every generation of americans faces great challenges, · alone. by banding together, facing a...

THENNOW&STANDING TALL

The same is true of the nation’s letter carriers.During times of tremendous struggle, NALC mem-bers know we can always rely on our brothers andsisters for help shouldering any burden. It was truein 1970, when rising inflation and stagnant wagesmade it nearly impossible for our members to support a family on a meager letter carrier’s salaryalone. By banding together, facing a threat of fines,job loss and even criminal charges, tens of thou-sands of desperate carriers walked off the job—abold and illegal act of defiance that not only forcedCongress, the president and the public to focus on our plight, but that also led to the rebirth andpreservation of our generations-old postal service.

A similar spirit is called for once again from thecurrent generation of NALC members. Our Postal Service faces dire economic conditions, thanks to

a perfect storm of a faltering economy and elec-tronic diversion of the mail, not to mention theunfair requirement to overpay into our retireehealth benefit fund. But if we stand together andmake our voices heard, loud and clear, we canconvince Congress that cutting service is not theanswer—and that we know the right way to savethe Postal Service.

We must make them hear us again. That’s our fight.In honor of the history-making strike and the loom-

ing battle for today’s carriers, we present a look backand a look ahead. You’ll find coverage of the 40thanniversary of the Great Postal Strike—from severalpoints of view—beginning on page 5. And then you’llalso see how the war of words over USPS’ proposedfive-day delivery plan has already broken out, andwhat NALC intends to do about it, on pages 13-19.

EVERY GENERATION OF AMERICANS FACES GREAT CHALLENGES,

and we somehow always find a way to rise to meet them.Throughout our history, from civil and world wars to depressions and

recessions, Americans have never backed down from fighting the good fight.

Letter carriers answering the call togo beyond what is good just forthemselves, to rally around whathelps all postal workers and the

Postal Service itself, was a recurringtheme during the National PostalMuseum’s panel discussion to com-memorate the 40th anniversary of theGreat Postal Strike of 1970, a wildcatwalkout that had its origins in NewYork City but soon spread like wildfireacross the United States and crippledthe nation’s mail system.

Dozens of active and retired lettercarriers and their families attendedthe March 20 event, where museumdirector and former postal employeeAllen Kane introduced the panel’sthree distinguished speakers: NALCPresident Emeritus Vincent R. Sombrotto, American Postal WorkersUnion President William Burrus, andGeorge Gould, a former congressionalaide and retired NALC lobbyist whohelped shape what became the PostalReorganization Act of 1970.

“That dispute helped shape the futurebusiness model of the Postal Service,”Kane said, noting how “40 years later, wefind ourselves in the midst of a fight toonce again save the Service.”

Sombrotto also remarked on the oddsimilarity between the Post OfficeDepartment’s situation in 1970 and theone the Postal Service faces today.

“Our motivation for going out on strikethen was not only simple unionism,” saidthe member of New York City Branch 36,who later served as NALC presidentfrom 1979 until his retirement in 2002.“There was an upbeat, positive, almostcarnival atmosphere on the picket lines,

a camaraderie that came from knowingwhat we were doing was for the goodof everybody in the Post Office. Wewere rallying around our brothers andsisters in need.”

Sombrotto was quick to point out,however, that the 1970 walkout wasn’tthe first postal strike. “In July of 1968, let-ter carriers in two stations in the Bronx—Kingsbridge and Throggs Neck—walkedout” for one day, in protest of low wagesand poor working conditions, he said.

“I can’t explain the electricity thatwent through the station I worked in,” he said, referring to Manhattan’sGrand Central Station. “Over 660 carriers worked in my station. Andeverybody was asking the same ques-tion: If they went out in Kingsbridgeand Throggs Neck, when do we go?”

NATIONAL POSTAL MUSEUM ORAL HISTORIES CELEBRATE

GREAT POSTAL STRIKE’S 40TH ANNIVERSARY

‘ALL ON THE LINE’

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LETTER CARRIERS MAY 2010 I POSTAL RECORD 5

Opposite page, top: Pickets at the Dearborn Post Office in Michigan.Photo by Ira Rosenberg, Detroit Free Press

Bottom: New York NALCmembers outside the Capitol.

NALC President Emeritus VincentR. Sombrotto (c) recounts talesfrom the postal strike as part of apanel with APWU President BillBurrus (l) and former congressionalaide George Gould.

6 POSTAL RECORD I MAY 2010 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LETTER CARRIERS

SETTING THE STAGEThe starting pay for a letter carrier in

1970 was just over $6,176. After 21 years,that could go up to $8,442. But by com-parison, the average American family wasmaking around $11,000, so many carrierswere forced to work second and some-times third jobs just to make ends meet.

These were also the days before col-lective bargaining, meaning Congressneeded to approve any pay raises for federal workers.

“But Congress wasn’t paying a lot ofattention to postal workers’ pay,” saidGould, who should know, having servedas a House staff member for a number ofcommittees related to postal operations.“They viewed a job at the Post Office as a safe civil service job. The pay wasn’t asimportant as that security.

“They knew that postal workers oftenhad two jobs, but the attitude was that at least they had one secure one,” saidGould, who later worked for 27 years as NALC’s director of legislation and politics, beginning in 1979.

So it was that in early 1970, when Con-gress approved a 40 percent pay hike foritself and a measly 4 percent for postalworkers, the members of New York CityBranch 36 decided they had had enoughof broken promises, Sombrotto recalled.In February, the branch approved amotion to hold a strike authorization voteduring its March meeting.

Sombrotto vividly remembered themayhem at the meeting on the eveningof March 17 at New York City’s LaborTemple. Word of a possible strike hadrapidly spread throughout New York’sfive boroughs, and hundreds of letter carriers and other postal workers attended the gathering to witness thevote while a woefully ill-prepared securityforce tried to keep some order, all underthe watchful eye of the media.

As all this was taking place, Branch36’s officers were holding their executiveboard meeting across the street, andSombrotto said the branch’s president,Gus Johnson, was skeptical. “‘They’re

just a few crazies and radicals,’” Sombrottorecalled Johnson saying. “He said,‘They’re never gonna vote for a strike.’”

Of course, the motion to strike wasultimately approved, by a 3-to-2 margin.“To his credit,” Sombrotto said, “once the strike was official, Johnson supportedit, directing stewards to inform the members and to set up picket lines.”

“At the time, most letter carriers didn’tinvolve themselves in these kinds ofgrand political things,” Sombrotto said.“You wrote a letter to your congressmansaying, ‘Please vote for this bill so we canget an increase in wages.’

“But we were living in an environmentwhere—and I must say, it’s starting tocome back again now—where authoritymeant nothing, where everybody chal-lenged authority,” he said. “You had theVietnam protests, teachers went out onillegal strikes, as did sanitation workersand transit workers, and oftentimes, thestrikes were successful.

“Our people had invested their lives inthe postal service,” he said. “That was allon the line, as far as they knew. Theycould lose that at the signature of a pen.”

A VIEW FROM THE FIELD“I was in Cleveland at the time [of the

strike], in my 16th year of service,” saidWilliam Burrus, president of the Ameri-can Postal Workers Union since 2001. Hebegan his postal career as a distributionclerk there in 1958, and by 1970, he wasan active member of the National PostalUnion—the APWU did not come intoexistence until 1971, when NPU mergedwith four other postal unions.

It was a tough time, he said. “I wasmaking $3 an hour—barely enough tolive off of, after deductions.”

The approval of lopsided pay raises forCongress and postal workers was oneinsult too many. “We had suffered thatdefeat before,” said Burrus, who laterserved as the president of the APWU’sCleveland local from 1974 to 1980. “But you had all these factors—civil unrest,rebellion against authority, Vietnam—

Striking members of Brooklyn, New YorkBranch 41 rally on March 22, 1970, againstPresident Nixon’s proposed wage increase.World Wide Photos

Picketing against a few postal workers whocrossed the line.

and then, after repeated promises, Congress failed the postal workers.”

Picket lines were set up in many postoffices all over the country, Burrusrecalled, “and when clerks arrived forwork the next day, they refused tocross the line.”

Sombrotto remembered that thequestion of the clerks’ support came upin New York the night the strike votewas taken. “Everybody starts scream-ing, ‘What about you, Moe? Are you on strike?’” “Moe” was Moe Biller,president of the NPU’s New York local.He went on to become national presi-dent of APWU from 1980 to 2001.

Sombrotto remembered how Billerreminded him that NPU was a democ-ratic union, and he could not call astrike on his own. “‘We’re a labor union;we won’t cross a bona fide picket line,’”Sombrotto said, quoting Biller. “I said,‘That’s good enough for me!’”

Many Cleveland workers soon joinedthe strike, Burrus said, as did postalemployees in Pittsburgh, Chicago, andother cities across the country.

“This was a strike of city letter carriersand clerks,” he stressed. “I’m sure otherssupported it individually,” he added, “but the other organizations did not rallytheir members.” Burrus noted that thepresidents of some other postal unionsissued a statement saying they could neither support nor condone a strike, and instructed all employees to return to work immediately.

“We were threatened by the govern-ment, the various postmasters, andlocal supervisors, too,” Burrus said.“But we achieved our goal. We gottheir attention.”

Did they ever. The work stoppage sohobbled the nation’s mail system thaton March 23, President Richard Nixonaddressed the nation on television andannounced that he was calling out theNational Guard to go into New YorkCity post offices to try to get the mailmoving again (see Declassified: A lookinside the government’s response to thepostal strike, page 11).

Although highly qualified to defendthe country and to provide criticalassistance in times of natural disaster,the Guard simply did not have theknow-how to sort, case and deliver the mail. In desperation, Nixon calledNALC President James Rademacher tothe White House to hammer out a dealto get postal workers back on the job.

“He did some good things,” said Sombrotto of Rademacher’s role. “Notone person was fired—and 200,000 hadwalked out.” This was a big deal and apoint of real concern, Sombrotto said,since “anyone who even mentioned theword ‘strike’ was subject to a $10,000 fine and five years in prison.” In the 1968 walkouts in the Bronx, the penaltywound up being a two-week suspensionfor each participant.


There was an upbeat, positive, almost carnival atmosphere

on the picket lines, a camaraderie that came from knowing what

we were doing was for the good of everybody in the Post Office.

We were rallying around our brothers and sisters in need.

—President Emeritus Vincent R. Sombrotto

“ ”

Strikers walk the picket line at themain post office in New York City.World Wide Photos


“Jim was alsoable to work out anagreement to ulti-mately get a signifi-cant increase in

wages,” Sombrotto said, and because ofthat, on March 25, letter carriers agreedto end the strike and return to work. Justover a week later, on April 2, Rademacherand Nixon announced they had reachedan accord that called for, among otherthings, two successive pay raises and areduction in the time it took to go fromentry in the service to the top pay step,from 21 years to eight years.

But perhaps most importantly of all,President Rademacher convinced theNixon administration to agree to allowletter carriers to bargain collectively andto have the right to binding contract arbi-tration. (See pages 9-10 for Rademacher’sfirst-person account of his historic role.)

Burrus said he understood that theMarch 25 agreement was not actually theend of the struggle. “Congress was stillthe only body that could authorize payraises,” he pointed out. “But we werecomfortable enough that this time, theirpromises would be fulfilled.”

WHEELING, DEALINGGould noted that serious efforts at

postal reform had already been in theworks since 1968, when, at the recom-mendation of Postmaster GeneralLarry O’Brien, President Lyndon John-son formed a commission comprised of business and labor leaders, includ-ing George Meany, the president of the AFL-CIO. Among the commission’srecommendations was the creation ofan independently financed “postal service” corporation. Nixon, who succeeded Johnson in January 1969,also approved of the group’s work.

As one might expect, Congress had anumber of concerns with the commis-sion’s findings. But it turns out NALCwas also nervous that making any drasticchanges would damage its relationshipwith members of the House and Senate,many of whom were sympathetic to the

carriers’ plight. In the fall of 1969, together with other labor unions, NALCsuccessfully lobbied against the bill.

After the strike was settled, a morerobust postal reorganization measure,with the provisions of the Rademacher-Nixon agreement added in, quicklymoved through Congress, and Nixonsigned it into law on August 12, 1970—nearly five months after the week-longwalkout first got underway.

“The bottom line is, without the unionsand their strike, without their involve-ment and their tenacity, and their rela-tionships with members of Congress,postal reform wouldn’t have happened,”Gould said.

“In my view, the Postal Reorganiza-tion Act would never have passed unlessthat strike took place,” Sombrotto said.“It affected all postal employees, not justletter carriers. The starting salary for aletter carrier now can reach $50,000 ayear,” he said.

Hundreds of thousands of carriersand federal workers—if not millions—have moved into the middle classbecause of that strike, Sombrotto said,adding that, for labor, it was one of theirshining moments—a moment when car-riers and clerks came together to put theneeds of their brothers, their sisters, andeven the Postal Service itself, ahead oftheir own personal desires, despite thevery real threat of fines, firings and evencriminal prosecution.

No one on the Postal Museum’s panelexpressed any regrets. “I’m just glad Ihad an opportunity to play the role that Idid,” Sombrotto said. ✉To view the complete video coverage ofthe Postal Museum's panel discussion,go to youtube.com/SmithsonianNPM andclick on “40th Anniversary of the 1970Postal Strike.” A fuller account of NALC’shistory, including an analysis of thestrike's causes and repercussions, isincluded in Carriers in a Common Cause:A History of Letter Carriers and theNALC, available by calling the NALCSupply Department at 202-393-4695.

Top: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Branch 84carriers.

Above: Three NALC presidents were inattendance at the Postal Museum event (l-r): retired Presidents William H. Youngand Vincent R. Sombrotto and currentPresident Fredric V. Rolando.


THE PERSPECTIVE FROM WASHINGTON

By James Rademacher, President Emeritus

March 17, 1970, will go down in NALChistory as the greatest event, pro-ducing the greatest result, which

most unions would certainly envy. Theobject of it all and the success of it all was when NALC went from collectivebegging of Congress to true collectivebargaining with strong arbitration rights.

SUFFERINGFor years, our members suffered guar-

anteed poverty. When I was elected in1968, the first two resolutions concernedgetting the right to strike.

I was blasted by some Republican con-gressmen when I dared to state in June1969, before the House Committee on thePost Office and Civil Service, that if wewere not treated better, there would be astrike that I would not be able to control.

When we were getting nowhere and aveto of a pay bill was threatened, we puton a mammoth campaign with the public.We asked the public to write Nixon anddemand better treatment for letter carri-ers. To their credit, under President GusJohnson, Branch 36 members affixedthousands of stamps and the WhiteHouse got 3 million letters from all overthe country. That is when I was sum-moned to the White House on December5, 1969. They had gotten the messageand wanted to meet.

WILLING TO MEETThe meetings centered around the

establishment of a corporate Postal Ser-vice. My concern was about where Laborwould stand in the new plan. The originalplan had collective bargaining with thepostmaster general’s appointed board settling all impasses.

The plan would also take carriers outof the Civil Service. After each meetingwith the president’s legal counsel, ChuckColson, he would report to the president.

These were secret meetings and the legislators prepared new legislation toinclude our tentative agreements.

The agreed-upon legislation was sentto the Hill where the chairman of thecommittee, Ted Dulski, had his own reorganization bill. But he agreed toaccept the Nixon-NALC bill. We wereshocked when he then held a press con-ference and denied he would do so.

With such a delay taking place and our members getting anxious for me todo something, I issued a letter to allbranches asking to take a vote assuringme of their support. I got a completelyfavorable response.

When Gus Johnson read that letter hismembers decided to have a vote, not atthe meeting but at a special voting placeon March 17, 1970. Many thought theywere actually voting to strike and that’swhat they did the next day.

‘LET IT BLOW’Gus Johnson, a great supporter, called

me at home at midnight about the vote. Isaid, “Let it blow.” Many branch leaderstold me they thought the New York walk-out was my signal to hit the bricks.

The PMG called me at home at 7 a.m.,demanding I come to see him at once.Strange, but it took a strike for him tofinally meet with me, as he had nevermet with me in his two years in office.

His name was Winton Blount, an anti-union contractor from Alabama. Atthe meeting, he ordered me to get thecarriers back to work or he would:1. immediately discontinue dues check-off, 2. immediately discontinue the govern-ment’s share of health and insurancebenefits, and3. use every means to punish, fine andimprison leaders of the walkout.

He demanded I get in touch with GusJohnson to have the men return to work.

President Nixon meets with NALCPresident James Rademacher (r).

President Emeritus Rademacheraddresses the delegates to the2008 NALC Convention.


I sent Gus a telegram but, of course, hewas picketting and didn’t receive it.

I called a meeting of all large branchpresidents for March 20. More than 400attended. After much discussion, themeeting voted, almost unanimously, toallow me five days to settle the situation.

THREAT OF A NATIONWIDE STRIKEAt a meeting with Secretary of Labor

George Schultz and other associations,we were told there would be no negotia-tions until all carriers were back to work.When I threatened a nationwide strike,Schultz decided he had better start nego-tiations now. The PMG refused to attendthat meeting. We met for five days andthen came up with a proposal to immedi-ately raise salaries by 6 percent.

As we ended the discussions on pay,Assistant PMG Ted Klassen proposedincorporating the reorganization legisla-tion. I said NALC would accept reorgani-zation only if it would provide the bar-gaining over wages, fringe benefits andworking conditions, and if we were paidfor accepting the long opposed reorgani-zation plan. I demanded 8 percent.

Branch 36 stubbornly resisted return-ing to work and Nixon was forced to askthe Army to move in. That was a colossalfailure, with all due respect to our greatmilitary, as they were better suited tofighting battles than delivering the mail.

At one point, I said that the strike wasurged on by members of the Students fora Democratic Society who had recentlybeen employed by the Postal Service. Ihad received bad information about it,and I know that none of the strikingmembers tolerated SDS members in thepicket lines.

While placing the blame on SDS mayhave eventually saved the jobs of thou-sands of carriers, it would have been better to not have mentioned it at all.

The strike came to an end once wespread the word that an agreement wasreached with Nixon. The last carriersagreed to go back to work on March 25.

Gus Johnson was fined $10,000 dailywhile the strike lasted, but an appeal tohigher levels canceled his fine. I tried toconvince the White House that the strikewas a necessity to demonstrate the hard-ships suffered by the nation’s letter carri-

ers, with some receiving welfare and foodstamps. Nixon looked at a poll thatshowed 80 percent of the people agreedwith their carriers’ actions, so he orderedno discipline. The one casualty of it allwas the president of Hartford, Connecti-cut Branch 86, who was fined $2,500.NALC should have paid that fine.

When Congress took so long to passthe reorganization legislation, I met withMontana Rep. Arnold Olsen and askedhim to introduce an amendment makingthe 8 percent retroactive to April 6. Hedid so, and the Postal Reorganization Actwas passed with the retroactive clauseand signed into law on August 12, 1970.

FROM 21 TO EIGHTOur first task, which never gets

enough mention, was to sit down andimplement the Nixon promise to reducethe time it took to attain the top paygrade from 21 years to only eight.

The next order of business was reaching agreement on a contract. It was easier doing that than writing a 36-articlelabor agreement from scratch.

That first contract provided for a$1,250 increase, a one-time $300 bonusand a first cost-of-living adjustmentcapped at $166. The following contract in1973 called for another hike of $1,310 andelimination of the COLA cap. That hasmeant more than $18,000 in wages peryear for the top grade salary since 1973.It is now estimated the top carrier wagesand fringe benefits (salary, health insur-ance, life insurance, annual and sickleave) exceed $83,000 annually.

Because of the political split caused bythe strike, I have withstood verbal andwritten abuse ever since. But just look atthe record: From 1900 to 1925, pay raisesaveraged $40. From 1925 to 1943, therewere no raises at all. From 1943 to 1969,increases averaged $200 yearly. But,since 1970, annual wage increases haveaveraged more than $1,000 annually.

NALC, as a union of brothers and sisters, should receive all the credit, notone individual. When I met with the president, I was representing the NALC.I was invited there, not because of mebut because of the NALC. I continue tobelieve it does not cost as much as it paysto be an NALC member. Right on! ✉

Top: Rademacher signs the firstcollective bargaining agreementwith the Postal Service in July1971. Also shown is PostmasterGeneral Winton M. Blount (l).

Above: The mail piles up duringthe strike.


A LOOK INTO THE GOVERNMENT’S

RESPONSE TO THE POSTAL STRIKE

DE-CLASSIFIED

GovernmentAttic.org, an online clear-inghouse for declassified federaldocuments, released two reports

in 2009 that offer a glimpse into the U.S. government’s mindset during the1970 postal strike, revealing paranoia,caution and—as with most governmentdocuments—meticulous detail.

The first report, from the Bureau ofthe Chief Inspector of the Post OfficeDepartment—predecessor of the PostalInspection Service—reveals that thePost Office was concerned about a strikeeven before the March 18 walkout. How-ever, they believed the strike’s instiga-tion came from outside the Post Office.

With very little evidence, the Bureaufocused on Students for a DemocraticSociety, a radical and sometimes militantpolitical group. After a lengthy investiga-tion, only seven carriers, clerks andmailhandlers, out of 750,000 nationwide,were alleged to have ties to SDS or any socialist organizations. Four of thesewere from San Francisco—nowherenear New York’s Branch 36.

BUNKER MENTALITYParanoia appeared to descend on the

Post Office Department when the strikeexploded. Postmaster General WintonBlount received 24-hour personal protec-tion, and he transformed his office into avirtual bunker, with patrols and closed-circuit cameras to monitor everyonewho entered.

That mentality didn’t extend to theGeneral Post Office in Brooklyn. There,strikers freely used the lobby’s bank of payphones and the second floor’srestrooms and cafeteria, while guardsand police just stood by.

Meanwhile, the Bureau turned itsattention to filing injunctions against

strikers, but with little effect. “Perhapsthe fact that the position of letter carrier,clerk or mail handler is so low in theoverall pay scale in the New York, N.Y.area leaves these employees with a feel-ing that it would be just as well to losetheir positions,” read one document.

OPERATION GRAPHIC HANDThe second released report, Opera-

tion Graphic Hand After Action Report,details what happened from the mili-tary’s perspective. From the start, theDepartment of the Army was highly concerned about military mail, whichflowed through New York to troops stationed overseas. All APO mail wasrerouted to Frankfurt, West Germany,where military postal clerks processed it.

On the home front, as the postalstrike spread across the country, President Richard Nixon ordered thepreparation of a plan to use militarypersonnel to process mail. The Secre-tary of the Army joined with leaders of other armed forces branches anddevised what became known as Operation Graphic Hand.

Five days after the strike began,Nixon announced on television thattroops would be used “to begin in NewYork City the restoration of essentialmail services.” That night, a militarytask force went into the first three postoffices, followed by forces from theNational Guard the next day.

Though the call-up of NationalGuardsmen went smoothly, a decisionwas made not to use members of theIndividual Ready Reserves, one of thegroups of the Army Reserves—mainlybecause the normal mode of contactingthem was by mail.

A soldier sorts mail at the BrooklynGeneral Post Office.Photo by Barton Silverman, The New York Times

CAUTION IS THE BETTER

PART OF VALORAs Operation Graphic

Hand planning continued,Army leaders strove toreassure strikers—and

the general public—thatthe military’s goal was not to

act as a force against a civil disturbance.They feared such a sentiment mightlead to a nationwide postal strike, oreven a general workers’ walkout.

This cautious mentality was evidencedin the after-action report. “(O)n oneoccasion,” it read, “postal employeeswere assembled and voting in front ofthe General Post Office. In order topreclude an adverse psychologicaleffect, it was necessary to divert anenroute military convoy to a holdingarea, pending the results of the vote.”

Further, the military decided to issuerations to the troops, rather than provideallowances to buy lunches, “in an effortto avoid confrontations with strikers innearby restaurants or on the streets,”the report said.

Packets containing the operation’sorders were prepared for troops to gointo 34 other cities if the postal strike con-tinued and expanded nationwide. But onlythe New York City plan was implemented.

COUNTER CULTUREThe Bureau of the Chief Inspector

noted efforts by SDS and other radicalorganizations, such as the Black Panthers

and “Hippies,” to use the strike as alaunching point for their own socialprotests. One such plan, the anti-draftPhiladelphia Resistance, called for flood-ing the mail with phone books and othermaterial to “impede the military handlingof the mail,” the bureau reported.

In Harrison, Pennsylvania, about 50people staged a post office sit-in, thoughtheir message may have gotten lost. “Nodirect interference with movement ofpatrons, but created nuisance with thenoise and discarded foodstuffs andpeanut shells,” noted the bureau’s report.

“The consistent reaction of theemployees was to refuse any offeredparticipation and assistance from out-side organizations,” the report concluded,“and [they] spoke out loud and clearthroughout the strike that they neitherdesired or appreciated being identifiedwith individuals nor units from outsidethe postal establishment.”

A CIVIL AFFAIRBoth declassified reports make clear

how civilly all parties handled the strike.As the Bureau reported, “Acts of violencedid not occur and field reports relate thatin most locations, a good humored air ofcamaraderie existed among the picketingemployees and patrons.

“Only two incidents of property damage were reported. In both in-stances, employees were not involvedand the damage was considered attributable to irate patrons chagrinedby the fact the installation was closed.”

In the end, with meticulous detail, the Army report claimed that more than20,000 military personnel processed12.8 million pieces of outgoing mail and4.4 million pieces of city mail, cased 3.2million pieces, and delivered 2 millionpieces to businesses and charities aswell as 3.2 million pieces to callers. Thetotal cost came to almost $3 million.

The Army sent Postmaster GeneralBlount a bill for $2.5 million of it. ✉

PDFs of both reports can be read on thePostal Record page of nalc.org. Specialthanks for this article goes to Tom Gates.


A map of the area where postaloperations were halted, from theOperation Graphic Hand AfterAction Report.

Picketing postal workers at theEighth Avenue Post Office watchas federal reserve troops arrive.UPI photo

The letter carriers who went onstrike in 1970 knew that some-times you have to choose sidesand fight for what you think is

right. Forty years later, letter carriersface the same choice.

Multiple battles are raging in Wash-ington over the future of the Postal Ser-vice and carriers must decide what to do about it. Do we sit back and acceptour fates—or at least cede the power ofdeciding our fates to postal managerswho think reducing service and down-sizing is the only way to survive—or dowe fight for a better alternative for our-selves and the American people?

In March and April, we made ourchoice to fight for a better way.

On March 17, President Fred Rolandosent a letter to every city letter carrierin the country, members and non-members alike, in response to thePostal Service action plan announcedin March—including its multimillion-dollar campaign to sell it. You’ve probablyeven gotten a postcard from PostmasterGeneral Jack Potter himself.

Our letter expressed support formany aspects of the Postal Service’splan—especially those regarding leg-islative reform of the Postal Service’sretiree health funding obligations. But it also urged carriers not to bebamboozled by the USPS media blitzin support of eliminating Saturdaydelivery as a key strategy in avertingcatastrophic financial losses forecastby its economic consultants—forecastsbased on predictions about mail vol-ume over the next 10 years that areunreliable by definition. Specifically,Rolando wrote:

A BATTLE FOR HEARTS AND MINDS...

AND THE FUTURE OF THE POSTAL SERVICE

STANDING TALL


NOW

5-dayis the

wrong wayto save thePostal ServiceFive-day delivery is not a done deal, or a good deal, for the PostalService, Letter Carriers or the public.

The Postal Service cannot reduce service to 5-day delivery withoutCongress’ okay—and NALC is working hard to prevent that.

Eliminating Saturday collections and delivery will slow service, accelerate the shift to electronic alternatives, drive away mailersthat value Saturday delivery (newsweeklies, DVD distributors, mailorder pharmacies, Parcel Select customers, etc.), anPostal Service’s financial problems worse, not better.

Giving away the competitive advantage of six-day delivery willopen a path for competitors to deliver on Saturday, expose thesanctity of the mail and of the mailbox, and eventually threaten the letter mail monopoly that makes universal service possible.

There is an answer to the Postal Service’s financial woes: Let ususe $75 billion of our own money—the amount the Inspector General says we were overcharged for pension liabilities—to eliminate the onerous cost of pre-funding future retiree health costs(saving at least $8 billion annually).

www.nalc.org

5-day is a bad deal—not a done deal!

Eliminating Saturday delivery and offeringslower service is penny-wise and pound-foolish—it will lead more mailers who relyon Saturday delivery (news magazines, mail-order merchants and pharmacies, andDVD rental firms, to name a few) to exit the postal system—and eventually worsenthe USPS bottom line. Worse, repeal of the6-day delivery requirement would allow theUSPS to eventually cut additional days ofservice and lead new companies to enterour business to fill the void left by theUSPS. In the pages of major newspapersand business magazines, we have alreadyseen reports of companies salivating to fillthe void left on Saturdays and writers urgingthe Postal Service to go further and toreduce deliveries to 3 or 4 days per week.How long would it be before these newcompetitors demanded access to Americans’mailboxes and how long would it be beforethose same companies demanded a repealof the letter mail monopoly to “level theplaying field”?

In the days that followed, the PostalService unveiled a new website to sell to mailers and the American people its plan for five-day delivery. NALCexpressed its dismay over the arroganceof the move. The website seemeddesigned to convince mailers that elimi-nation of five-day delivery in fiscal year2011 was a done deal. It was launched: ◆ despite the fact that current law

requires six-day delivery and thatCongress has not given its approvalto the Postal Service’s proposal tocancel delivery and collection ser-vices on Saturday;

◆ despite the fact that neither theappropriations committees nor thePostal Service’s oversight commit-tees have even held hearings on theradical proposal to slow service anddestroy 50,000 to 80,000 good jobsin the middle of a jobs crisis; and

◆ despite the fact that the Postal Service has not even filed for anadvisory opinion from the PostalRegulatory Commission, whichmust hold hearings and subject thePostal Service’s questionable finan-cial claims to democratic scrutiny.

“The arrogance of the Postal Servicein launching this website to sell five-daydelivery as the answer to the Postal Ser-vice’s problem is astounding,” PresidentRolando said. “Given that Congress hasshown very little interest in eliminatingSaturday service, the Postal Serviceshould focus its energies on real solu-tions, not risky and counterproductiveservice cuts.”

NALC countered with its own cam-paign to stop the Postal Service’s short-sighted drive to slash service. Withindays, “5-Day is the Wrong Way” posterswere distributed to every postal station in the country to convey NALC’s full-throated opposition to eliminating Satur-day delivery. The home page on theNALC’s own website, nalc.org, now features a wealth of information to helpmembers understand the stakes in thefight over Saturday delivery and providesdaily updates on developments in Con-gress and in the media. As major mailersannounce their opposition to five-daydelivery and key members of Congressweigh in on the debate, the NALC website shares the news. Carriers areencouraged to check the site daily to stay informed and to prepare to act.

Going forward, the NALC is workingwith other postal unions and allies in themailing community to develop a mediaand lobbying strategy to convince Con-gress to reject postal management’s plan for five-day delivery, embracinginstead a more enlightened strategy forthe future that will include retirementfunding reforms in the short run and anagenda of innovation and new revenuegeneration in the long run.

President Rolando ended his letter tothe members noting that its date, March17, was the 40th anniversary of the startof the 1970 strike: “Today, the PostalService faces a crisis every bit as chal-lenging as the one that prompted NALCmembers to take to the streets. We willhave to rely on different methods, butwe will need the same kind of courageand commitment in the weeks andmonths ahead to preserve the good jobswe all enjoy.” ✉

Only Congress has the authority todecrease the Postal Service’s

days of service, thanks to a clause inan appropriations bill that Congressrenews every year. That means boththe House and Senate appropriationscommittees will have a big say inwhether the Postal Service can endSaturday delivery, and it doesn’t looklike they’re ready to give the PostalService’s plan an easy pass.

In April, House Financial ServicesAppropriations Subcommittee Chair-man José Serrano told The National Journal, “While I understand theseriousness of the Postal Service’sfiscal issues, I remain supportive ofa six-day delivery schedule. I will be in conversations in coming weekswith the senior postal leadership and the postal unions in an effort toavoid service cuts.”

On the Senate side, in anexchange between Postmaster General Jack Potter and Sen.Richard Durbin (D-IL) during a Senate Appropriations subcommitteehearing in March, Potter said that if USPS was able to recover the $75 billion it has been overchargedfor the Civil Service RetirementSystem’s pension fund, cutting backto five-day delivery wouldn’t benecessary. (For the full exchange,see April’s Postal Record.)

“Fortunately, the congressionalrepresentatives on the appropria-tions committees have not beensnookered by the Postal Service’sarrogant media campaign,” Presi-dent Fred Rolando said. “We intendto educate them on the real issues at the heart of the Postal Service’sfunding problems, and on what wethink will be the best fixes for theService, today and in the future.” ✉

APPROPRIATIONCOMMITTEESNOT EASILY SWAYED


ACTIVISTS TAKE CENTER STAGE ON POSTAL FUTURE

FLAWS IN USPS PLAN, GAO REPORT EXPOSED

The night before dozens of NALCactivists from New York fanned out across Capitol Hill to convince

their representatives that “5-day is thewrong way” to save the Postal Serviceand to advocate financing reforms forretiree health benefits, Rep. Dan Maffei(D-NY) rallied letter carriers by remind-ing them just how important the PostalService is to America and to the UnitedStates Congress. “Look in your copy ofthe Constitution,” he said. “When theFounding Fathers listed the powers ofCongress, the establishment of the PostOffice was Number 7 on the list, waybefore the powers to declare war, raisearmies and navies or to create federaldistrict courts.”

The task before NALC in the weeksand months ahead is to remind everymember of Congress how important six-day universal service is to this country.

The work begins with our subcom-mittees and committees of jurisdiction inboth the House and the Senate. But theappropriations committees also have animportant say over the issue of six-daydelivery, even though the Postal Servicedoes not receive taxpayer support for itsoperations (see box on p. 14). NALC Pres-ident Fred Rolando met with virtuallyevery member of these committeesthroughout March and April and looksforward to testifying before oversighthearings as they arise.

Those hearings began in earnest inApril when both the House and Senate

subcommittees held their first hearingsof the year, focusing on two reportsissued by investigative agencies, theGovernment Accountability Office andthe Postal Service Office of InspectorGeneral. The GAO’s report, U.S. PostalService: Strategies and Options to Facili-tate Progress Toward Financial Viability,was a deep disappointment (see story onp. 17), while the IG’s report providesCongress with a roadmap for returningthe Postal Service to financial stability—stability that is needed to give us time todevelop a new business model that willwork over the long haul.

HOUSE HEARING ON USPS, GAO, OIG REPORTS

The House hearing on April 15 featured a government-only panel ofwitnesses, including USPS PostmasterGeneral Jack Potter, Inspector GeneralDavid Williams and GAO Director ofPhysical Infrastructure Issues PhillipHerr—all of whom testified aboutreports they issued on the crisis facingthe Postal Service. Also called to testifywere representatives of the PostalRegulatory Commission, the Office of Personnel Management and theCongressional Research Service.

The PMG made the case for a changeto five-day delivery and other aspects ofhis action plan (see the April issue of ThePostal Record, pp. 9-10) based on a projected $238 billion loss over the next 10 years. He renewed his request for

financial relief fromthe burden to pre-fund future retireehealth benefits, butback-tracked on astatement he madebefore the Senate inMarch, a suggestionthat elimination ofSaturday delivery

TODAY, THE POSTAL

SERVICE FACES A CRISIS EVERY

BIT AS CHALLENGING AS THE

ONE THAT PROMPTED NALC

MEMBERS TO TAKE TO THE

STREETS.

—President Fredric V. Rolando

“”

MAY 2010 I POSTAL RECORD 15

President Rolando gives marchingorders to NALC activists fromNew York (l), in town to lobby theircongressional representatives.

▲


Remarking that the Postal Service’sstrategy to drop Saturday delivery seemsto fit with a pattern of private industryattacks on public employees, AFL-CIOPresident Richard Trumka (pictured at left)told a dinner gathering of the NALC’s statelegislative chairs and other union activistsMarch 23 in Washington that his federationcontinues to fully support carriers’ effort topreserve delivery of mail six days a weekas well as our drive to reduce the onerousoverpayment USPS is required to makeinto the retiree health benefit fund.

The dinner was but one part of theannual week-long state legislative confer-ence, five full days packed with plenty oflegislative activity and training led by themembers of the union’s Department ofLegislation and Political Action. Unionleaders representing every state andNALC region took part in discussionsabout all aspects of the legislative agendaand geared up for their day on Capitol Hill,lobbying senators and representatives on

why moving to five-day delivery is thewrong way to save the Postal Service (asRegion 1’s delegates did with Sen. HarryReid below—Reid is second from l). Theactivists also picked up some tips for lobbying state legislators back homeabout letter carrier concerns, and dis-cussed early plans for the fall elections,when every House seat and a third of theSenate will once again be up for grabs.

STATE CHAIRS SET TONEFOR NALC ACTIVISTS

OHIO CONGRESSIONAL BREAKFASTOhio letter carriers held their congressional breakfastin Washington on March 18 before going to CapitolHill to lobby their congressional representatives onthe dangers of the proposed five-day delivery plan.

Right: Rep. Zack Space (D-18)Below: Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy (D-15)Below left: Rep. Steve Driehaus (D-1)

Below: NALC activistsmet with DemocraticRep. Dennis Kucinich (c)in his Washington office. Below left: RepublicanRep. Steven LaTourette(standing third from l)poses for a photo withOhio letter carriers.

would be unnecessary if the Postal Service’s retiree health fund were credited with the $75 billion USPS hasbeen overcharged by the Office of Personnel Management.

The GAO’s Herr called on Congressto assemble a panel of independentexperts to propose changes in postalcollective bargaining, universal serviceobligations and the structure of thePostal Service’s retail and delivery net-works to allow USPS to remain viablein the future. With respect to bargain-ing, the GAO appeared to endorse thePostal Service’s proposal to requireinterest arbitration panels to give special consideration to the agency’sfinancial condition when issuing theirdecisions, a change that would unfairlybias the process in favor of manage-ment. It also highlighted—withoutcontext or explanation of the unions’views—the fact that postal employeespay less for health benefits than otherpostal employees.

In a statement posted on the union’s website on April 14, PresidentRolando denounced the GAO reportas a “full-throated attack on postal collective bargaining.”

The inspector general sparred withOPM’s witness over the validity of theIG’s report in January that found that

OPM had overcharged USPS by $75 billion in Civil Service Retirement System pension payments over thepast 40 years by using an inequitablemethod for allocating costs betweenUSPS and the federal government forbenefits paid for work performedbefore the creation of the Postal Ser-vice in 1971. NALC strongly backs theOIG’s conclusions and has led the fightto correct the unfairness of OPM’smethods. That $75 billion in pensionassets is more than enough to closeany remaining unfunded liability forfuture retiree health benefits—andenough to justify repeal of the retireehealth pre-funding provisions of the2006 postal reform law, the PostalAccountability and Enhancement Act.


Setting the debate over how tosave the Postal Service backward

rather than forward, the GovernmentAccountability Office released anaudit report in April calling on Con-gress and the Postal Service to cutwages and jobs, to shift more workonto part-time employees, and to lookinto contracting out craft functions—the result of lazy research and a pur-poseful misreading of the report’scongressionally mandated mission.Unsurprisingly, the Strategies andOptions to Facilitate Progress towardFinancial Viability report landed with a

thud in the middle of the ongoing five-day delivery debate.

In 2006, Congress directed the GAOto take five years to produce a report,“evaluating in depth various options andstrategies for the long-term structuraland operational reforms of the UnitedStates Postal Service.” It was asked tosuggest structural changes that wouldminimally impact all parties and stillmaintain affordable universal service.

Instead, the GAO released a hurriedand ill-prepared audit report thataccepts problematic projections andcalls for wholesale changes to the

Postal Service that, if enacted, wouldhave long-term, damaging effects onlabor and management alike.

“The Congress outlined, in detail,what it ordered GAO to do, and how todo it,” said NALC President FredricRolando in a statement about thereport. “GAO ignored Congress.”(President Rolando further outlines theunion’s reaction to the GAO report inhis President’s Message on page 1.)

The GAO claims that the USPSbusiness model has failed because ithas “lost $12 billion over this period[2007-2009], despite achieving billions

FLAWED GAO REPORT ATTACKS EMPLOYEE BENEFITS

L-R: House Postal SubcommitteeChair Stephen Lynch (D-MA) andranking Republican Jason Chaffetz(R-UT) ask questions of the post-master general during a hearingheld April 15.

Postmaster GeneralJack Potter (l) and GAODirector of PhysicalInfrastructure IssuesPhillip Herr testifiedtogether before theHouse subcommittee.

▲

▲

in cost savings, reducing capitalinvestments, and raising rates.” How-ever, it virtually ignored the fact that thelegally mandated pre-funding of theretiree health benefits fund accountsfor $12.4 billion—more than theamount GAO claims USPS lost.

While the report acknowledges thatchanges should be made to that pre-funding requirement, it glosses over thatchange as one minor blip within USPS’sprojected shortfall of $238 billion overthe next 10 years—a prediction that hasbeen roundly criticized both by theNALC and members of Congress.

“It’s an unacceptable practice tolook at economic numbers during the

worst recession in 80 years and thenclaim that those conditions won’tchange over the next decade, resultingin a disastrous loss,” Rolando said.

Continuing its behavior of uncriticallyusing questionable figures, the GAOalso accepted as gospel the Office ofPersonnel Management’s valuationresults, even though the Office of theInspector General’s report says OPMhas overcharged USPS for civil serviceretirement funds by $75 billion.

“[W]e did not assess the reasonable-ness of these [retiree health valuations]or OPM’s actuarial assumptions andmethodology,” GAO’s report admits.“We utilized OPM’s valuation results to

analyze the financial impacts of selectedoptions for funding USPS’s retireehealth benefit obligations. We did notassess the validity of USPS’s financialand mail volume projections due to timeand resource constraints.”

These self-imposed “time andresource constraints”—remember, Con-gress wasn’t expecting a report untilsometime in 2011—lie at the heart ofquestions about the report’s validity,making its conclusions that much harderto swallow—conclusions that call forCongress to, among other things, allowthe Postal Service the ability to closepost offices, cut Saturday mail delivery,decrease wages, increase the number


USPS PLANS, GAO NUMBERSDON’T HOLD UP TO SCRUTINY

Subcommittee Chairman StephenLynch (D-MA), full committee RankingMember Darrell Issa (R-CA), subcom-mittee Ranking Member Jason Chaffetz(R-UT), Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA)and several other members raised manyquestions about the validity of the post-master general’s projection of a $238 billion shortfall over the next 10 years,USPS’ claim that elimination of Saturdaydelivery is essential to its future viability,and whether the GAO study has true

value if the assumptions it used are nowbeing called into question.

Rep. Issa warned the PMG againstseeking support from Congress withplans to turn career jobs into part-timejobs, citing workers’ needs for decentwages and benefits to support familiesand to afford decent housing.

Rep. Connolly grilled the Postal Ser-vice and the GAO on how they couldproject a $238 billion shortfall over thenext decade. Under questioning, bothPotter and Herr were forced to admitthat the numbers in the Postal Service’saction plan were “theoretical” and based

THE POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION(PRC) wants answers about the Postal

Service’s proposal to eliminate Saturdaydelivery, collections and incoming mailprocessing next year. So does the NALC.

That is why the union has joined dozensof other interested parties that have inter-vened as formal participants in a proceed-ing initiated by the PRC on March 30 toreview the controversial proposal.

The PRC’s Docket N2010-1 willinvolve months of litigation, field hearings and debate and will lead to a non-binding advisory opinion regard-ing the USPS proposal.

“It would be inconceivable for thePostal Service to adopt its plan to slashdelivery and collections services,” NALCPresident Fred Rolando said. “For thatreason, the union will spare no effort toconvince the commission that the Postal

Service’s plan would recklessly endangerits ability to provide affordable universalservice to America’s mailers and the citizens who rely on the USPS every day.”

Among the key questions to be raised inthe PRC proceeding are:◆ Will the savings the Postal Service

anticipates be as significant as it esti-mates?

◆ Will mail volume decline more thanthe Postal Service anticipates?

◆ Will businesses and citizens have ser-vice that remains adequate to meettheir needs?

◆ Will the national economic impact ofservice reductions offset or add to thesavings that are predicted?

NALC will seek ways to help the PRCanswer these questions and will providedetailed testimony and evidence to sup-

port our view that eliminating Saturdaydelivery would be a tragic mistake.

“Of course, only Congress can approveelimination of Saturday delivery,” Rolandoobserved, “but the PRC process is a veryimportant exercise and an opportunity toeducate the public about the value of six-day delivery for the nation’s economyand for the country as a whole.” ✉

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSIONTAKES UP 5-DAY DELIVERY PLAN“IT’S NOT A DONE DEAL BY ANY MEANS,” SAYS PRC CHAIR

PRC ChairmanRuth Goldway


of part-time employees, increase theamount of employees’ contributions totheir health insurance, and contract outcraft functions to private businesses.

“GAO has issued a full-throatedattack on collective bargaining, ourcontractual COLA clause, our contrac-tual limits on contracting out, and ourcontractual protections of full-timecareer positions,” Rolando said.

The president pointed out that sincethe GAO basically ignored Congress’instructions, House and Senate leadersshould instead consider the findings ofthe Postal Regulatory Commission,which is not only preparing its ownreports on the validity of both USPS’

projections and OPM’s valuations, but is also listening to average postal cus-tomers, all in an effort to help it deter-mine which changes will ensure astrong Postal Service for years to come.

“NALC will spare no effort in bringingthe truth—and the real data—to theCongress for its deliberation,” Rolandosaid. “And NALC’s membership will riseto the challenge to make sure that thereal public, their patrons and the mail-ers, know the facts and act on them.The country deserves nothing less.” ✉For the full GAO report, go to gao.gov/new.items/d10455.pdf. For Rolando’sstatement and all the latest news, go tonalc.org.

on “worst-case scenarios” that assumedthat neither Congress nor the USPSwould take any action over the next 10years to ensure the Service’s viability.Connolly scoffed at the explanations andconcluded that the projected $238 billionloss was a “bogus” number.

The hearing concluded with Chair-man Lynch expressing his sympathy forthe Postal Service’s side in the disputewith OPM over the proper allocation ofpension costs in CSRS. He urged theagencies to work together to hash outan agreement on how to to fairly dividethese costs. The same agencies werepreparing to testify before the Senate on April 22 as this Postal Record went to press.

NALC is expected to be called to testifyat the next round of committee hearings.“Letter carriers can help amplify themessage I will give the committees by getting involved in our legislativeactivities,” President Rolando said.“Working together, we have the power to reach our representatives in Congressin ways that capture their attention andbring them around to our point of view.”

As wave after wave of state associa-tions continue to climb Capitol Hill inthe coming months, that power willbecome much more apparent. ✉

NEW YORK CONGRESSIONAL RECEPTIONOn April 14, members of the NewYork congressional delegation had the opportunity to lobby theirrepresentatives during a reception.

At right: Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-14)got a rousing cheer when she spokeof the need to preserve six-daydelivery.

Pictured below (clockwise from top l):Rep. Tim Bishop (D-1), Rep. MikeMcMahon (D-13), Rep. Dan Maffei (D-25), Rep. Paul Tonko (D-21) andRep. Scott Murphy (D-20).

every generation of americans faces great challenges, · alone. by banding together, facing a...

Documents