Authoritative status of NRLCA's RRECS Comprehensive Guide

[Dominator]

Is there anything that establishes the NRLCA's RRECS Comprehensive Guide as a jointly agreed upon source document?

If not, and a carrier wants to dispute application or compliance of a RRECS rule, what source documentation does a carrier cite?

 

[neciat]

As far as I am aware , no, The RRECS Guide is not a jointly agreed upon source document and generally not recognized as such. The absence of two signatures , one from The NRLCA and one from The USPS , make The Guide "difficult to cite" . Although, since three engineers , one postal, one NRLCA , and one neutral conducted the study(ies) and that Guide presented by The NRLCA is based upon their findings and the whole process was ordered by an arbitrator , I'm not seeing where there needs to be any agreement. Now, do I believe what we all finally saw in The Guide was REALLY what was determined by the engineering panel ? Absolutely not !!!! I know what The Clarke Ruling states regarding being bound by the findings of the engineering panel but I also know that there have been many occasions where NEITHER party adhered to a given arbitrated ruling. I just have a gut feeling that many a standard was negotiated after the fact. Anyway, this is , in part, from the ruling ; " Both parties agree to be bound by that determination, and the determination shall not be subject to grievance or arbitration by either party " So, The Guide presented is either what the engineering panel determined in whole or in part and / or what the PO and The NRLCA negotiated in whole or in part. At the end of it all, either The Guide is binding because it is what the engineering panel determined and / or both parties agreed to whatever standard(s) are presented in that Guide. I would argue that The Guide is a document to be cited based upon The Clarke Ruling.

 

[Dominator]

The PO-603 remains an official instruction, yet there is no reference to RRECS while still maintaining past era mechanics. Additionally, the Guide presents step-by-step directions on how to perform certain working tasks, despite not being directives certified by a Postal representative.

M-38 is still on life support from 1980.

Maybe I need to file a grievance to determine which is controlling over the other in a conflict.

• If the Guide is controlling, then a union-sourced, non-postal manual is authoritative.
• If the 603 is controlling, then RRECS authority falls to the ground.

I expect a piping hot plate of red herring from the union. Your thoughts, @neciat ,are always appreciated.

 

[neciat]

Well, you may as well add an assortment of MOUs and / or parts thereof. Here's but one example from page 5 of the attached.

4. In no instance will a route using a USPS provided
vehicle receive less than thirty (30) minutes
allowance per week for the activities described in
D.l, 0.2, and D.3 above.


Now, I noticed that we abide by OTHER parts of this . Just NOT the part regarding time for fueling. This particularly impacts urban / suburban routes that are high density with lower mileage. When I read "in no instance" , I take THAT to mean NEVER regardless of standard changes , type of Govt. Vehicle , etc. The language states 30 minutes weekly AT MINIMUM. I know, personally, of routes that are not credited with at least 30 minutes weekly for fueling.

 

[Dominator]

So would you agree then that seeing the RRECS system as a hodgepodge of muddy authoritative lines that neither side is willing to sort out, is a fair claim?

 

[neciat]

Oh, more than fair. But as you and I know , the "fair" only comes to town once a year.

 

[gotstamps]

The PO-603 remains an official instruction, yet there is no reference to RRECS while still maintaining past era mechanics. Additionally, the Guide presents step-by-step directions on how to perform certain working tasks, despite not being directives certified by a Postal representative.

M-38 is still on life support from 1980.

Maybe I need to file a grievance to determine which is controlling over the other in a conflict.

• If the Guide is controlling, then a union-sourced, non-postal manual is authoritative.
• If the 603 is controlling, then RRECS authority falls to the ground.

I expect a piping hot plate of red herring from the union. Your thoughts, @neciat ,are always appreciated.

The PO-603 is currently being updated. The Union signed off on the Revised version earlier this year but it is not yet in print.

 

[Dominator]

The PO-603 is currently being updated. The Union signed off on the Revised version earlier this year but it is not yet in print.

We're one month shy from 13 years since its last print. Is there any confirmation on union concurrence or is that only rumor?

 

[gotstamps]

We're one month shy from 13 years since its last print. Is there any confirmation on union concurrence or is that only rumor?

It was stated at SWAC in Looisiana & Maston signed off on it there.

 

[Gotrope]

An electronic version is available every 2-3 years. A printed copy is almost always out of date from electronic version.