Mr. Chairman, thank you for providing me the opportunity to comment on your landmark bill, H.R. 3717, the Postal Reform Act of 1996. On behalf of the 318,000 actively employed and retired members of the National Association of Letter Carriers, I wish to congratulate your perseverance and thoughtfulness in introducing this comprehensive piece of legislation. I also would like to compliment your subcommittee staff, individually and as a group, for their diligence, accessibility, and the expert guidance they continue to provide members of my staff.
 At the outset, let me state unequivocally that letter carriers desire what you desire. The U.S. Postal Service must provide the best possible mail service to every postal customer in this country at an affordable price. The question for each and every Member of this Subcommittee is: Does H.R. 3717 accomplish this goal? To be quite honest, the breadth and complexity of the legislation precludes a complete answer at this time.
I have read accounts of what others think we will, or should, say today. But let me assure you that only letter carriers speak for letter carriers. No mailers' group, postal competitor or political party will define the NALC's position in this vital matter.
The well-trained and dedicated employees of the U.S. Postal Service are the most important stake holders in this agency. While others wish to make that claim, craft employees make a larger investment in the quality of mail service than anyone else in the postal community. Ninety-five percent of letter carriers spend their entire careers working for the Postal Service, which delivers mail to every postal address in this nation. Postal customers greet their letter carriers six days a week. As a result, letter carriers are the most visible representatives of this government. Therefore, it is in our interest to see the Postal Service not only succeed, but to thrive. No other member of the postal community can make that claim.
It's understandable that mailers use the Postal Service when it meets their business interests. If they think it's more desirable to use alternative delivery methods, they do and will.
The Postmaster General and the rest of his management team come and go. Too often, self-preservation, peddling resumes, or even negotiating "platinum parachutes" became their highest priorities.
Letter carriers are often put in the position of being the sole guardians of the integrity of the nation's massive mail delivery network. However, it is reassuring to know that letter carriers have a strong and committed ally in the Chair of this Subcommittee.
The NALC strongly endorses your desire to enable the Postal Service to operate more successfully in the communications marketplace. Volume discounts, streamlined rate proceedings, eliminating the so-called test year, providing greater opportunities to market new product lines, are all proposals that letter carriers enthusiastically endorse. We believe that such postal reforms will not only make the Postal Service more competitive, but will also help to enhance its ability to support its infrastructure, ensure continued availability of universal service, and maintain six-day delivery at affordable rates.
Letter carriers are also encouraged by your recognition that labor-management relations continue to be extremely tense. Your proposal to create a temporary presidential commission to recommend improvements in this relationship approaches the problem in a novel way. Chairman Clinger remarked at last week's hearing, however, that such a Commission could supplant productive discussions between labor and headquarters personnel. Letter carriers continue to anticipate the beginning of the so-called Labor Summit. It was, therefore, interesting that the Postmaster General, in response to a question posed by Chairman Clinger, implied that the Labor Summit could be compromised by the creation of the White House commission. In fact, the Summit could very well reduce the necessity of creating this White House commission. In any case, the only way to solve many of the day-to-day problems that confront letter carriers is through face-to-face meetings between labor and management, not through the creation of a commission.
Notwithstanding my qualified optimism that the Postal Service will sit down with its employees, letter carriers were greatly disappointed by the Postmaster General's unilateral decision to terminate the Employee Involvement program. As you know, this program was designed to enable letter carriers and managers jointly to improve mail delivery. Letter carriers truly appreciated your continued behind-the-scene efforts to get labor and management together to make these improvements.
The American public also wants assurances of improved mail service. One area of the bill which may impact service quality and customer expectations, particularly residential patrons, is the possible repeal of the "mail box rule." Obviously, H.R. 3717 proposes only to test this idea. However, letter carriers wonder: What would constitute success or failure of the test? Additionally, I understand that the Subcommittee has explored the experience of foreign postal authorities with a mail-box rule. But unlike the limited expectation of privacy characteristic of foreign nations, U.S. citizens enjoy a high expectation of privacy. Americans are secure in knowing that the only hands entering their private mail box are their own and those of their letter carriers. Negotiable matter is routinely deposited in U.S. mail boxes. This is not the case overseas. Letter carriers strongly believe that opening the mail box to non-postal delivery operations would needlessly subject items such as social security checks, credit cards, and banking documents to criminal exposure. Theft of mailed matter would irrevocably undermine the confidence that the U.S. public has for the sanctity of our mail system. In addition, mailing pornographic material, including child pornography, is currently against federal law. Opening mail boxes to fly-by-night delivery operations would expose the mail box to limitless smut. I believe that even a limited number of incidents could jeopardize the confidence the American public has in the mail box. As a result, we respectfully request that you revisit the issue of the mail box test.
Letter carriers are also concerned about the possibility of significant mail diversion that could occur under H.R. 3717. As you know, aggregate mail revenue helps to underwrite the infrastructure that promotes universal delivery. Last week, the Postmaster General raised a concern that moving "priority mail" into a competitive market could divert substantial revenue -- approximately $4 billion -- away from the Postal Service. I understand that H.R. 3717's goal is to make the Postal Service more like a business. But, last year, the Congressional Research Service observed that the Postal Service's public service mandate may be incompatible with its making a profit. For example, while the competition may pick and choose among only the most lucrative services and profitable areas, the Postal Service must continue to operate in all markets, both profitable and unprofitable. This difference between a public service and a for-profit business is stark. Price flexibility in competitive classes would be an illusory victory if the USPS had to carry the burden of providing universal service all by itself.
Clearly, our competitors covet the periodic opportunity to intervene in postal rate setting. Shadow pricing and attempts to force the Postal Rate Commission to overprice competitive classes of mail have long characterized PRC deliberations. Letter carriers support your efforts to streamline the rate-setting process and permit annual postage adjustments without initiating a protracted rate case. Furthermore, letter carriers appreciate the fact that the adjustment factor can decrease, as well as increase. However, PRC Chairman Gleiman raised an important issue regarding the adjustment factor that could impact my members. Chairman Gleiman suggested that the adjustment factor could be used to restrict the financial component of our collective-bargaining agreements. We believe that the adjustment factor should reflect the results of collective bargaining, not dictate them. Additionally, letter carriers believe that any decision regarding the the disposition of Postal Service profits should be negotiated as part of collective bargaining.
Mr. Chairman, as I indicated at the beginning of my statement, your hard work in crafting this bill demonstrates your commitment to improving the Postal Service. For me, H.R. 3717 is like a kaleidoscope. Different people and assorted interests, some who want to see the Postal Service improve and some who would like it to deteriorate, see distinctive aspects of this multi-faceted bill in dissimilar ways. For this reason, the NALC will continue to analyze the bill's impact on letter carriers, the Postal Service, and the American public. We look forward to continue working with your staff as you endeavor to perfect the Postal Reform Act.
Thank you. |
