Remarks to the ND AFL-CIO 66th Annual Convention NALC State Association President Cory Carter

Back in February, the NALC launched a new campaign to guide our union’s work at every level, “Fight Like Hell!” Since the founding of our union 135 years ago, NALC members have fought for everything we have achieved, and we have fought against every attack that has come our way, and that’s exactly what we’re doing now. 

We held a kickoff event at NALC Headquarters on February 13, where NALC members and leaders, along with representatives from other unions, came together to commit to the fights ahead. There’s a lot on our plates, for safety and protection on the job, for fair retirement for all letter carriers, and the fight against any efforts to privatize the Postal Service. Just a week after our launch event, one of these fights came into clear focus. 

On Feb. 20, we started hearing reports of a potential executive order from the White House that would dismantle the Postal Service as we know it. According to reports, this executive order would fire the Postal Service Board of Governors and place the independent, self-sufficient agency under the control of the U.S. Department of Commerce. Immediately, we and the other postal unions saw this for what it was—a direct attack on letter carriers and all 640,000 postal employees, our universal service, and every person who relies on the Postal Service. Letter carriers quickly sprang into action, and days later, we held a rally on Capitol grounds where hundreds of NALC members rallied to say, “Hell no!” We sent a powerful message, and as of today, no executive order regarding the Postal Service has been released. But the threats are real and must be taken seriously. 

While letter carriers know and understand the dangers of privatization, it’s worth reminding ourselves what’s at stake and how devastating such an order would be for us and every American. Our members’ work is at the center of the $1.9 trillion mailing industry. We deliver nearly half of the world’s mail. Without our work, 51.5 million households and businesses in rural communities, like many here in North Dakota, would have no guaranteed delivery. Additionally, this wouldn’t just threaten the job of every postal employee—at least 73,000 of whom are veterans—it also would jeopardize the jobs of 7.9 million people employed in the mailing industry. The Trump administration’s goal is to get rid of us and create a fragmented, unreliable, and more expensive private version of the Postal Service. These ideas are dangerous and illegal. 

The Postal Service, which will celebrate its 250th anniversary this year, is older than our country and it is enshrined in the Constitution. The Constitution gives Congress, not the president, authority in setting postal policy, and if Trump tries to break the law with executive action, we will fight like hell to stop it. This will be a tough and ongoing fight, but fortunately, we have the public on our side. Americans love the Postal Service, and it’s repeatedly ranked in annual polls as the most-trusted government agency. That’s because Americans know they can count on their letter carrier, and regardless of how anyone voted in last year’s presidential election, they did not vote to destroy the Postal Service. 

On Sunday, March 23, letter carriers and others rallied across the country to fight like hell to preserve the future of the United States Postal Service as a self-sufficient public agency. More than 200 NALC branches and state associations held rallies in nearly every state, including one here in Bismarck and one in Fargo, amplifying the message that Americans do not want to see USPS dismantled. 

Two days later, on March 25, NALC's National President, Brian Renfroe, along with representatives from the American Postal Workers Union and the National Rural Letter Carriers’ Association, participated in a National Press Club Headliners event in Washington, DC, to discuss the threats facing the USPS and the future of the agency. The union presidents discussed the severe impacts privatization would have on all Americans, recent actions the unions have taken to bring awareness to this issue, the need to protect universal service, ways in which Congress and the executive branch can help the Postal Service, the targeting by criminals of letter carriers, the resignation that very day of Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, and more.  When asked about DeJoy’s exit, Renfroe emphasized that the next postmaster general must continue to build infrastructure and maintain universal service while valuing USPS employees. The Postal Service’s Financial situation was also discussed. Renfroe began by emphasizing that the USPS operates as a public service funded by earned revenue, not taxpayer dollars. He then identified two potential solutions for financial relief: adopting private-sector accounting practices for retirement funds and passing legislation to allow investments in higher-yield assets. These changes, long advocated by NALC, would help boost the Postal Service’s financial situation, assuring long-term stability. 

What else we’re fighting for 

The White House’s potential plans to restructure USPS is not the only thing NALC is prepared to Fight like hell against. President Renfroe has outlined the ongoing major battles NALC is waging: 

• For even greater use of the unparalleled postal network in the interest of the public 

• In defense of the retirement and health care benefits that letter carriers have earned 

• For enhanced safety and protection on the job, including an end to the assaults and robberies targeting letter carriers on their routes, and establishing national standards related to heat and other forms of extreme weather 

• For fair retirement for all letter carriers, including those who spent time in a non-career position, by passing the Federal Retirement Fairness Act

NALC state delegations have continued their regularly scheduled lobbying trips to Washington, DC. In these meetings, NALC members from various states have focused on increasing co-sponsors for our priority legislation. While many members of Congress want to get involved in the fight for the Postal Service, at this time, the most helpful action they can take is co-sponsoring our anti-privatization resolution (H.Res. 70 and S.Res. 147). Increasing co-sponsors for this, as well as for the Protect Our Letter Carriers Act (H.R. 1065/S. 463) and the Federal Retirement Fairness Act (H.R. 1522), has been the goal of these meetings. I personally brought these to the attention of our Senators at the beginning of April when I visited their offices in Washington, D.C. Regardless of the threats coming our way, letter carriers cannot forget about these fights or lose sight of how Congress can most help, which is to pass our priority legislation.

Looking forward 

On March 24, Postmaster General Louis DeJoy announced his resignation, effective that day. Upon DeJoy’s resignation, Deputy Postmaster General Doug Tulino, a 41-year veteran of the Postal Service, was appointed acting postmaster general. Tulino previously served as the Vice President of Labor Relations for 15 years. 

President Renfroe emphasized that the new leader must continue modernizing postal infrastructure, work in collaboration with NALC and other postal unions, and advocate for necessary changes to retirement fund and accounting policies in Congress. The new leader should also have a strong belief in USPS as a public service and in its role of providing universal service to the American public. NALC has pledged to collaborate with the new postmaster general to ensure that the perspectives of letter carriers are prioritized. With the leadership of the Postal Service in transition, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), arrived on site at USPS in early March. DOGE has reportedly focused on real estate contracts and has had meetings with various departments at USPS. In a letter to Congress prior to his departure, DeJoy laid out areas of concern that DOGE can and should prioritize, including OPM’s calculation of Postal Service pension liabilities, which have cost the agency tens of billions of dollars. Also outlined was a new investment strategy for USPS’s three retirement funds, which are currently held in Treasury bonds, missing out on billions in annual returns.  NALC continues to engage the administration and Congress to enact these critical policies and will closely monitor DOGE’s engagement with the Postal Service. 

Just last month, the Postal Board of Governors announced that they had selected David Steiner as the next Postmaster General for the USPS. As the union representing 295,000 active and retired letter carriers, the National Association of Letter Carriers (NALC) strongly condemns the reported selection of David P. Steiner to lead the Postal Service. Steiner comes directly from service on FedEx’s board of directors, presenting a clear conflict of interest. Steiner didn’t just stroll in from the private sector—he comes straight from one of the Postal Service’s top competitors.

His selection isn’t just a conflict of interest—it’s an aggressive step toward handing America’s mail system over to corporate interests. Private shippers have been waiting to get USPS out of parcel delivery for years. Steiner’s selection is an open invitation to do just that.

During his tenure as Waste Management, Inc.’s CEO, Steiner took a stand against unions. He built his brand on union-busting, slashing jobs, and replacing workers with machines. He has publicly bragged about shrinking the union footprint. Now, he’s being handed the keys to one of the nation’s largest unionized employers. At a time when collaboration with workers helped USPS turn a $144 million profit in the last quarter of 2024, this decision flies in the face of everything that’s working. 

This isn’t just bad policy—it’s a direct assault on the workers who keep the mail moving and the public connected. The damage will hit rural communities hardest, where the Postal Service isn’t just a convenience—it’s a lifeline. And make no mistake: if this appointment stands, it threatens 7.9 million jobs tied to the postal industry and service to over 300 million Americans.

The nation’s letter carriers are outraged that the Postal Service Board of Governors has chosen an anti-union postmaster general with a major conflict of interest. The board has the responsibility to act in the best interest of USPS. This decision is not only a failure in that responsibility but also shows open contempt for the work of America’s letter carriers and the public good.

April 29 was the second Trump administration’s 100th day—a traditional milestone used to gauge the early direction of a presidency. In just these first 100 days, the administration has moved swiftly to shrink the federal government through the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (better known as DOGE) and has issued a wave of executive orders aimed at removing perceived opponents. Dozens of officials, including prosecutors and FBI agents involved in investigations related to Trump and the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, have been demoted or fired. At the core of this effort is Project 2025—a sweeping 900-page blueprint authored by the conservative Heritage Foundation. Its rapid implementation has tested the boundaries of executive power while undermining labor rights and worker protections. Here are some of the most egregious actions: 

• At the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the president has fired both pro-worker General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo and NLRB Chair Gwynne Wilcox, removing the quorum required to operate. It no longer has the ability to resolve disputes between unions and employers—a devastating blow to organizing campaigns and grievance resolutions nationwide. Additionally, President Trump has removed two commissioners from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, thereby hampering the agency’s ability to protect workers from discrimination and retaliation. 

• On Jan. 20, the administration reinstated Schedule F, a destructive executive order from Trump’s first term that reclassifies tens of thousands of federal employees from civil service workers to at-will employees, stripping them of civil service protections and making them vulnerable to political firings. Though letter carriers are not directly affected, this effort undermines job security and professional integrity across the federal workforce. 

• On Jan. 31, Trump issued an executive order invalidating collective bargaining agreements that were signed and agreed to prior to his taking office. 

• On Feb. 7, the administration halted the use of labor agreements on construction projects at the Department of Defense and expanded the order on March 14 to include all federally funded projects. 

• On March 28, President Trump signed an executive order stripping the right to organize from hundreds of thousands of federal employees across more than 30 agencies. The order carved out exemptions for agencies that have been supportive of the administration. 

• On April 23, President Trump signed an executive order undermining the use of Registered Apprenticeship programs at the Department of Labor, weakening job training in skilled trades. 

The federal government is undergoing a fundamental transformation that endangers workers’ rights, union power, and the very foundation of public service. From Capitol Hill to federal agencies, this is shaping up to be the most aggressive anti-worker agenda in modern history. But Trump still has a long to-do list that will depend on the cooperation of Congress. While Republicans control the House and the Senate, slim majorities in both chambers have complicated their ability to pass sweeping legislation. Looking ahead, as Congress works to advance Trump’s policy priorities, the remainder of the 119th Congress will involve high-stakes legislative battles over the budget, immigration, and taxation, with far-reaching implications for the country and the federal workforce.

On April 30, as part of the budget reconciliation process, the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability advanced a measure that would reduce benefits for federal employees, including letter carriers.

These proposals included:

• Increasing the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) contribution rate for existing employees up to 4.4 percent
• Cutting retirement benefits by eliminating the FERS special annuity supplement
• Reducing annuity payments by calculating a retiree's annuity based on their high-five salary average (instead of three)
• Charging fees for federal employee Merit Systems Protection Board appeals—potentially pricing out workers from fair due process.
• Enacting Federal Employees Health Benefits Protection Act (H.R. 7868)—reworking eligibility or cost-sharing for health insurance
• Converting new federal workers to at-will employment unless they accept higher FERS contributions—weakening job protections unless employees agree to pay more into retirement, with reports as high as a 9.4% contribution. 

Our benefits are not free. We earn them through hard work and contributions.

Many Democratic members praised federal employees for their dedicated service and spoke against benefit cuts.

Just one Republican, Mike Turner (R-OH), opposed the measure. "I believe that making changes to pension retirement benefits in the middle of someone's employment is wrong. Employee benefits are not a gift. They are earned," he said.

On May 22, the House narrowly passed the Republican-led One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R. 1) by a vote of 215–214. The passage of H.R. 1 marks a significant step forward in the budget reconciliation process, which allows the Republican-led Congress to fast-track sweeping budget cuts that reduce federal programs and spending.

As it relates to letter carriers, the initial legislation contained harmful provisions, including a 4.4 percent across-the-board increase for all employees’ contributions to the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) and recalculating retirees’ annuities based on their high-five salary average (instead of the high-three). Following aggressive lobbying efforts by NALC and the federal employee community, lawmakers removed these two provisions.

Despite our best efforts, a key threat to postal employees was passed in the House: the elimination of the FERS special annuity supplement, a crucial benefit for FERS-covered employees who retire before becoming eligible for Social Security at age 62.

As letter carriers know, no other group of Americans has contributed more to congressional priorities than those endured by federal employees. And with this White House continuing to target federal worker jobs, it is time for Congress to find other ways to cut federal spending than by, once again, taking from the middle-class federal employees and retirees who have dedicated their lives to serving the public. NALC will continue to urge members of Congress to reject attacks on earned benefits that serve only to hurt working-class families in every community in the country. Join the fight by contacting your representatives and senators to let them know you do not support such measures.

H.R. 1 now heads to the Senate, where they have their ideas for changes to the House-passed bill. The Senate has a tight timeline with the goal of getting the package to President Trump’s desk by the July 4 recess.

The Senate, which will only require a simple majority to pass reconciliation (51 votes instead of the usual 60), can remove the elimination of the FERS special annuity supplement from its version of the reconciliation package. With 53 Republicans, 45 Democrats, and two independents who caucus with the Democrats, there is little room for Republican objection.  Rand Paul (R-KY) has already indicated his opposition, tightening an already fragile margin.

Beyond the federal workforce impacts, the bill contains numerous provisions that could hinder action in the Senate, including cuts to Medicaid, low-income food and nutrition programs, and clean energy programs, among others. H.R. 1 also expands tax cuts for corporations and the wealthiest Americans while increasing funding for national defense, border security, and deportation. The bill would increase the debt limit by $4 trillion.

A provision "hidden" in the sweeping budget bill seeks to limit the ability of courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, from enforcing their orders.

The provision in the bill, which is more than 1,000 pages long, says, "No court of the United States may use appropriated funds to enforce a contempt citation for failure to comply with an injunction or temporary restraining order if no security was given when the injunction or order was issued." 

The provision would prohibit courts from enforcing contempt citations for violations of injunctions or temporary restraining orders—the primary types of rulings used to rein in President Trump's administration—unless the plaintiffs have paid a bond, which is rare when someone sues the government.

The Supreme Court has long recognized that the contempt power is integral to the authority of the federal courts. Without the ability to enforce judicial orders, they are rendered mere advisory opinions that parties are free to disregard. 

Dozens of lawsuits have been filed since Trump returned to office, challenging his executive orders and actions taken by his administration. Judges have partially or fully blocked the president in at least 82 cases, according to a tally by The Associated Press. The provision in the House bill would make the court orders in these cases completely unenforceable. 

At the beginning of March, the Department of Homeland Security nullified its contract with the American Federation of Government Employees, announcing the end of collective bargaining for TSA agents. In the same month, President Trump signed an executive order unilaterally canceling collective bargaining rights for about two-thirds of the federal workforce under the guise of national security. And just over a month ago, the administration ended payroll union dues collection for most federal workers without providing any notice, leaving the unions scrambling to implement an alternative method to collect dues and survive. This is no coincidence. Unions are on the presidential chopping block. 

Perhaps the most apparent attack on the existence of unions is the administration’s methodical dismantling of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the independent agency that enforces U.S. labor law in the private sector, ensuring fair labor practices and protecting workers’ rights to organize and bargain collectively. 

President Trump removed the agency’s general counsel and fired Gwynne Wilcox from her position as a board member without a hearing. He effectively crippled the agency’s operations since it cannot produce decisions without a quorum. Outside of reforms to federal labor law, attacks on the NLRB are the administration’s most powerful tool to limit labor power in the private sector. Without a functioning NLRB, unions have few, if any, ways to challenge unfair labor practices, hold union elections, or hold employers accountable. It does not stop there. Occupational Safety and Health Administration enforcement was drastically scaled back by the administration, which reduced the number of inspectors and ordered the Department of Labor (DOL) to cease enforcing certain rules regarding employment discrimination by federal contractors. President Trump nominated Jonathan Berry to be Solicitor of Labor at the DOL—the same Jonathan Berry who authored Project 2025’s labor provisions, aiming to weaken the federal minimum wage, limit overtime eligibility, and undermine workers’ rights to a union. 

Postal employees fall under the jurisdiction of the NLRB. Plans to significantly restructure the Postal Service are being encouraged by this administration, as is the installation of private-industry executives into Postal Service leadership. The end game is to weaken postal unions, reduce the workforce and its associated costs, and introduce additional anti-union tactics. 

The administration is actively seeking to overturn Humphreys Executor, which has been used as the precedent by the courts to prohibit the president from firing members of independent agencies without cause and for purely political reasons. This Supreme Court decision, issued on May 27, 1935, was unanimous. The 9-0 decision in favor of Rathbun and Humphrey’s estate held that the removal restrictions in the FTC Act did not violate the Constitution.  

The Supreme Court's decision essentially asked whether the president has the power to remove members of agencies, such as the NLRB and EEOC boards, for any reason he desires, or if they must have cause, and if that is unconstitutional. Nearly 100 years of precedent have stated that he does not have that power and that it is, in fact, constitutional. 

On May 22, 2025, in a 6-3 unsigned order in response to an emergency appeal from Trump, the Supreme Court stayed the reinstatement of two independent regulators, Gwynne Wilcox of the National Labor Relations Board and chair Cathy A. Harris of the Merit Systems Protection Board, pending further review in lower courts. The unsigned order stated that "because the Constitution vests the executive power in the President, he may remove without cause executive officers who exercise that power on his behalf, subject to narrow exceptions recognized by our precedents.” However, the Court did not rule on the merits, with the order stating, “The stay reflects our judgment that the Government is likely to show that both the NLRB and MSPB exercise considerable executive power. But we do not ultimately decide in this posture whether the NLRB or MSPB falls within such a recognized exception; that question is better left for resolution after full briefing and argument.” The ruling carved out a narrow exception for the Federal Reserve, arguing that it is "a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity". 

The decision was sharply criticized by Justice  Kagan in a dissent joined by Justices  Sotomayor and Jackson, saying that the ruling had effectively repealed Humphrey's Executor "by fiat", and that "nowhere is short-circuiting our deliberative process less appropriate than when the ruling requested would disrespect—by either overturning or narrowing—one of this Court's longstanding precedents". Kagan also criticized the order's call-out to separate the Federal Reserve Board from other independent agencies, saying that this board's independence "rests on the same constitutional and analytic foundations as that of the NLRB, MSPB, FTC, FCC, and so on — which is to say it rests largely on Humphrey's." 

If the Humphreys Executor is ruled unconstitutional after nearly a century, then say goodbye to worker rights and protections. Say goodbye to safe working conditions. Say hello to our federal government, the government of the United States of America, becoming the slumlord employer of the world. Becoming the low standard for worker rights, instead of the gold standard, which is ironic when you consider our current president, who loves his gold. The Federal government should be leading the public sector when it comes to the treatment of its workers. They should be showing them how it should be done, rather than giving them the go ahead to strip workers of the dignity and respect they deserve. 

The attacks don’t stop there. 

In Congress, Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) has introduced the Federal Workforce Freedom Act, S. 1006. This bill seeks to prohibit federal employees from organizing, joining, or participating in labor unions for the purposes of collective bargaining or representation. If passed, this bill would immediately terminate all collective bargaining agreements, whether established before, on, or after the date of enactment of this bill, and dismiss any arbitration, dispute resolution, or grievance proceeding related to the collective bargaining agreements.

Other notable anti-labor legislative proposals include a national right-to-work law, a law making it harder to classify a worker as an employee, and a law allowing the president to negotiate and modify collective-bargaining agreements. Unions are experiencing hostility from every direction, and NALC is no exception. 

I’ll end with a brief history of Mother Jones.

Do you know who Mother Jones was and how she vigorously defended workers, inspiring them to continue their struggles? The story of Mother Jones, the petite woman who stood up to men in positions of power, serves as a poignant reminder that America’s labor history is complex, tumultuous, and often violent. Advocating for workers, Mother Jones and other labor activists made great sacrifices and demonstrated intense bravery and determination on behalf of workers. 

Mary Harris Jones became “Mother” Jones when the members of a railroad union she was fighting for gave her the nickname in 1897. But her fierce advocacy for social justice began much earlier. Jones was born in County Cork, Ireland, sometime in the late 1830s, although the exact date is uncertain. When she was a child, her family immigrated to Canada to escape the Great Potato Famine. In 1859, Mother Jones moved to Chicago, IL, to become a dressmaker and opened her own dressmaking business catering to wealthy women. The contrast between her affluent clientele and the poor of Chicago sparked her union activism. Jones later wrote in her autobiography, “Often while sewing for the lords and barons who lived in magnificent houses on the Lake Shore Drive, I would look out of the plate glass windows and see the poor, shivering wretches, jobless and hungry, walking along the frozen lake front. The contrast of their condition with that of the tropical comfort of the people for whom I sewed was painful to me. My employers seemed neither to notice nor to care.” 

In the 1880s, she joined one of the country’s earliest labor organizations, the Knights of Labor. The Knights sought to include people regardless of race or sex, and to unite both skilled and unskilled laborers. As the nation’s industries grew, Jones transitioned from meeting to protest to strike in support of the workers who were driving the growth but received little in return. She hit her stride in the coalfields of Pennsylvania. In 1897, during a strike, the United Mine Workers were so impressed by her tenacity that they asked her to go straight to the workplace to sign up miners for the union. She traveled to mines, steel mills, and textile factories to organize workers. In addition to her union involvement, Jones advocated for the rights of child workers. She led a “children’s march” of 100 child workers in textile mills from Philadelphia to then-President Theodore Roosevelt’s home in New York in 1903. 

A self-described “hell-raiser,” Jones’s activism came with many risks. She was often arrested, imprisoned, banished, or threatened with violence. In 1902, a prosecutor in West Virginia, where Jones was on trial for meeting with striking workers in violation of an injunction, pointed to her and said: “There sits the most dangerous woman in America. She comes into a state where peace and prosperity reign ... crooks her finger, [and] 20,000 contented men lay down their tools and walk out.” 

When striking coal miners faced men with guns, Jones was on the front lines urging them not to back down. She was imprisoned for several months following a strike in West Virginia in 1912, and held again, without charges, by the Colorado National Guard to keep her out of the mines there. On April 20, 1914, National Guard troops and private guns hired by the mine companies attacked a tent village of striking miners in Ludlow, CO, killing an estimated 21 people, most of them miners’ wives and children. It was part of a larger conflict, known as the Colorado Coalfield War, that killed more than 100. Jones was not in Ludlow during the massacre. Still, she used the violence to bring attention to the plight of workers, lobbying Congress, President Woodrow Wilson, and even labor’s arch-enemy, businessman and mine owner John D. Rockefeller, to improve the lives of miners and their families. Jones describes her most famous quote in her autobiography, saying that she urged union members meeting in a church in West Virginia to go out to the coal fields instead: “Pray for the dead and fight like hell for the living!” Her words still inspire today. 

Jones continued to organize and protest for workers into her 90s until she died in 1930.  Her legacy includes a foundation, museum, and magazine named in her honor, all working to educate new generations about this remarkable, short, “dangerous” woman’s life’s work. In the closing of her autobiography, Jones left us with a note of optimism: 

“In spite of oppressors, in spite of false leaders, in spite of labor’s own lack of understanding of its needs, the cause of the worker continues onward. Slowly, his hours are shortened, giving him leisure to read and to think. Slowly, his standard of living rises to include some of the good and beautiful things of the world. Slowly, the cause of his children becomes the cause of all. His boy is taken from the breaker, his girl from the mill. Slowly, those who create the wealth of the world are permitted to share it. The future is in labor’s strong, rough hands.”

This fight is far from over. Our rights at work, enforcement of our collective bargaining agreement, and our very jobs are under attack, and the threat looms closer every day. Now is not the time to be complacent. We cannot stand by and assume our own safety while other unions are being dismantled one executive order at a time. An offense against one is an offense against all, and there are so many grave offenses. The current administration is strategically and systematically undermining labor unions and the laws that protect workers’ rights against the greed and power of corporate America. 

Our solidarity is our strength. We will not stand by while Trump’s administration implements policies designed to lure unions into lengthy and expensive legal battles. We will not watch in silence while our ability to represent members on the job, in Congress, and at the bargaining table is strategically weakened. Brothers and sisters, these attacks are unlike anything our union, and all federal unions, have ever experienced. We have no time to rest, no time for internal squabbles. All our energy and focus must be unified and centered. 

Whether we’re saying, “fight like hell” or “hell no,” one thing is clear: NALC members are fed up and not backing down. Our union is strong because our members are strong. Now is the time to tap into that strength and put everything we have into the fights ahead. More is sure to come, and we need the help of every NALC member in every fight, as well as the solidarity of other unions and the public. The postal service is a public good. The postal service doesn’t “lose money”; it’s the cost of this public good. And for those who say they don’t use the postal service, I have this to say: This is exactly what a public good is for. Just because you don’t use it or see its value doesn’t mean it’s not extremely valuable to others, and when you do need it, it should be there for your needs. We are doing everything in our power to ensure that it will be. 

“Fight like hell” is not just a catchy phrase; we chose it to invoke Mother Jones’s fierce appeal for agitation: “Pray for the dead and fight like hell for the living.” We are indeed fighting like hell for our lives, our rights, and our livelihoods. Thank You!