nasa1974's Account Talk

[nasa1974]

GovernmentExecutive.com

Lawmaker seeks 10 percent pay cut for Congress, White House
By Emily Long elong@govexec.com March 14, 2011


"Proposed legislation would slash pay for members of Congress, as well as the president and vice president.
Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler, R-Wash., on Thursday introduced a bill (H.R. 1012) that would cut lawmakers'salaries by 10 percent, effective in January 2013. The legislation also would mandate a 10 percent reduction in pay for the president and vice president. "We've voted to reduce our massive deficit by billions in order to create a better environment for job creators -- but we haven't cut a dime from our own paychecks," said Beutler. "The savings ought to start with us."..."

http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=47326&oref=todaysnews

Why wait until 2013?

 

[nasa1974]

GovernmentExecutive.com

From Nextgov: U.S. supercomputer experts assess radiation risks amid crisis at Japanese nuclear facility
By Aliya Sternstein asternstein@govexec.com March 14, 2011

"The U.S. agency charged with protecting America's nuclear weapons has deployed a team of stateside supercomputer experts to gauge the radiation risks posed by the nuclear crisis in Japan.

Read the whole story at Nextgov.com."

 

[nasa1974]

GovernmentExecutive.com

Short-term funding measure to prevent shutdown expected to pass
By Chris Strohm National Journal March 14, 2011

"Senior lawmakers from both parties on Sunday said they believe a short-term stopgap funding bill to keep the government running will be approved this week, but they did not see an end game in sight for developing a comprehensive plan to bring down the nation's debt.
The House is expected to approve a continuing resolution this week that would keep the government funded until April 8, with the Senate expected to follow suit. Negotiations will then continue on another short-term spending bill..."

http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=47322&oref=todaysnews


Great another extension. Sure is a heck of a way to run a business. Pass a budget already!!!

 

[WorkFE]

Why wait until 2013?

At the rate their going none of them will be in office by then.

 

[nasa1974]

GovernmentExecutive.com

Senator: Feds should "put the brakes on" new nuke plants after Japanese disaster
By Chris Strohm National Journal March 14, 2011

"Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Joe Lieberman, ID-Conn., said Sunday the U.S. government should "put the brakes on" building more nuclear power plants until design plans for new facilities are reviewed in the wake of the crisis unfolding in Japan..."

http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=47323&oref=todaysnews


A knee jerk reaction or actually comparing apples to apples.

 

[nasa1974]

Japan nuclear crisis sparks selling from equities to commodities



Tuesday March 15, 2011, 3:19 am EDT

By Jungyoun Park and David Chance

"SEOUL (Reuters) - Shares and other risky assets from the Australian dollar to commodities such as copper and oil slumped on Tuesday while safe-haven assets like U.S. Treasuries rallied as Japan's nuclear crisis worsened.
Rising radiation levels at an earthquake-hit nuclear plant in northeastern Japan triggered a huge selloff in Japanese shares and panic hoarding of food and other supplies in Tokyo..."

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Japan...html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode=

 

[RealMoneyIssues]

Now I do not want to step on any toes and I think everyone needs a pay raise to offset inflation but, with the postal service having financial problems and all other federal employees in a two year pay freeze, how can the APWU justify a pay raise? Just curious.

It isn't about reality, it's about getting as much money as possible. The USG will bail USPS out when they continue to have financial problems...

 

[crws]

GovernmentExecutive.com

USPS, union reach tentative agreement
By Emily Long elong@govexe.com March 14, 2011

"The U.S. Postal Service and the American Postal Workers Union have reached a tentative contract that preserves jobs and provides a 3.5 percent pay raise for three years..."

http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=47328&oref=todaysnews

Now I do not want to step on any toes and I think everyone needs a pay raise to offset inflation but, with the postal service having financial problems and all other federal employees in a two year pay freeze, how can the APWU justify a pay raise? Just curious.

http://apwu.org/news/nsb/2011/nsb01-110314-contract-tentative.htm
Because we gave USPS the flexibility via "NCA" workers- aka: Non-Career Assistants.

3.5% over the life of the contract- 2015
At least we get to keep our COLA, but frozen until the end of 2012.
At present, articles are mentioning personnel cuts of up to 30k by the end of the fiscal year being announced March 25th, with the overall target of eliminating 175k positions ASAP.
http://www.federaltimes.com/article/20110309/DEPARTMENTS02/103090301/1026/DEPARTMENTS02

watch yer back....

 

[crws]

It isn't about reality, it's about getting as much money as possible. The USG will bail USPS out when they continue to have financial problems...

Sorry, buddy, our 5.5 billion/yr contribution is floating USG boats.
http://www.apwu.org/news/webart/2011/11-006-uspsfinances-obamaletter-110113.htm

“The financial problems facing the Postal Service were made significantly worse by a Bush-era mandate that the agency pre-fund nearly 80 percent of its future retiree health care obligations by 2016 at a crushing cost of $5.5 billion per year… No other agency or company in America is required to pre-fund such obligations at all, much less on such an accelerated schedule,” the organizations wrote.

Had it not been for these payments, the Postal Service would have experienced a $611 million profit over the past four years — despite the recent recession and competition from the Internet, the letter notes. The USPS experienced a deficit of $8.505 billion in Fiscal Year 2010, and anticipates a deficit of $6.4 billion in Fiscal Year 2011.

A Sound Solution

“Fortunately, there is a sound policy solution to this pre-funding burden,” the letter says. “The Postal Service should be permitted to use the surplus in its two pension funds — the Civil Service Retirement System and the Federal Employees Retirement System — to cover the cost of its future retiree health obligations.” Three independent actuarial studies have confirmed the USPS has a surplus of between $50 billion and $75 billion in its CSRS pension account, and $6 billion to $7 billion in its FERS account.

 

[RealMoneyIssues]

Sorry, buddy, our 5.5 billion/yr contribution is floating USG boats.
http://www.apwu.org/news/webart/2011/11-006-uspsfinances-obamaletter-110113.htm

“The financial problems facing the Postal Service were made significantly worse by a Bush-era mandate that the agency pre-fund nearly 80 percent of its future retiree health care obligations by 2016 at a crushing cost of $5.5 billion per year… No other agency or company in America is required to pre-fund such obligations at all, much less on such an accelerated schedule,” the organizations wrote.

Had it not been for these payments, the Postal Service would have experienced a $611 million profit over the past four years — despite the recent recession and competition from the Internet, the letter notes. The USPS experienced a deficit of $8.505 billion in Fiscal Year 2010, and anticipates a deficit of $6.4 billion in Fiscal Year 2011.

A Sound Solution

“Fortunately, there is a sound policy solution to this pre-funding burden,” the letter says. “The Postal Service should be permitted to use the surplus in its two pension funds — the Civil Service Retirement System and the Federal Employees Retirement System — to cover the cost of its future retiree health obligations.” Three independent actuarial studies have confirmed the USPS has a surplus of between $50 billion and $75 billion in its CSRS pension account, and $6 billion to $7 billion in its FERS account.

Oh, I get it. Let's not fund the health costs and make it all fail in the future. Ok for now, not so good for those who will have to pay it in the future.

I am just glad that it is a sound financial solution. If USPS was a private company, it would have already been in bankruptcy. Yet another loss to excessive union labor costs...

 

[nasa1974]

Congratulations to those of you that are currently in the G&F funds.

Those of us that are not are going to get hammered today.

Big change in the Tracker tonight.

I don't even think that a fresh pair of sticky pants will help today.

 

[nasa1974]

I still have two IFT's but I am going to ride this out for right now. YTD I am up 4.49% so I guess I will use this as a buffer.

Good luck everyone we are going to need it.

 

[crws]

Oh, I get it. Let's not fund the health costs and make it all fail in the future. Ok for now, not so good for those who will have to pay it in the future.

I am just glad that it is a sound financial solution. If USPS was a private company, it would have already been in bankruptcy. Yet another loss to excessive union labor costs...

Our health care costs are fully funded far out into the future.

As for going out of business, so would the US Gov't, and your point (while in your Gov't job) is?

By the way the USPS is the only Gov't Agency whose sole source of revenue is the sale of postage and postage-related services.
Then we have to ask the congress, (that includes representatives from your district) for price increases to offset operating expenses, say when oil
& gas goes up by 1/3.
If they say no, we eat it.
How many private companies do you think would survive 40, much less 200 years under those circumstances?

By the way, every letter carrier you see takes the same oath of office your Senate and Congress-person does.

Our paltry 45-55k a year compared to "private sector" workers is supplemented by the satisfaction of having dedicated portions of our lives serving the public good.
To take up to 15% of our net income and invest it in the TSP gives us a chance at better retirement prospects than only social security.
You don't contribute, you get SS only.

-Sorry Nasa...

 

[Guest2]

WTG; CRWS
{not sorry nasa :nuts

 

[WorkFE]

Then we have to ask the congress, (that includes representatives from your district) for price increases to offset operating expenses, say when oil & gas goes up by 1/3.
If they say no, we eat it.
How many private companies do you think would survive 40, much less 200 years under those circumstances?

Oil-Gas-Horses-200 Years ago.

I'm lost

 

[RealMoneyIssues]

crws, you skipped a paragraph:

Had it not been for these payments, the Postal Service would have experienced a $611 million profit over the past four years — despite the recent recession and competition from the Internet, the letter notes. The USPS experienced a deficit of $8.505 billion in Fiscal Year 2010, and anticipates a deficit of $6.4 billion in Fiscal Year 2011.

Let me see...
2011: ($6.4b) + $5.5b = ($0.9b) or ($900m) [still in the red] [46 cents]
2010: ($8.505b) + $5.5b = ($3.005b) [again, in the red] [44 cents]

So, where is the $611m coming from? Oh, 2008 & 2009 combined profits must have been... hmmm, $611m + $3.005b + $900m, or $4.516b

2009: ($3.8b) + $1.5b = ($2.3b) After a $4b reduction in pre-paid health care cost requirement(P.L. 111–68) [44 cents]
2008: ($2.8b) + $5.5b = $2.7b [42 cents]

So, profits for 2008+2009 is awash (ok, $400m isn't chump change) instead of $4.516b needed to come up with a $611m profit over the last 4 years. Not sure where the union came up with those numbers. I looked at the USPS financial reports for years 2000-2010.

Let's look before that-
2007: ($5.142b) + $5.5b = $0.358b or $358m [41 cents]
2006: $900m [39 cents]
2005: $1.445b [37 cents]
2004: $3.065b [37 cents]
2003: $3.868b [37 cents]
2002: ($676m) [37 cents]
2001: ($1.68b) [33 cents]
2000: ($199m) [33 cents]

OBTW, it looks like the USG supports USPS to the tune of ~$3b a year (at least for the last few years)... why?

Another OBTW, why don't we have other agencies pre-fund health-care so that we don't end up having to raise taxes to pay for current year costs. Maybe this isn't such a bad idea.

Sorry that this may seem very disjointed as I had to write it over a long time trying to get work done... :blink:

If the USPS has over paid into FERS/CSRS, then I completely agree that those funds should be used to offset loses, finish pre-paying the health care costs, pay off all debt, and reduce the price of postage. I do not think that that money should be used to provide a pay increase.

Assumptions:
- $5.5b annual payment through 2016 to pre-fund future health care costs
- I didn't take into account money provided by USG
- I didn't take into account postage increases (shown in [])
- I didn't take into account USPS employee pay increases
- I am a newbie and I am sure I missed something obvious, sorry up front.

Links:
USPS Financial Reports
Postal Service aid plans would jeopardize federal retirement funds, watchdog says
Postal Rate History
APWU, Postal Unions Urge Obama To Fix USPS Pension Overfunding
Statement of NALC President Fred Rolando on the GAO Report

 

[nasa1974]

OK!! The question wasn't asked to show all the poor business practices. For the most part USPS employees work very hard at what they do. It just seemed weird that the union was going for a pay raise instead of protecting other things that may have been more important, job loss or health insurance costs as an example.

 

[RealMoneyIssues]

For the most part USPS employees work very hard at what they do.

Absolutely agree! I'm sorry I hijacked your thread.

 

[nasa1974]

Absolutely agree! I'm sorry I hijacked your thread.

No problem. I opened up the subject for discussion. This account is always open to lively discussions as long as there is fact behind the argument and no name calling.

 

[nasa1974]

The market sure ended better than it started. Is there hope for tomorrow?