPI.
2012 Retiree COLA: 3.4%
The projected accumulation for the 2012 retiree COLA was 3.4 percent following the release of the May CPI.
Because there was no retiree COLA for 2010 or 2011, the 2012 retiree COLA will be determined by comparing the average CPI during the third quarter of 2011 and the average during the third quarter of 2008.
Click here for further details about the retiree COLA.
2012 FECA COLA: 3.5%
Federal Employees Compensation Act (FECA) COLAs are applicable only in cases where death or disability occurred more than one year prior to the adjustment’s effective date.
The projected accumulation for the 2012 COLA under FECA was 3.5 percent following the release of the May CPI. The 2012 FECA COLA will be based on the increase in the CPI between December 2010 and December 2011.
source: NALC
USPS Pay-for-Performance: Fair And Balanced Or Subject To Manipulation
Ask postal employees about the Postal Service’s Pay-for-Performance (PFP) program and you’ll hear a wide range of opinions as to why they think the program is not working. Many believe the program is unfair and can be subject to manipulation.
According to Postal Service officials, the PFP program’s foundation is a balanced scorecard of objective, independently verifiable measures of service, employee engagement, and financial performance. Performance indicators are measured at national, district, business unit, and individual levels.
In its 2010 Comprehensive Statement of Postal Operations and Annual Report, the Postal Service stated the PFP program continued to drive organizational achievement as measured by a 2.2 percent increase in Total Factor Productivity (TFP) in 2010 compared to 2009.This marked the ninth year of positive TFP growth since 2000. The current PFP program evolved over a 12-year period and became the only basis for annual salary increases and lump sum awards for executive and administrative employees beginning in 2004. In implementing its PFP program, the Postal Service joined the ranks of many private sector firms where pay for performance is a standard feature for management and executives.
The OIG plans to initiate a review of the Postal Service’s PFP program. We would like to hear more about your thoughts on the subject.
Read the entire story and Take the poll at USPS OIG’s website
Postal Manager Can Pursue Discrimination Lawsuit Under Equal Pay Act
Female Postal Manager also claims she earned a pay-scale level that does not offer annual leave carry-over, paid life insurance, fully paid health insurance or survivor benefits.
A Native American woman can amend her discrimination complaint against the United States Postal Service over claims that the company paid a higher salary to a man with similar job duties, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims ruled. Beverly Martin started working for USPS in 1981, and over the years worked her way up the ranks to become program manger. From 2004 until 2008 Martin headed the office’s National Performance Assessment program in the Field Operations Requirements and Planning division. In March of 2008 USPS promoted a co-worker named Thomas Henry to division manager, a position for which Martin had also applied. She filed a discrimination complaint with the Equal Opportunity Commission because she believes that Henry was hired based on his gender. Martin says that although she practically shared the same job responsibilities as Henry, he was paid more by USPS.”Plaintiff alleges that, because of Mr. Henry’s gender, he received greater compensation for performing job duties substantially similar to those that Plaintiff performed,” the ruling, filed Jan. 26 states.
Here’s some other legal information on the case:
On January 26, 2011 Judge Mary Ellen Coster Williams of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims rejected USPS’’ motion to dismiss postal manager Beverly Martin’s pay discrimination claim. Judge Williams’ decision rejected USPS’s argument that the recent Supreme Court “Iqbal and Twombly” decisions effectively required Ms. Martin to prove her Equal Pay Act case outright in order to survive a motion to dismiss. In particular, Judge Williams held that Ms. Martin properly alleged that the actual job duties she and the male comparator performed in their respective positions, and not their formal job titles, controlled whether or not they could be compared for pay discrimination analysis. Judge Williams also ruled that the fact that the male comparator did the job after Ms. Martin was no bar to Ms. Martin’s Equal Pay Act claims.
Here ares excerpts from her complaint filed February 11, 2011:
Plaintiff Beverly A. Martin has worked for the U.S. Postal Service since January 1981, in a variety of positions of increasing responsibility and compensation levels.
Beginning November, 2004, until March 28, 2008, Ms. Martin held the position of Program Manager for the National Performance Assessment (“NPA”) program in the Field Operations Requirements and Planning (“FORP”) division at USPS. Ms. Martin’s position was ranked as an “EAS 25,” and beginning 2004 she was paid a salary of $80,902 as set out in USPS schedules for managers at that level. Her annual pay for the NPA program manager position was $89,194 in 2004-2005; $98,336 in 2006; and $103,207 in 2007.
From November 2004 until July 2005, Ms. Martin also held the temporary position of Acting Manager, FORP, on a “detail,” but at the same, lower compensation level of an EAS-25. Ms. Martin’s duties as Acting Manager, FORP encompassed oversight responsibility for six to 14 different programs in FORP, only one of which was the NPA program. Ms. Martin’s responsibilities as Acting Manager also included oversight of the NPA Program Manager, and supervision of several other staff working on thirteen (13) other programs.
Ms. Naoma Bourdon, also female, served as Manager, FORP from July, 2005 until February 29, 2008. Ms. Bourdon was Ms. Martin’s first line supervisor during that time, except
during Ms. Martin’s eight month tenure as Acting Manager. Ms. Bourdon’s duties as Manager, FORP encompassed oversight responsibility for six to 14 different programs in FORP, only one of which was the NPA program. Ms. Bourdon retired from the position effective February 29, 2008. On information and belief, Ms. Bourdon was paid at the PCES-1 level throughout her tenure as Manager, FORP.
The USPS named Mr. Thomas Henry, a white Male, as Acting Manager, FORP, effective March 1, 2008. Ms. Martin does not have knowledge of Mr. Henry’s annual pay during his four month tenure as Acting Manager, FORP.
The USPS named Mr. Henry Manager, FORP, on July 5, 2008. Ms. Martin also applied for the position, but was not selected. Ms. Martin filed a formal EEO complaint of discrimination against the USPS based on her non-selection on or about October 6, 2008.
Ms. Martin continued to serve as NPA Program Manager during Mr. Henry’s first month as acting Manager, FORP. Her last day as NPA Program Manager was March 28, 2008. Her last rate of pay as NPA Program Manager in 2008 at the EAS-25 scale was $105,088.00. Her previous annual pay for the NPA Program Manager was $89,194 in 2004-2005; $98,336 in 2006; and $103,207 in 2007.
Identical Duties
Ms. Martin’s duties as the NPA program manager from 2004-2008 were detailed in her annual statement of “goals” included in her annual performance evaluations. Ms. Martin had complete management and oversight of the NPA program including officer briefings; planning, development, and implementation; oversight of NPA staff and contractors; and hiring and performance reviews of NPA staff.
Mr. Henry’s 2008 new goals, both as Acting and as Executive Manager, FORP, were nearly identical to, or encompassed fewer responsibilities than, the goals and duties set out for Ms. Martin as Program Manager for the NPA program between 2005 and 2008. In particular, Mr. Henry’s new goals as Manager, FORP show that his main and only responsibility as Manager, FORP was management and oversight of the NPA program. Ms. Martin’s main responsibility as Program Manager for the NPA program from 2004 to 2008 was also the management and oversight of the NPA program.
Pay Disparity
Beginning July 25, 2008, and continuing to the present, although Mr. Henry’s duties as Manager, FORP, were far fewer than Ms. Bourdon’s had encompassed, and essentially identical to Ms. Martin’s duties as NPA program manager, USPS compensated Mr. Henry at the higher-ranked and better paid PCES-1 level. As of July 25, 2008, Mr. Henry’s PCES-1 salary was $115, 596.80.
Mr. Henry held the position of Manager, FORP, from July 25, 2008 through July, 2010, when he was selected for another USPS managerial position. As of July 25, 2008, Mr. Henry’s PCES-1 salary was $115,596.80, or more than $10,000 per year higher than Ms. Martin’s last annual pay as NPA program manager. In addition, as a PCES-1, Mr. Henry was eligible for benefits including 128 additional hours annual leave carry-over; fully paid life insurance; fully paid health insurance; and survivor benefits, all of which are estimated to increase the value of his compensation package to $129,327.18.
As further detailed in 17 through 20, below, Ms. Martin’s received a discriminatory, lower salary as an EAS-25 Program manager for doing PCES-1 work beginning 2004, when she was paid an annual salary of $89,194. The pay discrimination continued through 2006 ($98,336); 2007 ($103,027), and 2008 ($105,088). In addition, Ms. Martin’s EAS-25 level compensation package from 2004 through 2008 did not include the additional PCES-1 benefits enumerated in paragraph 15; including the annual leave carry-over; paid life insurance; fully paid health insurance; or survivor benefits. Ms. Martin therefore seeks back pay in an amount more than $10,000.
The USPS’s pay discrimination cost Ms. Martin $31,716 in 2005. Ms. Martin’s 2005 annual pay at the lower EAS-25 level was $89,194.
The USPS’s pay discrimination cost Ms. Martin $34,093 in 2006. Ms. Martin’s 2006 annual pay at the lower EAS-25 level was $98,336.
The USPS’s pay discrimination cost Ms. Martin $37,203 in 2007. Ms. Martin’s 2007 annual pay at the lower EAS-25 level was $103,207.
The USPS’s pay discrimination cost Ms. Martin $48,670 in 2008. Ms. Martin’s 2008 annual pay at the lower EAS-25 level was $105,088.
Ms. Martin also seeks the additional value of the 5% Thrift savings match which she would have received had she been compensated at the PCES-1 level. Ms. Martin is covered by the FERS retirement system and contributed the maximum allowed each year from 2004 through 2008. USPS contributed the 5% match to Ms. Martin’s Thrift savings plan in each of those years.
Thousands Of Postal Employees To See Social Security Tax Decrease Starting January 7
Filed under: FERS, pay, postal, postal employees, postal news, usps
NEW TAX LAW
SOCIAL SECURITY EMPLOYEE TAX RATE DECREASES FOR 2011
Thousands of postal employees will have their Social Security employee tax rate decrease 2 percent in 2011.
The tax reduction is a result of the “Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010” signed into law Dec. 17, 2010.
The Act temporarily decreases the Social Security employee tax rate from 6.2 percent (of the first $106,800 in earned income) to 4.2 percent for 1 year — but some employees will not see any changes in their tax rate.
Here are the new law’s effects:
■ Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) employees — Since they do not pay Social Security, the new law does not change their tax rate and there will be no change in their retirement deductions.
■ CSRS-offset and Federal Employees’ Retirement System (FERS) employees — Social Security tax will be reduced by 2 percent and there will be no change in their retirement deductions.
The Social Security tax rate change will be reflected in Jan. 7, 2011 paychecks. The reduced Social Security withholding will have no effect on the employee’s future Social Security benefits.
Click here for more information, or contact the Accounting Help Desk at 866-974-2733
Postal Letter Carriers and Mail Handlers Get Wage Increase
Filed under: APWU, NALC, NPMHU, NRLCA, pay, postal, postal news, usps
The last general wage increase under the 2006 National Agreement for the National Postal Mail Handlers Union (NPMHU) and the National Association of Letter Carriers (NALC) became effective on November 20, 2010.
NPMHU represented employees will receive a 1.2% increase. NALC represented employees will see a 1.85% raise in their paychecks. Both raises will be reflected in the paychecks issued on December 10, 2010.
APWU and Rural Carriers represented postal employees received their last wage increase under the current contract in November of 2009.
NALC: Proposed Federal Pay Freeze Does Not Include Postal Workers
The National Association Of Letter Carriers released the following statement:
Proposed federal pay freeze: President Barack Obama announced on Monday a plan to freeze federal employees’ pay for two years, calling the measure necessary to help reduce the federal deficit. Postal workers, however, are paid by the self-sustaining U.S. Postal Service, and so they are not included in this proposal.