NRLCA Files National Step 4 Grievance on Whether Rural Carriers are Receiving the Correct Coverage Factor

[Ruralinfo]

Under the Rural Route Evaluation Dispute Process (RREDP), when the parties reach an impasse at the headquarters level, the dispute is referred to Step 4 of the grievance-arbitration procedure as an interpretive issue.

NRLCA Files National Step 4 Grievance on Whether Rural Carriers are Receiving the Correct Coverage Factor - Ruralinfo.net

Under the Rural Route Evaluation Dispute Process (RREDP), when the parties reach an impasse at the headquarters level, the dispute is referred to Step 4 of the…

ruralinfo.net

 

[ATCBigE]

Another step 4 grievance...


What are chances this ends up like almost every other step 4????

 

[Rogtar]

This one sort of sounds serious, but it won't pass because if it's found to be true, wouldn't USPS owe every rural carrier who ever worked under RRECS?

 

[ATCBigE]

This one sort of sounds serious, but it won't pass because if it's found to be true, wouldn't USPS owe every rural carrier who ever worked under RRECS?

I doubt it. I bet money they will say it should be added to your previous evaluations and if it didn't push you up to next hour....TOO BAD SO SAD YOU GET NOTHING YOU LOSE GOOD DAY SIR.

Now if it did push you to next hour then 100% they owe someone.

RRECS is officially a mess with all of these step 4 now especially if they find in favor of the carriers. Trying to prove how much each carriers get will be a nightmare.

 

[jaymacgthree]

This one sort of sounds serious, but it won't pass because if it's found to be true, wouldn't USPS owe every rural carrier who ever worked under RRECS?

Nailed it. Too expensive to admit fault therefore it will go to grievance purgatory to remain limbo forever.

 

[RFD]

Under the Rural Route Evaluation Dispute Process (RREDP), when the parties reach an impasse at the headquarters level, the dispute is referred to Step 4 of the grievance-arbitration procedure as an interpretive issue.

NRLCA Files National Step 4 Grievance on Whether Rural Carriers are Receiving the Correct Coverage Factor - Ruralinfo.net

Under the Rural Route Evaluation Dispute Process (RREDP), when the parties reach an impasse at the headquarters level, the dispute is referred to Step 4 of the…

ruralinfo.net

About three years too late....idiots!

 

[oi veh.]

About three years too late....idiots!

well, to be fair, our previous labor was a pure-d idiot.

in my unqualified but common sense opinion, she screwed up a lot of things.

i think john has been cleaning up a lot of crap we don't even know about.

 

[psd181]

About three years too late....idiots!

city carriers experimented with the RRECS system a year or 2 before rural finally implemented it. None of the #'s were correct when the city used it............ they actually counted parcels and mail...... system didn't record the same #'s as the actual count....................... I'm not sure if coverage factor was checked since city goes by actual delivery time and not what a computer tells them it should be. So in the end NALC said no!!! can't use this to "evaluate" city routes.

 

[Rt2mailman]

After the 2nd mini count I proved the the % coverage was way low, and not properly credited to my route. I showed that only the DPS was used to track my % coverage, and never were any raw pieces of letters or flats contained in the USPS % coverage number. This was sent all the way to the NRLCA original engineer of Rrecs who believes that the USPS changed the way their % coverage was obtained. Of course this was illegal, but I've heard nothing since.
Any carrier can easily obtain this proof that the % coverage on their own route is wrong, but it does take a month of extra work. You must case all mail including DPS. Then before pulling down you would have to count every slot on your route that has NO letters or flats and received no parcels for that day. You can gain that knowledge by marking all your parcels. With this knowledge every day for one month you then compare the USPS % coverage. It will be off by 13-19%. Over one year this reduces our % coverage a lot over one year.

 

[EthelAnne]

Nailed it. Too expensive to admit fault therefore it will go to grievance purgatory to remain limbo forever.

I try not to get too excited (or at all excited) about these Step 4s because this is my opinion as well. It just means they can't come to an agreement and the union took this final step, because it's all they can do. I don't hold out any hope that this will be arbitrated any time soon, if ever.

 

[She mails rural]

We all know rreca is junk, even the routes that have done well with pay knows rrecs is a joke! We all also know we might do better moving forward IF we win a step 4 of any kind but we won't see anything behind us I'm sure. I also feel it will still totally be up to us to keep management in check to make sure we are being paid correctly and there's where the real problem lies! We all either need password protection that we are the only one's that can enter our rt information, to ensure once we log out they can't go back in and so called fix something. Expecally during survey. Or better yet do that and then submit any updates for approval before it's submitted. Print everything off for proof because everyone knows stuff transformers through the net to head quarters and oops its different now, I see them incorrect changes on my 4241m every 6 months. Even with all that the system itself just can't cut it. So I feel just trash it all! Our union has really failed our craft to the point of no return !