This weekend, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) continued his social media assault on the Postal Service, making a case to the American people that Congress should make the cuts to begin the process of dismantling the USPS.
Coming prepared with an arsenal of misinformation, Issa claims that his “postal reform” legislation, HR 2309, would not end collective-bargaining rights for postal employees if it passed. Rather, he is satisfied that his proposals do enough to severely limit the right to bargain collectively by including the creation of an oversight authority that would have the power to unilaterally change and nullify portions of bargained agreements.
Furthermore, Issa misleadingly declared, “USPS is not required to fund 75 years of retirement benefits in 10 years.” Yet the USPS is required to put roughly $5.5 billion per year through 2016 into a fund called the Postal Service Retiree Health Benefits Fund (PSRHBF). This fund cannot be used to pay for the cost of benefits for current retirees; rather, it would fund 80 percent of the cost of USPS retirees over the next 75 years. Forgetting the fact that there is already more than $40 billion in the PSRHBF right now—half of the total cost of retiree health benefits over the next 75 years—Issa’s misinformation campaign has one purpose: To tear apart the USPS, one piece at a time.
By focusing on cutting business and service standards, busting the postal employees’ unions and ending the trusted service provided to the American people six days a week, Issa refuses to work toward a viable future for the USPS.
The right legislative solution will empower the USPS to find new ways to make money while using existing USPS resources in every community, continuing to visit every American home and business six days a week, and providing more convenience and service to the American people.

issa is just licking his chops. he wants the postal service dismantled so he can be the primary share holder in ISSAS MAIL DELIVERY.
if the sticking point to incentives to retire is the existance or not of the fers overpayments, has anyone thought about the feasibility of offering solely years of service to csrs employees? 5 years would entice 100k to leave in dignity.