APWU President Jonathan Smith hosted a national livestream on Tuesday, April 14, 2026 at 7:00 PM ET titled “Are We Broke or Is There Hope?” alongside Political Legislative Director Judy Beard. The full presentation tackled the FERS contribution suspension head-on, walked members through the actual financial picture of the Postal Service, and laid out three specific fixes APWU says Congress could pass tomorrow. We watched the entire stream so you don’t have to. Here’s what was actually said and what it means for your paycheck.
Smith’s Framing: This Is a Situation, Not a Crisis
Smith opened by drawing a deliberate distinction between the words “situation” and “crisis” — and stuck with it for the entire presentation. His argument: a crisis means there’s no solution. A situation means there is one, and APWU has been preparing for this moment for years.
That framing matters because it’s a direct response to the headlines that followed Postmaster General David Steiner’s recent congressional testimony, where Steiner warned the Postal Service could fail within a year. Smith argued that Steiner was deliberately raising the alarm to push Congress into action — and that the press picked up the most dire phrases without the context.
The FERS Contribution Suspension: What It Actually Is
This was the biggest fact-versus-rumor section of the stream, and it’s where most members will get the most value. Here’s the breakdown Smith delivered:
It’s a deferment, not a theft. The Postal Service is temporarily suspending its employer contribution to the FERS retirement fund to preserve operating cash so it can keep paying salaries every two weeks. The money it’s required to contribute doesn’t disappear — the obligation remains on the books and must be paid in the future. Per Smith, this is the same playbook USPS used in 2011, and back then no layoffs followed and no benefits were lost.
Your benefits are protected by federal law. The Postal Service legally cannot refuse to pay your retirement benefits. This applies to current retirees, soon-to-be retirees, and future retirees alike. Smith was emphatic that nobody’s pension is at risk because of this deferment.
The fund is already 75% funded. There is currently over $144 billion sitting in the FERS retirement fund — more than enough to cover existing retirees, near-term retirees, and future retirees. The deferment doesn’t change that math.
It saves USPS roughly $200 million per pay period. Smith said the Postal Service is obligated to contribute about $200 million in employer FERS contributions every pay period across roughly 200,000+ FERS-covered employees. Pausing those contributions frees that cash for operations.
What this means for your paycheck: Nothing changes for you personally. The suspension is on the employer contribution — the portion USPS pays on your behalf into the FERS fund. Your own paycheck deduction (the employee FERS contribution) is unaffected, your take-home pay does not change, and your eventual annuity is not reduced. If you want to see your exact take-home math under current pay scales, the pay calculator on the homepage will walk you through it craft-by-craft.
Why USPS Is in This Spot: The “Identity Crisis”
Before getting to the fixes, Smith spent time on why the Postal Service keeps ending up in these situations. His framing: Congress can’t decide whether USPS is a business or a public service, and treats it as both in the worst possible ways.
The Postal Service has obligations no normal business has: deliver to 168 million addresses six days a week at uniform affordable rates, fund its own retirement obligations entirely from postage revenue (no taxpayer support), and break even rather than turn a profit. But it also has restrictions no normal business faces: it can only borrow from the U.S. Treasury (not banks), it can only invest its retirement reserves in Treasury bonds (not equities), and Congress sets a hard borrowing cap that hasn’t been adjusted for inflation since 1992.
Per Smith’s numbers: in 1992, USPS had a $15 billion borrowing limit against $45 billion in annual expenses. Today, it has the same $15 billion limit against more than $90 billion in annual expenses — double the operation, same credit line.
The Three Common-Sense Fixes (“Three Buckets”)
This was the structural backbone of the presentation. Smith walked through three specific changes Congress could make that, together, would resolve the underlying situation without touching a single postal worker’s pay or benefits.
Bucket 1: Raise the Borrowing Limit to $35–$40 Billion
The simplest fix. The current $15 billion borrowing cap was set in 1992. Adjusted for inflation, that same $15 billion would equal roughly $35 to $40 billion today. Smith’s argument is that this isn’t a request for special treatment — it’s a request to update a number that hasn’t kept pace with the cost of running a Postal Service that’s twice the size it was when the cap was set.
Bucket 2: Let USPS Invest in More Than Treasury Bonds
This is the bucket with the biggest potential upside, and Smith spent the most time on it. There is currently around $300 billion sitting in the various postal retirement and health benefit funds (CSRS, FERS, and the postal health fund combined). By law, that money can only be invested in U.S. Treasury bonds.
Smith made this concrete with a TSP analogy every postal worker will instantly understand: it’s the equivalent of being told you can only invest your TSP in the G Fund. Over the last 10 years, the G Fund has yielded about 2.8% annually. Over the same period, the C Fund has yielded about 14.6% annually. Letting USPS diversify those reserves the same way every other federal agency does could generate hundreds of billions in additional returns.
Smith also pointed out something members may not realize: the Tennessee Valley Authority, the National Railroad Retirement Investment Trust, and Amtrak — all government-related entities — are allowed to invest in more than Treasury bonds. The Postal Service is uniquely restricted.
Bucket 3: Fix the Civil Service Retirement Allocation
This is the most technical fix but potentially the most consequential. When the Post Office Department became the U.S. Postal Service in 1971, the federal government calculated how much of the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) obligation USPS would inherit versus how much the federal government would keep. Per Smith, that calculation was not done using standard accounting practices — and as a result, USPS has been overpaying for 50 years.
Using normal accounting practices, Smith said the federal government currently owes the Postal Service approximately $80 billion in over-allocated CSRS obligations. He explicitly framed this as a non-partisan failure: the issue was raised to the Obama, first Trump, Biden, and now second Trump administrations, and none have fixed it.
The Most Important Number from the Livestream
If you only remember one figure from this stream, make it this: $80 billion. That’s what APWU says the federal government owes USPS from 50 years of incorrectly calculated Civil Service Retirement obligations. For context, USPS’s entire 2025 operating loss was $9 billion. The CSRS overpayment alone, if corrected, would wipe out roughly nine years of operating losses at current burn rates.
| The “Three Buckets” Solution | What It Does | Estimated Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Raise borrowing limit | Adjusts 1992 cap for inflation | $20–$25 billion in additional credit |
| Diversify investments | Allow non-Treasury investments for retirement reserves | Hundreds of billions over time |
| Fix CSRS allocation | Correct the 1971 calculation using standard accounting | Roughly $80 billion owed to USPS |
Bonus Good News: The PRC Waiver
Toward the end of the presentation, Smith mentioned a piece of news that hadn’t gotten much attention in the press: the Postal Regulatory Commission recently granted USPS a waiver Smith said frees up roughly $2.4 billion per year in operational expenses. He framed this as additional breathing room on top of the FERS deferment — and in his view, this PRC action alone should have been enough to make the FERS suspension unnecessary.
What APWU Is Asking Members to Do
- Don’t panic, and don’t spread rumors. Smith explicitly said the “USPS is going to start layoffs” rumor circulating in break rooms is not true. If you’re hearing it from coworkers, send them this recap or the official APWU statement.
- Stay informed through APWU’s monthly livestream. Smith announced that going forward, APWU will hold member livestreams every second Tuesday of the month at 7:00 PM ET. Future streams will be members-only, but tonight’s was open because the issue affects all postal employees.
- Support House Resolution 70. Smith and Beard noted that a majority of House members already support H. Res. 70, which opposes postal privatization. Contacting your representative to confirm their support — or to ask them to add their name — is the most concrete action members can take this week.
- If you’re not a member, this is the case for joining. Smith made the point pretty directly: this isn’t a grievance issue, and no individual employee is going to march into management and reverse the FERS deferment alone. Union strength on legislative issues comes from numbers.
What Wasn’t Addressed (Yet)
Because the broadcast we reviewed covered the presentation portion, the live Q&A from members hadn’t happened by the time of writing. That said, here are the questions members will reasonably want answered that the prepared remarks didn’t directly cover:
- What’s the actual timeline for any of the three congressional fixes? Smith made a strong case that Congress could act — he didn’t say when they’re likely to.
- If the FERS deferment is “temporary,” how temporary is temporary? Weeks, months, until a specific congressional action? The 2011 precedent was mentioned, but the duration wasn’t.
- Does the PRC waiver have any conditions attached? A $2.4 billion-per-year regulatory accommodation typically comes with strings — service standards, rate-setting changes, something. Worth watching for.
- What happens to the deferred employer contributions over the long term? They have to be repaid into the fund eventually. Is there a schedule? A penalty? An interest accrual?
- Where does this leave the 2024–2027 contract’s economic terms? The retro pay went out April 10. Are there any contract impacts from this situation that members should know about?
If APWU answers any of these in their official follow-up communication, we’ll update this post.
How This Lines Up with Other Union Statements
APWU’s “don’t panic, this is fixable” framing is consistent with the joint statement issued by APWU, NALC, NPMHU, and NRLCA in the days following the Postal Service’s announcement — all four unions emphasized that benefits are protected by law and that the deferment is a temporary measure. For the side-by-side comparison of all four union responses, see our full FERS suspension breakdown.
What to Watch Next
- Second Tuesday of May 2026, 7:00 PM ET: Next APWU monthly livestream (members-only).
- Ongoing: Congressional action on the borrowing limit and CSRS recalculation. These are the two biggest near-term levers.
- Ongoing: Watch for any APWU/NALC joint legislative push on H. Res. 70 cosponsorships.
See exactly how the FERS deferment affects your take-home pay. Spoiler: it shouldn’t, because the suspension is on the employer contribution, not your paycheck deduction. But run the numbers yourself by craft and grade.
Open the Pay Calculator →Related Coverage
- USPS FERS Employer Contribution Suspension — Full Breakdown
- USPS Financial Crisis 2026: What Postal Workers Need to Know
- FERS Retirement Guide for Postal Employees
- TSP Funds Explained: G, F, C, S, and I — relevant to Smith’s G Fund vs C Fund analogy
This recap is based on the public APWU livestream broadcast on April 14, 2026, hosted by President Smith and Political Legislative Director Judy Beard. Quotes are paraphrased except where shown in quotation marks. All figures cited are from Smith’s presentation. MyPostalPay is not affiliated with APWU. For the official APWU statement, visit apwu.org.