2024-2027 NRLCA-USPS Tentative National Agreement Has Been Ratified
- Thread starter Ruralinfo
- Start date
not sure where the edit button went. but also a yes vote would mean i approve of the nrlca negotiations.
gotstamps
Well-known member
Which is why I voted “no”. This Table One Carrier didn’t see much in this contract for me as usual. There needed to be more.
I asked the question to the association which didn't get answered-- Why didn't the top step get $1000 added like the city????? I guess they only answered the questions that they wanted to. I voted NO. I will say-this contract helps the table 2 folks, the subs & those who drive their own rigs. Table 2 needs top go. They do the same job as I do & should be paid accordingly.
GarbageLLV
Well-known member
Was the contract great...no. Was it good...no. If it went to arbitration would it have been worse...probably. I voted yes.
U caught my attention
Well-known member
My thoughts exactly
PostalBlue
Member
I believe the real reason for the lack of voting is because the City Carriers go first and it went to arbitration and our lazy a$$ union waits to see what happens and then they copy and paste. We rural carriers realize that the arbiter is in the postal pocket and if you vote no and it goes to arbitration then you will lose even more benefits. The rural union has no balls, everyone knows it and we are all just circling the drain. Have a nice day 
Dominator
Well-known member
I'm convinced the numbers of those who wish to see it flourish are significantly less than those who wish to deplete its resources for personal gain.The rural union has no balls, everyone knows it and we are all just circling the drain. Have a nice day
Porch Pirate
Active member
Maybe I’m in the minority here but I’m willing to have smaller but more consistent gains along with stable employment than getting a UPS style deal and then letting go of 20k people. I’m more of a big picture type of person as much as being on table 2 rightfully pisses me off. Because I could say “why didn’t you folks back then in 2012 just vote to pass the bleepin thing?? Instead of letting a betrayer determine our destiny? Because now we have this?” Watch what a NO vote can cause… think about that.I'm convinced the numbers of those who wish to see it flourish are significantly less than those who wish to deplete its resources for personal gain.
Something that I've wondered years and @Porch Pirate touches on for your speculation or otherwise - just what was the USPS final offer that was rejected that lead to Arbitration with Clarke? I believe it was a bad deal, but did it include Table 2 as we know it?I'm convinced the numbers of those who wish to see it flourish are significantly less than those who wish to deplete its resources for personal gain.
DB.Cooper
Well-known member
Maybe they need to look at root causes... peeps working 6 days a week aren't likely too jazzed about driving long distances to meetings where mostly BS is discussed...
DB.Cooper
Well-known member
All of these Table 1 bashers should realize Table 2 hasn't helped Table 1.... every since Table 2 came about, Table 1 really hasn't gotten squat... too busy listening to Table 2 cry about being screwed... it's not Table 1ers fault.... and hasn't helped Table 1...
Haygrrl
Well-known member
Last time we got rrecs, js
DB.Cooper
Well-known member
I felt like NRLCA was still sore about the previous contract getting voted down, and weren't looking for a repeat.... so they didn't agree to anything and it went straight to an arbitrator with no vote.... I feel like they did a very poor job of arguing at arbitration, and lost our @$$ there... it was a horrible contract.... and every since then NRLCA always says vote yes or you'll lose your @$$ at arbitration, and 2012 is an example of that....
DB.Cooper
Well-known member
Why didn't you folks just vote to pass the bleepin thing in 2012????Maybe I’m in the minority here but I’m willing to have smaller but more consistent gains along with stable employment than getting a UPS style deal and then letting go of 20k people. I’m more of a big picture type of person as much as being on table 2 rightfully pisses me off. Because I could say “why didn’t you folks back then in 2012 just vote to pass the bleepin thing?? Instead of letting a betrayer determine our destiny? Because now we have this?” Watch what a NO vote can cause… think about that.
Answer: Because there was no vote in 2012... NRLCA took in straight to arbitration without anybody ever voting...
U caught my attention
Well-known member
I was just looking through archive nrlca magazines from 2011-2012.
Have a looksie.
Jeanette explained in state of union
Sept 2012
Aug 2012 had the final determination.
Have a looksie.
Jeanette explained in state of union
Sept 2012
Aug 2012 had the final determination.
The NRLCA has seemingly become docilized due the 2010-2015 Contract Award.I felt like NRLCA was still sore about the previous contract getting voted down, and weren't looking for a repeat.... so they didn't agree to anything and it went straight to an arbitrator with no vote.... I feel like they did a very poor job of arguing at arbitration, and lost our @$$ there... it was a horrible contract.... and every since then NRLCA always says vote yes or you'll lose your @$$ at arbitration, and 2012 is an example of that....
Following up on my own question, @gotstamps noted in a thread a few years back that the USPS did make Table 2 as part of negotiations which led to going straight to Arbitration. I think the real question I should be asking is - would an Arbitrator foisted two-tier on the APWU had it gone that route?
It's said, done, here to stay...becoming the norm. The UAW, UPS, and others have recently been able to be rid of it through Industrial Action...Postal Unions can't, the USPS won't eliminate it out of "fairness", and no Arbitrator will entertain the thought.
"DB" et al -- "I felt like NRLCA was still sore ( perhaps embarrassed? ) about the previous contract [ 2006 ] getting voted down, and weren't looking for a repeat.... so they didn't agree to anything and it went straight to an arbitrator with no vote.... I feel like they did a very poor job of arguing at arbitration ( even Clarke included numerous negative comments in his award about the NRLCA's negotiating "performance ), and lost our @$$ there... it was a horrible contract.... and every since then NRLCA always says vote yes or you'll lose your @$$ at arbitration, and 2012 is an example of that...."
-- According to then President Pitts, the 2006 National Agreement was an "excellent" contract. The membership felt otherwise and voted it down.
-- On the other hand, the 2024-2027 National Agreement was deemed "fair" by the current president. And was ratified!
-- Arbitrator Fishgold ( 2006-2010 ) noted that the other 3 postal unions had ratified their contracts with the USPS, but that the NRCLA had not. ( In IMHO he probably had a negative attitude towards the NRLCA negotiating team before things got underway ). After the initial hearings and opening statements addressing fundamental arguments and proposals of the parties, Fishgold advised the parties that there would be limited range of alternatives available fashioning the "award".
-- Arbitrator Clarke ( 2012 ) incorporated the APWU pay package into his "award", stating that "While the Board of Arbitration is not bound to adopt the wage and benefit pattern set out in that agreement, it is appropriate that it do so in this particular case".
-- One might have argued that it was "illegal" to use the APWU pay package as compensation for the NRLCA should have been based upon "outside" wages, and not another government entities' wages.
-- This year, the APWU's President mentioned they got what they wanted without giving up anything. The NRLCA's President could have mentioned the same thing, since X-President Stutts mentioned some time ago that there was nothing left for the NRLCA to give up!
-- According to then President Pitts, the 2006 National Agreement was an "excellent" contract. The membership felt otherwise and voted it down.
-- On the other hand, the 2024-2027 National Agreement was deemed "fair" by the current president. And was ratified!
-- Arbitrator Fishgold ( 2006-2010 ) noted that the other 3 postal unions had ratified their contracts with the USPS, but that the NRCLA had not. ( In IMHO he probably had a negative attitude towards the NRLCA negotiating team before things got underway ). After the initial hearings and opening statements addressing fundamental arguments and proposals of the parties, Fishgold advised the parties that there would be limited range of alternatives available fashioning the "award".
-- Arbitrator Clarke ( 2012 ) incorporated the APWU pay package into his "award", stating that "While the Board of Arbitration is not bound to adopt the wage and benefit pattern set out in that agreement, it is appropriate that it do so in this particular case".
-- One might have argued that it was "illegal" to use the APWU pay package as compensation for the NRLCA should have been based upon "outside" wages, and not another government entities' wages.
-- This year, the APWU's President mentioned they got what they wanted without giving up anything. The NRLCA's President could have mentioned the same thing, since X-President Stutts mentioned some time ago that there was nothing left for the NRLCA to give up!
DB.Cooper
Well-known member
That contract drastically changed the rural craft, and we are still feeling the effects today.... knocked RCA pay back a decade, started Table 2, RRECS, changed time standards for the worse, made Regs wait 10 years for high $$$ option, and several other big hits against rurals.... it was truly an @$$ kicking....
U caught my attention
Well-known member
They are all online nrlca.org
