Mandatory Stand-Up Talk June 12, 2026 Rural Carriers – (MDDI Audible Reminders for Rural Route Evaluated Compensation System CRRECS) Loading and End

[RammerJammer]

My question that NO ONE had answered.

They did start and end load, and return and clock. Where is the one for return to lunch????? You can't just say no one does lunch that is fine. People forget that too.

I still believe 100% this will end up being some sort of benchmarking in the future. No doubt in my mind. Their our great union doing good things. Just going to ignore this too.

The carriers that are trying to maximize their OT rate to 3 figures are probably taking 30 minutes everyday whether they are actually at lunch or not. I’m surprised they haven’t thought of that and put a message on scanner to say you can’t be in motion while you’re out to lunch.

 

[ATCBigE]

The carriers that are trying to maximize their OT rate to 3 figures are probably taking 30 minutes everyday whether they are actually at lunch or not. I’m surprised they haven’t thought of that and put a message on scanner to say you can’t be in motion while you’re out to lunch.

That and it makes the route look better for them.

Oh look Jimmy got his 46K done in 5 hours, we can probably say he is getting less mail and drop his volume.

I agree that some carriers are probably doing that and that's where my issue with the whole thing is. You have it for 2 of 3 things but not the other. WHY???? I am still behind my 100% theory it is benchmarking...

 

[Dominator]

Is responding these intentionally persistent duty interruptions compensable, or is this another newly built-in "it's built-in!" things?

If you affirm that you're done with the task, does the timestamp land on the instant you affirmed, or the instant the alert began?

Looking forward to surveys on how break time is used.

 

[hockey94]

Cut it down to 10%, turn upside down in bottom of tub with some U-lines & other UBBM to muffle sound.

 

[neciat]

I see this , in part, from The Clarke Ruling ;

7 Thereafter, any future changes or additions to the time standards and
other components of the revised Evaluated Compensation System will be established
consistent with the processes established by the Chairperson in his final determination
with regard to the revised Evaluated Compensation System. The parties agree to
renegotiate the provisions of Article 34 so as to reflect the processes developed by the
Chairperson’s final determination and to provide that either party may call for a review of
one or more standards.

And , the process established by the Chairperson is the three engineers ; one NRLCA, one USPS, and one neutral / jointly agreed upon or appointed if parties cannot agree upon the third. Then, we have the 'ole Article 34 ;

Section 2. Work Measurement System

The Employer agrees that any work measurement systems or
time or work standards shall be fair, reasonable and equitable.
The Employer agrees that the Union through qualified represen-
tatives will be kept informed during the making of time or work
studies which are to be used as a basis for changing current or
instituting new work measurement systems or work or time
standards. The Employer agrees that the National President of
the Union may designate a qualified representative who may
enter postal installations for purposes of observing the making
of time or work studies which are to be used as the basis for
changing current or instituting new work measurement systems
or work or time standards.

From what I am gathering ( retired now ) , these "alerts" are NOT the occasional hazardous weather alert or the occasional " Amber Alert" . I seems to me that constant prompts would require a new category of MDD scans of which a new standard number would be assigned. I understand that these prompts occur while on actual time but in keeping with the excerpt from the ruling posted above ;

"Thereafter, any future changes or additions to the time standards and
other components of the revised Evaluated Compensation System will be established
consistent with the processes established by the Chairperson in his final determination
with regard to the revised Evaluated Compensation System."

it would appear that the ruling was either ignored, overlooked, or otherwise not adhered to with the addition of these prompts.

 

[DB.Cooper]

Does anyone's scanner beep literally every two minutes at end of shift like mine?

Everytime it beeps you should stop doing your EOS duties, pick up the scammer and study it for about a minute then set it back down... rinse and repeat everytime it beeps.. it may magically quit beeping... LOL...

 

[Dominator]

"Thereafter, any future changes or additions to the time standards and
other components of the revised Evaluated Compensation System will be established
consistent with the processes established by the Chairperson in his final determination
with regard to the revised Evaluated Compensation System."

it would appear that the ruling was either ignored, overlooked, or otherwise not adhered to with the addition of these prompts.

I don't have your source on hand, so there may be a counter in there to this, but my guess is they'll say they aren't definitionally changing any standards, and that item (responsing to that specific alert in its entire context) is not specifically identified as component of the system, then squawk de minimus on any necessary time to perform a "pick up, examine, tap, set down" function.

 

[BillyBoi]

If I did that with as sensitive as my scanner is, it would clock me out.

The scanner has two touch modes. You probably have the more sensitive one on. It's somewhere in the hamburger menu at the top under "touch settings".

 

[neciat]

I don't have your source on hand, so there may be a counter in there to this, but my guess is they'll say they aren't definitionally changing any standards, and that item (responsing to that specific alert in its entire context) is not specifically identified as component of the system, then squawk de minimus on any necessary time to perform a "pick up, examine, tap, set down" function.

Well, this is a new task that was not in existence upon implementation of RRECS. According to the previous posts , this new task / duty occurs quite frequently during BOTH loading and EOS duties. This thread won't allow attachments. I'll PM you the info.

 

[Dominator]

Well, this is a new task that was not in existence upon implementation of RRECS. According to the previous posts , this new task / duty occurs quite frequently during BOTH loading and EOS duties. This thread won't allow attachments. I'll PM you the info.

Thanks for that info.

I'm trying to determine the scope of what constitutes a "task". Basically, to what degree of nuance are we talking here?

If "responding to alerts" is a task, they'll just sweep it into that bucket, especially if responses are measured collectively, rather than individually.

Humorously noted that this document recognizes the evaluated system as an incentive system in number 3. I could have sworn they spoke out of both sides of their mouth on that one over the years.

Watch there be no log on it, so the union will drop the case for lack of memorialization, or settle for a tenth of a second each day for how ever many years from now until a settlement is reached.

I'm not holding my breath on a solution any time soon. I'd be more interested in constructing an argument if I weren't so convinced the union would withdraw the case at step 1.

I just put the scanner in the drawer and let its muffled cry continue until it's time for me to use it again.

 

[Shannonboy]

When we scan our badge we have reported in for work. Why do we get all these messages we have to read before clocking in. If they were going to fix anything or update the scanners you would think that would be at the top of the list. Where is our union on these scanners?

Nowhere....union is WORTHLESS.

 

[Shannonboy]

Can you reduce the volume on the scanner ? If you do not have to use the scanner, cant you just ignore it, especially, if you can reduce the volume ?

Yes, you can. Go online with the model #, of the scanner itll walk you right through it.

 

[BillyBoi]

Thanks for that info.

I'm trying to determine the scope of what constitutes a "task". Basically, to what degree of nuance are we talking here?

If "responding to alerts" is a task, they'll just sweep it into that bucket, especially if responses are measured collectively, rather than individually.

Humorously noted that this document recognizes the evaluated system as an incentive system in number 3. I could have sworn they spoke out of both sides of their mouth on that one over the years.

Watch there be no log on it, so the union will drop the case for lack of memorialization, or settle for a tenth of a second each day for how ever many years from now until a settlement is reached.

I'm not holding my breath on a solution any time soon. I'd be more interested in constructing an argument if I weren't so convinced the union would withdraw the case at step 1.

I just put the scanner in the drawer and let its muffled cry continue until it's time for me to use it again.

I think the issue lies in the fact that you have to stop what you are doing and answer the prompt. You have to drop a current task for another. And if people's hunch that it puts a pause straight on time while the alert is going of then it for sure is a problem.

 

[Dominator]

I think the issue lies in the fact that you have to stop what you are doing and answer the prompt. You have to drop a current task for another. And if people's hunch that it puts a pause straight on time while the alert is going of then it for sure is a problem.

Could be. Perhaps the union will respond to this issue sometime soon.

Note, however, that the stand-up includes no obligatory language. While it lays out "if carrier selects yes/no" etc., there's no obligatory words such as "must" or "will" or "shall". Any obligation to respond is, at best, only implied.

It's peculiar that they identify it as a "reminder", as though it's a one-way communication, similar to the "reminders" of certs and return receipts in the DPS whose windows automatically close after some number of seconds if you do not tap enter or escape. Was there a stand-up when those "reminders" rolled out, and, if so, how were those alerts classified?

The "reminder" from this stand-up requires a response to continue using the scanner, but doesn't direct employees to respond. I wonder what would happen if a carrier chose not to respond to the scanner during RETURN2DU time, but just waited for the "reminder" to automatically close (as other reminders do), for both lack of compensation and lack of directive within the stand-up to respond to the prompt.

 

[Chemado]

What happens when you accidentally hit #2 that you are finished with end of service duties? You can't hit Return to DU again, can you?

 

[neciat]

Could be. Perhaps the union will respond to this issue sometime soon.

Note, however, that the stand-up includes no obligatory language. While it lays out "if carrier selects yes/no" etc., there's no obligatory words such as "must" or "will" or "shall". Any obligation to respond is, at best, only implied.

It's peculiar that they identify it as a "reminder", as though it's a one-way communication, similar to the "reminders" of certs and return receipts in the DPS whose windows automatically close after some number of seconds if you do not tap enter or escape. Was there a stand-up when those "reminders" rolled out, and, if so, how were those alerts classified?

The "reminder" from this stand-up requires a response to continue using the scanner, but doesn't direct employees to respond. I wonder what would happen if a carrier chose not to respond to the scanner during RETURN2DU time, but just waited for the "reminder" to automatically close (as other reminders do), for both lack of compensation and lack of directive within the stand-up to respond to the prompt.

Well, while I realize that on the surface that it "sounds" like I / we are arguing ourselves to a lesser position because we are on actual time and this newly implemented feature / task increases the actual time, one of my concerns is the incremental aspect of this. What new prompt(s) will follow in the future if this particular one is not challenged ?