That is my contention: structure it more like an apprenticeship bringing people in under very general, permissive terms, working and learning ācraft lessā and āassigned office-lessā for 90 calendar days doing a mostly balanced combination of clerk and carrier work, like what pse and arc employees are permitted to do. Let them set their own availability up to 24 hours a week. Hire twice as many as we think we can stand, as it wonāt be enough.
Toward the end of 90 days, if they have accrued enough working hours, invite them to test for a craft(s). If after 180 days if they havenāt worked enough hours or there are issues or concerns, cut them loose. Having too many bad employees is worse than not having more mediocre or good ones. If they pass then give them a list of offices with openings and let them choose where to āstartā.
Continue structured, guided training through two years, and after each carrier must do a set of continuing education employer led classes each year that is split in some not necessarily equal proportion between safety and job-specific knowledge or technique. Shift most of the time (and money) from the stand ups towards this program, and save local stand ups for the rare but consequential local issues.
Secondly, they have to resolve the mandated and āad hoc work without incentiveā. They need to offer a substantial premium for Sunday and normal non business day work. If no one is volunteering, the problem isnāt the people, it is the program.