RCA seniority list - "ranking" column

Kelp · Jun 7, 2017

I don't know if every office uses the same format to post their RCA seniority list, but I have a question on ours, which people here don't seem to have an answer for.

So in the list of RCAs, there are 3 columns: name, hire date, and ranking.

The list is sorted by the hire date, and if two people were hired on the same date, the one with a lower ranking number is above the other.

What does the ranking column mean? If on a given date only one RCA was hired, shouldn't their ranking be 1?

There are RCAs on the list with rankings of 10,20,30,50, etc. Why such high numbers? It's not as if there were 40 other people hired on a given date in the same office.

Thanks.

Bud Budderly · Jun 7, 2017

If RCAs were hired on the same date and neither have any prior postal service of any kind, rural carrier exam basic scores would be compared next to break the tie. Maybe the 'ranking' column is where each RCA was ranked in terms of test scores among the roster of eligibles at the time of hire. This is just a guess on my part.

Kelp · Jun 7, 2017

<blockquote class="spPostEmbedQuote">Bud Budderly said 
If RCAs were hired on the same date and neither have any prior postal service of any kind, rural carrier exam basic scores would be compared next to break the tie. Maybe the 'ranking' column is where each RCA was ranked in terms of test scores among the roster of eligibles at the time of hire. This is just a guess on my part. </blockquote>
That was my guess too, but the only thing that doesn't make sense is for those RCAs who have a really high number in the ranking column.

For instance someone with a number of 40; they weren't hired with 39 other people and it doesn't make sense that they scored in 40th place on the exam and were still hired.

Bud Budderly · Jun 7, 2017

<blockquote class="spPostEmbedQuote">
Kelp said 

That was my guess too, but the only thing that doesn't make sense is for those RCAs who have a really high number in the ranking column.

For instance someone with a number of 40; they weren't hired with 39 other people and it doesn't make sense that they scored in 40th place on the exam and were still hired.

</blockquote>
I suppose it would depend on the size of the hiring register for your geographical area and the number of RCA vacancies within that area at that time. Some of the 39 were probably hired for other offices, some didn't pass the drug screen, criminal background check, some probably had second thoughts, etc. so the hiring register may have thinned out to where they needed to go deep into pool of applicants. Again this is all speculation on my part so maybe a call to your ADR would help shed some light on the process if your PM is no help or nobody else here chimes in.

gotstamps · Jun 7, 2017

In our office, the 'ranking' number is their seniority. We have 2 offices, so subs know 'who' on the other side has seniority over them.

Kelp · Jun 7, 2017

We also have two offices, but that doesn't explain it.

Here's a simplified example chart:

Name. Hire date. Ranking.

bill 1/2000 2

jim 2/2001 1

jenna 4/2002 29

chris 6/2010 7

courtney 7/2013 3

garry 1/2016 51

and so on...

gotstamps · Jun 11, 2017

<blockquote class="spPostEmbedQuote">
Kelp said 
We also have two offices, but that doesn't explain it.

Here's a simplified example chart:

Name. Hire date. Ranking.

bill 1/2000 2

jim 2/2001 1

jenna 4/2002 29

chris 6/2010 7

courtney 7/2013 3

garry 1/2016 51

and so on...

</blockquote>
We don't have 'hire date' on our list but our lists are the schedule and the matrix list. We don't have a posted seniority list for neither RCAs nor Regs. The excuse given has been the 'painting' of our office but we haven't been 'painting' walls for the whole year.

I haven't any clue as to why a 'ranking'. Maybe it's mgmts 'hate' (or 'like') ranking. ?

LouSainus · Jun 14, 2017

I looked at the list recent and it was the same way. I think its alphabetical of their last name and is simply how the seniority system sorts the information. Did not look too much at it besides a few peoples hire dates so I could be wrong but I did notice the ranking was not the same as the hire seniority date.