WaPo supports onerous USPS prefunding requirements b/c it gives Congress "leverage" to union bust

[brentspeak]

Below, the Washington Post editorial staff openly admits that artificially crippling USPS' finances via the 2006 Congressional requirement to pre-fund future employees' retirement health benefits -- an almost unprecedented financial requirement that virtually no other public or private business is ever saddled with-- has been useful in giving Congress "leverage" in pursuing USPS "reforms" (i.e., passing legislation which would break union contracts).

The following excerpts are from just two of several ed-ops the Washington Post editorial staff has penned recently on the USPS. This is an unusual and somewhat suspicious fixation on the Post's part: what (and who) is behind the paper's printing so many editorials on this one topic? Has there ever been an expose on who exactly is paying off the Washington Post editorial staff (chiefly, Fred Hiatt and Jackson Diehl) to promote RW/corporate scams? Who are the sugar-daddies hiding behind the curtain?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/usps-reform-may-be-on-the-way-but-is-it-too-late/2011/05/27/AGMPsQLH_story.html

Editorial Board Opinion

USPS reform may be on the way, but is it too late?

By Editorial, Published: June 7

The Senate’s leaders on postal issues, Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Thomas R. Carper (D-Del.), propose to let the Postal Service dip into the federal civil service retiree fund for the next several years so it can make otherwise unaffordable annual payments for retiree health and worker compensation. Ms. Collins and Mr.Carper say that this is justifiable because the Postal Service had overpaid the federal civil-service pension fund by some $50 billion in recent years, according to the USPS inspector general and the Postal Regulatory Commission.

Still, it’s a big concession that basically suspends the requirement, enacted just five years ago, that the Postal Service pre-fund these liabilities out of current revenue. USPS and its unions habitually blame this law for all of their woes. Actually, given USPS’s bleak financial future, the law was a wise precaution that also gave Congress leverage to demand reform.

snip

Yet we can’t help noting that these service cuts are necessary, in part, because the Postal Service has not done more to cut other still-unreasonable costs: Postal employees still enjoy a no-layoff clause and still pay a smaller share of their salary for health care than federal workers. More than 850 senior postal service managers get their health care absolutely free.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/postal-reform-act-is-imperfect-but-needed/2011/07/08/gIQA0Y1ddI_story.html

In the long run, the best solution for the Postal Service would be one that cuts it loose of the cumbersome oversight structure that prevents it from efficiently downsizing or competing, allows it to negotiate more sensible contracts and behave more like a private-sector business, and rethinks its universal service obligation for a century where people no longer rely on the mail to pay bills or send messages.

[brentspeak]

1. self/kick

:kick: