More on postal rate increases

[dianasmama]

Moni:

How long do you have to be in the military to get retirement benefits? My brother served as a Marine for only 3 years (during non-war time) Does he qualify?

Another question: If a military person actually retires from the military (like 20 years or whatever is required) and then works at the PO, is this saying that the PO pays for his military pension?

My SIL just retired from Secret Service and she said her benefits are all different from ours as well because it was all government based but has since been changed as well, but she had been there for so long she was still entitled to the original set up of benefits. She'll do quite well and will receive about 75% of her normal income. Sounds good to me! [img]smile.gif[/img]

Laurie

[monimarine]

Without getting in to reservists or those who can be medically retired, in general, in order to be considered "retired" from the military, you have to have served honorably for at least 20 yrs total, doesn't matter whether it was peace time, or war. There are Marines who retire after 30 yrs sometimes, as long as the Marine Corps doesn't force them out.

If they do 20 yrs in the military and then get a job working for the PO, the PO is not paying their military retirement. They will collect their military retirement while they are working for the PO, for example. Once they retire from the PO, the PO is responsible for paying their retirement from the Postal service ONLY.

<font color="#051E50" size="1">[ January 09, 2006 01:17 PM: Message edited by: monimarine ]</font>

[Ds9jullian]

We still pay less than may other countries. In England it is nearly twice what we pay.

Ashley

[Miss_Nellie_OMalley]

Postage rates in england are not that bad... it just looks steep because of the exchange rate of the US dollar... we are weak against sterling

[moderator]

Don't forget the postal rate increases!

I just heard on the news that the rate hikes this year are to benefit the military and do not benefit the postal service. They expect to have to make a price hike next year to help with operating costs. Ouch.

Although I am not a fan of the Direct Marketing Association, they have some information on their website under "2) Military Pension Costs and Excess Funds Held in Escrow":
http://www.the-dma.org/postal/fivema...20050610.shtml

[monimarine]

Let me just clarify that before someone gets up in arms about active duty or any military benefits. The rate increase does not benefit the military. It is to help those employees who have honorable military service and now work in the post office be assured of their retirement benefits.

The rate increase came about because the legislation states that the Post Office is "required to pay the total retiree benefits for employees who have also served in the military. This is different from any other government entity, whose military portion of retiree benefits are paid by the US Treasury."

[moderator]

I wasn't intending to make anyone upset at the military. My dad is a former member of the Air Force, and we're a very patriotic family. What I was pointing out was that there would be more rate increases next year. The reason I posted about this provision and the escrow is because it helps explain why the increase was made. Most people thought it was for operating costs, but it isn't; those will possibly come next year.

I apologize for not being more clear in my first post.

<font color="#051E50" size="1">[ January 09, 2006 12:46 PM: Message edited by: Melissa ]</font>

[monimarine]

I didn't take it that way. It was just the way it was originally stated in your first post that said it benefitted the military.

I just wanted to elaborate so that no one took it as something benefitting active duty military. There are many people out there who don't understand or agree with what benefits the military does have. I just didn't want this one to be misconstrued.

[dianasmama]

monimarine:

This is different from any other government entity, whose military portion of retiree benefits are paid by the US Treasury."

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Do you know why the USPS was set up differently then? Just wondering...

Laurie

[monimarine]

No. I don't know why the PO was set up differently.

That quote that I used was from the link provided in the original post. It gives a little more elaboration on what is now expected of the Post Office as far as paying those former military their retirement benefits once they retire from the post office. The legislation changed the organization of the post office and it even stated that the PO is now responsible for paying back the govt for retirement dating back to 1971.

<font color="#051E50" size="1">[ January 09, 2006 12:54 PM: Message edited by: monimarine ]</font>