New MOU about route cuts.
- Thread starter LouSainus
- Start date
Twomoreyears
Well-known member
Our office had 9 overburdened routes that we adjusted to 43ks prior to the Oct MMS. Out of the 9, 7 routes went up after the survey and 2 went down. I’m sure that’s has lot due to the delay in data collection and management tried to realign the routes at the same time. As for me, this MOU is good as I chose the high option and came back as a 46J (41K) so now I’ll be back up to a 43k with some back pay coming. But for the 7 routes that came back bigger than a 43K after MMS, they will revert back to 43k and owe back money. I think that is wrong. Perhaps put them back to 43K next pay period but NOT make them pay back money as this RRECS program is seriously flawed.
I fought tooth and nail for my interim adjustment when I finally got apartments added and mapped into program. Ended up gaining 2 hrs a week, no where near what it takes me weekly. I just wonder how many actually do fight and never back down when not given a good answer.
Overall I agree it’s not the best scenario but as always rural craft will never win in every aspect. I try to keep the bigger picture in mind. I also think no back pay needed should have been added into this mou. Let usps for once learn a lesson and not get carriers to face the consequences.
Sorry, but it's never been that way. We always have maintained the edit book, and when you gained an hour, only then would your pay increase. Depending on the box factor, you could have serviced 15-20 boxes without compensation. Technically 29 boxes.
RRECS is indeed plagued with all kinds of issues. Actually, not issues but a SUBSCRIPTION. The adjustment "program" .......................well.............................it just flat out does not work. What does the PO do ? They plow ahead with THEIR version of adjustments which was totally incorrect. This is what occurs when they continue to mess with something. All that happens is the situation gets worse. Now , there are all kinds of pay issues with "adjusted" routes and the PO and our union THINK a piece of paper is going to fix it. All that was done here was add yet ANOTHER vector in the equation of this cluster. Here's the formula ; 1) RRECS is severely flawed + 2) adjustment program does not work at all + 3) Moe, Larry , and Curley type route adjustements + 4) MOU messing around with pay = WAY worse than just fixing things BEFORE implementing them. Whereas the adjustment program does not work , there is language in the M-38 and the Nat'l Agreement to afford overburdened routes assistance. How 'bout THAT language be executed and enforced. There are already SO many underlying pay issues as it is with RRECS like the WSH mailings NOT being credited to routes at all and many others. If and / or when things get figured out with RRECS , YEARS will have passed and with all of the "patches" and "fixes" the PO / union have done and WILL continue to do will only make matters worse and it will take even longer to correct our compensation.
Complete BS. If you were cut to a 43k and then 3 months later you became 45k with the new preccs eval, you are now a 43k again and expect a letter of demand. It took 3 months to cut me from a high 48k to a 43k. Probably some residual volume there and that’s why I’m a 45k now. And none of this is the carriers fault!
I
I’m confident in saying the NRLCA is the worst union in America
Well, according to the MOU......................yes. However, I just do not see how they are going to make this work. Look at the "adjustments" , for example. They "said" someone was cut to a 43K and put stuff on paper and sent it up to make the whole fiasco appear that it was done legitimately and THAT didn't work. All these Form 50s are going to be all conflicting with what was "said". Another survey comes around and regardless if a route gains or loses is going to NOT be what the pay is supposed to be. Plus, there are all kinds of other problems with Social Security deductions, income tax deductions, TSP percentage / matching contributions, FERS retirement payments, high three, etc. There are more than enough CONSISTENT pay problems as it is without adding this into the mix. To all who will actually experience the actions of this MOU, please keep us informed of the route evaluation on the 4240 and what your Form 50 states and what the evaluation actually is. Granted, NONE of the three are correct but they should , at least, match and I do not believe they will.
Twomoreyears
Well-known member
So I started RRECs as 47K, then: 48K, 48k, 43K, 41k, 46J, and with this MOU will be back to 43K. The 4241 comes quick from district printed by the supervisor, then ps 50 comes in the mail about 3-4 weeks later. The 4240 gets corrected the pay period after the effective date. So those trickle in and overlap each other. But all the other pay and retirement issues I can definitely see being screwed up. What a mess…
Johnny Football
Active member
Rural union is a complete joke. First, they sit back as countless carriers work untold hours of free labor for years and do absolutely nothing. Then they allow RRECS to go live without any transparency or an idea how to adjust overburdened routes. Now routes have been adjusted and management realized that adjustments were very flawed and union just lays down and lets the postal bus roll over rural carriers nationwide, yet again. How anyone continues to pay dues to this corrupt organization is beyond me but don’t worry they are hard at work planning their next vaca…I mean convention.
Sounds like a plan that will be another PO clusterF.
Twomoreyears
Well-known member
No word yet hear either. But my guess would be November 30th (new pay period).
U caught my attention
Well-known member
The interesting thing that I see with taking dps to the street, volume is still showing up in our street times. Some sections take way longer than others with the same amt of boxes. Are they taking this into consideration in the adjustment process? Couldnt they remove all the wrong combination of boxes or take away too many high volume boxes with the way the adjustments are currently happening? Then after a year of waiting I suppose there will be so many other factors involved that the initial screw up might be hidden.
YOUAREthecurrentresident
Well-known member
When RRECS first rolled out, I was excited that EACH box would have its own volume factor…making route adjustments a lot more accurate. But it seems they are using the old way of using the ROUTE’S volume factor and standard mins/box instead. So a savvy carrier could theoretically chop the lightest part of their route during a route adjustment… giving them a good chance of shooting back up in evaluated hours in 52 weeks. That’s my game plan for now…if they ever get around to adjusting my route. I still don’t understand how it’s not illegal to have us carry more volume than what we’re being paid for after an extreme amount of time. I get the flsa b thing…but it’s been almost 2 years!!!!
Last edited:
RollinRural
Well-known member
How is it that the union president can sign an mou which directly affects our pay without us voting on it as part of a contract?
At the end of the day, I’m taking a $13k pay cut from this mou, and owing money back to USPS.
They might as well make our entire 3 year contract an MoU and have the post office write it and the NRLCA president sign it .
We, the members, don’t seem to matter at all.
At the end of the day, I’m taking a $13k pay cut from this mou, and owing money back to USPS.
They might as well make our entire 3 year contract an MoU and have the post office write it and the NRLCA president sign it .
We, the members, don’t seem to matter at all.
Twistofcain
Well-known member
Especially if you were on an overburdened route. They should consider all the free hours worked for past 2 years.
No back pay clause, here is how I think:
Yes, like that other guy said, the ones that were cut, most have been doing way more than their 48k pay cap for most of them the past 2 years. They have been greatly underpaid for the last 2 years, just who thinks it makes any sense to go after them for a so called overpayment for that last couple of months. Better yet, how about adding this to the mou? “Since we agree that both parties were grossly negligent, carriers that have had their pay capped at 48k since the inception of rrecs, will receive makeup pay for the difference of their evaluation and their capped 48k. Make a mou pay table that goes up as high as any route ever was.
