If memory serves, wouldn't the USPS actually still be mildly profitable, if it weren't for what it's essentially sabotage, demanding that they cover something like 50+ future years of retirement benefits?
It's just another case of yelling about a problem they created.
It's just another case of yelling about a problem they created.
Comments
Note how DeJoy quoted "since 2007", and the prefunding mandate conveniently started in 2006.
prefunding had nothing to do with losses. USPS never paid them and the prefunding was done to protect postal employees so they would have health care when they retired. Until recently, they were FEHB. Do you not read the news? can you read?
I forgot it was 75, though. Imagine having to save up retiree benefits for someone that's not even been born yet as part of your operating costs.
Woof.