In response to:

About Those Postal Retiree Health Benefits

Walter1776 Wrote: Apr 14, 2012 9:00 AM
The Monday nightmare and the impossible Tuesday after a holiday would be better if we had nightmares on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday? I fail to see the logic. Which carriers would you have work in the plant? Rural carriers? City Carriers? Both? Do we require carriers from distant areas to commute in to the plant from 70 miles away or just those whose offices are closer? Do we work some of them at night one day and put them on the road delivering mail the next day when they are sleepy from the shift change? Are you trying to cause traffic accidents? Do you really want to put a policy into place that contributes to carriers running over small children while delivering mail? Your ideas are not well thought out.

While Congress is busy trying to figure out how it’s going to continue screwing up the U.S. Postal Service, postal expert Michael Schuler has been busy analyzing the reasons why it’s so screwed up to begin with. Last week, Michael released a paper on congressional micromanagement of the USPS. A new paper looks at the complicated and controversial topic of postal retiree health benefits.

A common claim made by the postal unions and other defenders of the unsustainable status quo is that the USPS would be a-okay if a 2006 law hadn’t required the postal service to...

Related Tags: Health
Thursday, May 23 | 04:56 PM ET
Thursday, May 23 | 04:56 PM ET
Thursday, May 23 | 04:56 PM ET
Thursday, May 23 | 04:56 PM ET