NRLCA Reaches Tentative Agreement with USPS for Three-Year Contract

[U caught my attention]

So, the adjustment WAS NOT accurate ? Well, since that is the case when an aux. route is involved, what makes it any different when adjustments are done on regular routes. The territory taken or given from or to ANY route has no idea if it going on an aux. or regular route.

Yes I agree with your logic. The mail counts, however, are also deemed invalid after a cut. That is why they did the freeze.
So does that make the difference? I am having a hard time thinking this concept through. Is not converting an aux to regular status reasonable because of the freeze component?

 

[U caught my attention]

3rd paragraph in adjustment mou.
When I read mou, I wasn't thinking about new conversions and what the words in paragraph 3 might mean to them. In reading it again with conversion in mind, doesnt it mean no conversions until after the freeze?
I can't get any of my copies to copy and paste the section....sorry.

 

[blue_goose1348]

Maybe this from The M-38 ;

822.3 Auxiliary Rural Routes
Auxiliary routes will be established when there is insufficient work to justify a regular route.

Auxiliary routes are operated in the same manner as a regular route except auxiliary ruralcarriers are compensated for the hours actually worked. Payment for the vehicle will be based upon the current rate as provided for in the National Agreement. All new rural routes must be established first as auxiliary routes until the exact evaluation is determined by a mail count.

And this:
822.2 Regular Rural Routes
Establish additional regular routes if possible. Regular rural routes will be considered if the proposed evaluation is [ 39 ] hours or more per week. Do not establish regular route until the exact evaluation is determined by a mail count.

Now, the 39 hours has been changed to 42 hours but it appears that a count is needed to "set" the actual evaluation.

Art 12.3.A.1.a As i read this, it no longer requires a "mail count" to become a regular route.

 

[U caught my attention]

Art 12.3.A.1.a As i read this, it no longer requires a "mail count" to become a regular route.

I wanted to showcase my cut and paste skills.

Section 3. Rural Carrier Posting
A. Posting Requirements
1. Posting of a regular route is required as follows:
a. When an auxiliary rural route reaches an evaluation of forty-two (42:00) standard hours, it will be
converted to a regular route within thirty (30) days
of the increase to 42:00 standard hours, unless
the increase is as a result of a route evaluation.
Routes that increase to 42:00 standard hours as a
result of a route evaluation will be automatically
converted.
b. Post a vacant route which is not absorbed by
consolidation or other service adjustments.
c. Post rural routes which have been changed (by
either adding or subtracting territory) as a result of
consolidation with other rural routes and/or conversion to city delivery service. This provision
applies only if one or more regular rural carriers
are displaced from their assigned routes and
there are fewer rural routes remaining within the
affected offices following such consolidation and/
or conversion to city delivery service.

 

[Gotrope]

So then the unanswered question is will aux carriers understand Rrecs in order to maintain or build upon what they receive?

Doubtful

 

[U caught my attention]

Well, bring on the HU chocolate for this next phase of fun.

 

[neciat]

Art 12.3.A.1.a As i read this, it no longer requires a "mail count" to become a regular route.

Thanks !! I had seen that.

Yes I agree with your logic. The mail counts, however, are also deemed invalid after a cut. That is why they did the freeze.
So does that make the difference? I am having a hard time thinking this concept through. Is not converting an aux to regular status reasonable because of the freeze component?

The way the language in The Nat'l Agreement reads , the "new" regular route ( if at least 42 hours ) should be posted and the "new" evaluation is frozen in compliance with The MOU.

But, then again, I see THIS in the Nat'l Agreement ;

ARTICLE 19
HANDBOOKS AND MANUALS
Section 1. Statement of Principle
Those parts of all handbooks, manuals, and published regula-
tions of the Postal Service, that directly relate to wages, hours
or working conditions, as they apply to employees covered
by this Agreement, shall contain nothing that conflicts with this
Agreement, and shall be continued in effect except that the
Employer shall have the right to make changes that are not
inconsistent with this Agreement and that are fair, reasonable,
and equitable. This includes, but is not limited to, the Employee
and Labor Relations Manual (ELM) and Handbook F-21, Time
and Attendance

So, the language in The Nat'l Agreement conflicts with what is in The M-38.

 

[btdtret]

neciat et al -- "So, the language in The Nat'l Agreement conflicts with what is in The M-38."

-- Probably not surprising as the last up date to the M-38 was done in 1980.

-- Of course, there have been "revisions", such as the 2013 change from Express Mail to Priority Mail Express.

-- I think the last revision to the PO-603 was in 2016.

-- A lot has changed since then, so anyone going to the National Convention, please ask from the floor if the National Officers might consider updating the M-38 and the PO-603 to reflect the changes brought about by WRECKS, ooops, make that RRECS.

 

[Surprise!]

Perhaps we should ask for access to the managers on line manuals as an objection to the contract. The m-38 may have been updated. We may not have access to the updated version. The managers on line manuals do get updates. We are as entitled to these updates as the managers.

Arbitrators come from legal backgrounds. They should see the logic to the argument. Especially, when the manual we get a copy of is 40 years out of date.

 

[agilent80]

City carriers got $1,000 added top step and 1% added to each year. They are getting 7.2% plus a $1,000.
we are getting 4.2%. Not fair

PLUS THEY GET TO KEEP IT - NO LOSS IN PAY EVERY 6 MONTHS

 

[agilent80]

that's exactly what i expect to happen when upon retirement.

we have one sub right now. it is a race between me and another regular as to who gets probation first. i am 45k, she is 46. sub will end up with one of our routes and we both predict that she will destroy all of our hard work exactly because of work habits outlined in your post, despite our attempts to educate her for the past however many RRECs years.

oh well, you reap what you sow.

I think there should be regular pay (based on days worked in year). then sub pay based on days worked
MY DATA SHOULD BE MY PAY FOR WHAT I DO,,,,, AND THE SUB CAN BE PAID FOR WHAT THEY DO OR DON'T

 

[oi veh.]

I think there should be regular pay (based on days worked in year). then sub pay based on days worked
MY DATA SHOULD BE MY PAY FOR WHAT I DO,,,,, AND THE SUB CAN BE PAID FOR WHAT THEY DO OR DON'T

i agree completely.

 

[blue_goose1348]

A lot has changed since then, so anyone going to the National Convention, please ask from the floor if the National Officers might consider updating the M-38 and the PO-603 to reflect the changes brought about by WRECKS, ooops, make that RRECS.

The updating and printing of Postal manuals, including our contract, is the responsibility of the postal Service. The Union only reviews and corrects errors that occur.

 

[Shannonboy]

The Union only reviews and corrects errors that occur.
Uuuuuhhhh...I'm pretty sure they dont even do that....

 

[Worve]

Doubtful

I concur, still a few weeks away from cuts to be done. Have tried talking to the rca who plans on taking the new aux…. I would get farther talking to a stone, or maybe just throwing it….

 

[Surprise!]

A lot has changed since then, so anyone going to the National Convention, please ask from the floor if the National Officers might consider updating the M-38 and the PO-603 to reflect the changes brought about by WRECKS, ooops, make that RRECS.

The updating and printing of Postal manuals, including our contract, is the responsibility of the postal Service. The Union only reviews and corrects errors that occur.

How about contacting the National Labor Relations Board?

When we got the new updated PO-603 I still had to file grievances to to get copies for our cases. Is was required to have a copy of the PO-603 at each case.

 

[Porch Pirate]

I think they should push to cover more of the insurance premiums. Even now they cover 74% I believe. We need them to cover at least 85%. That would be a major bump for a lot of folks in terms of disposable income. We’ve all seen how much premiums have shot up and it’s ludicrous not to address it in some way.

 

[Dominator]

A lot has changed since then, so anyone going to the National Convention, please ask from the floor if the National Officers might consider updating the M-38 and the PO-603 to reflect the changes brought about by WRECKS, ooops, make that RRECS.

The updating and printing of Postal manuals, including our contract, is the responsibility of the postal Service. The Union only reviews and corrects errors that occur.

In my experience with our absent-minded organization, I trust that request would just be another coin falling into the union's abysmal well of "non-binding resolutions".

M-38's latest print was what... from the first few months of the Regan era?

The union is supposed to gopher up out of its glory hole and point out inconsistencies and such before they're printed. (Article 19.2) They fail to do that within even their own constitution and other internal materials.

Many of the Delegates have had groveling down to a science for decades. It's a shame there seemingly are worries about delegates "sounding like management" by replacing "resolved that..." with "ordered that".

RONR §10:24 - Orders (Instructions to Employees).​

In organizations with employees, the assembly or the board can give instructions to an employee in the form of an order, which is written just as a resolution except that the word “Ordered” is used in place of the word “Resolved.” An example would be: “Ordered, That the steward obtain impoundment of all unauthorized vehicles found parked on the club premises.”​

​

Since the union's consitution is unenforceable by the membership anyway though, I suppose screaming demands at the ocean would be just as useless as requesting the organization to do what it's already paid to do.

Cheers to you though for wanting more information in the hands of the actual workers.

 

[Dominator]

I think there should be regular pay (based on days worked in year). then sub pay based on days worked
MY DATA SHOULD BE MY PAY FOR WHAT I DO,,,,, AND THE SUB CAN BE PAID FOR WHAT THEY DO OR DON'T

You seriously don't love communism in your compensation methods?

I wonder how it would look like if the Association's officers and representatives had a taste of the "we're all in this together" compensation formula determining their pay.

I can almost imagine a few of them weeble-wobbling towards the mic now, crying how doing something like that would be "retaliatory" or "putting a big ol' target on their backs" or some other lame duck outcry of a pity party.:

 

[Surprise!]

I think they should push to cover more of the insurance premiums. Even now they cover 74% I believe. We need them to cover at least 85%. That would be a major bump for a lot of folks in terms of disposable income. We’ve all seen how much premiums have shot up and it’s ludicrous not to address it in some way.

If you are writing about medical insurance I think the basic idea is good. However, I would encourage fighting for the ability to make a case for a higher percentage of our medical insurance being paid.

My understanding is that law enforcement gets a higher percentage of their medical paid because they are considered to have higher risk jobs than others.

They base the claim on government law enforcement agencies being at high risk, however the example agencies are at lower risk than working for the Postal Service.