SNFS

[Rural Deviation]

Sorry, Not f***ing sorry.

The Evaluation System use to a system of an overall view of your route if counted in a timely manner even with the lack of honest conversation of what 45 seconds a parcels…

In the hopes of achieving Article 34.1 of the National Agreement.. for all the nerds

A fair day’s work for a fair day’s pay has left the building after the 5 year hiatus from 2018 to 2023 as the NRLCA National Board left this craft defenseless with a majority of the routes nationwide not being being counted during the time they experienced the highest volumes they have ever experienced during COVID Christmas as we as a nation endured the aftermath of the horrid COVID Policies.

RRECs is no longer an evaluation system….

It is now a system of every day accountability.
If you as the regular can not verify the volume each and every day and or trust the numbers given by the one entity that has everything to gain by you losing hours in your route, the United States Postal Service.

How can anyone enjoy their life if they are expected to be aware of a system they were never properly trained on by their employer, the USPS.

And their union, the NRLCA coped out and released documentation in which the answers that were released changed weekly depending on the conversations between Alexandria, VA and Washington D.C.

Further proof to the fact, the NRLCA National Leadership Status Quo has failed on the responsibility given to it to stand up for the value every rural carrier whether union or not.. whether involved or not…

The value every carrier brings to this union, NRLCA, and this organization. USPS.

When you understand that, you will understand how to bring change as a whole to this craft.

To this date, no current rural carrier has stepped into that arena yet…

Lord have mercy, I miss the chance to speak out loud from my heart on the podcast.

 

[Dominator]

"Fairness" is determined by those who aren't delivering the mail.


Yet...

 

[Surprise!]

That was a disappointment to read. Discouraging stewards to file for the craft right in the official manual.

 

[neciat]

That was a disappointment to read. Discouraging stewards to file for the craft right in the official manual.

As well as contradictory. Not that @Dominator was being contradictory but the language from two separate documents. You can refer to The National Agreement ; Article 15
b. For other than disciplinary actions the Union may
also initiate a grievance at Step 1 in accordance
with the above, and may initiate a class grievance at
Step 1 when the grievance concerns the complaint
of more than one employee in the office. If the Union
initiates a grievance, the steward or Union representative
is the only appropriate party to meet with the
appropriate supervisor.

Then, cite what @Dominator posted where " The NRLCA discourages stewards from filing contractual grievances on behalf of individual carriers who do not wish to grieve the issue." Okay, first off, I would never make a good steward because MY mindset is to actually be the contract police. I also am of the mindset to take even one word, gesture, sigh, anything that is claimed and MAKE an argument out of it FOR the carrier. Keep in mind, the "average" carrier ,RCA and regular alike, will often have no clue as to the fact he / she has been violated. That's where the steward comes in to play. Patrolling offices, polling carriers, etc. to maintain the integrity of The National Agreement to which the very name of their organization appears. That contract is boasted as The National Agreement between The USPS and The NRLCA. The stewards have an obligation to uphold that agreement while the offended rural employee does not. When one sees that statement regarding "discourages stewards.........." at OUR level , what does anyone think the attitude and mindset is at the National level ?

 

[Shannonboy]

I'LL BE GLAD TO STEP UP, AND ANSWER THAT QUESTION....IT BASICALLY MEANS THAT THE TOP ECHELON REALLY DOESNT GIVE A RIP ABOUT ME, OR YOU, THEY ARE JUST GOING THROUGH THE MOTIONS , BUT THE MAJORITY OF THEM DONT CARE ONE BIT WHAT WE THE LITTLE PEOPLE ARE FEELING, ARE SUFFERING, ARE GOING THROUGH, AS LONG AS THEY GOT THEIR CUSHY LITTLE NESTS ALL FLUFFED UP, AND COMFY. PEOPLE ARE HURTING.....PEOPLE DDDIIEEDDD BECAUSE OF THIS WHOLE STINKIN
DEBACLE...REMEMBER!!!! DID THE NRLCA SEND CONDOLENCES TO THE PEOPLE THAT COMMITTED SUICIDE....NNNOOOOO...IM SURE THEY DIDNT. THIS union DOES HAVE A FEW GOOD PEOPLE, BUT NOT ENOUGH TO MAKE THEM WORTH KEEPING...GET EM OUTA HERE....ITS PATHETIC. ONLY THING WORSE THAN THEM IS POSTAL MGMT....THEY FULLY DESERVE EACH OTHER...

 

[Surprise!]

Perhaps we need a new kind of steward that is not elected within the office. I also believe a steward should be contract police. I do not see the situation being as clean as it was described.

I have filed when the majority of the people in the office wanted to have the contract violated. I was not the steward. Boy were they angry. Short term they were earning some extra money they liked that. Long term there was no need to hire RCA's because it caused management no issues. To have an enforceable contract requires that sometimes the people it represents don't like it. This so that the contract as a whole stands.

 

[Dominator]

Keep in mind, the "average" carrier ,RCA and regular alike, will often have no clue as to the fact he / she has been violated. That's where the steward comes in to play. Patrolling offices, polling carriers, etc. to maintain the integrity of The National Agreement to which the very name of their organization appears. That contract is boasted as The National Agreement between The USPS and The NRLCA. The stewards have an obligation to uphold that agreement while the offended rural employee does not. When one sees that statement regarding "discourages stewards.........." at OUR level , what does anyone think the attitude and mindset is at the National level ?

I've made this point at past National Conventions and was struck down by the status quo. The most cherished fools are those who jump on the National Board's talking points and rebut in their telltale condescending tone, "Stewards can only file class action grievances, didn't you go to local steward training?"

Mind you, this is the same training that instructs stewards to fill a PS 7020 (one of management's timekeeping forms) which, by filling it, the steward is technically doing management's duty and instantaneously resigns all union agent rolls for one year under Article 9. Section 3 of the Union’s National Constitution. But I digress.

If they took a look at their history, they'd learn the right of a steward to "file individual grievances" predates the "class action" language of the 1975 agreement. The "class action" mechanism gave the Parties a method to reduce paperwork and meeting time in those instances "when the grievance concerns the complaint of more than one employee in the office."

Despite the union's specific discouragement of its stewards independently disagreeing with management, the "right" of stewards to do so remains in the contract, and is reinforced by MOU 14.

That was a disappointment to read. Discouraging stewards to file for the craft right in the official manual.

If you think that's bad, I've seen higher level stewards withdraw grievances filed by the local steward not because the grievance was bad (the violation was apparent and unambiguous), but because the steward filed against a violation independently of the carrier violated.

But get a load of this:


Keep in mind, if management and a carrier make a sweetheart agreement, the union specifically discourages reversing the deal by blocking the steward from grieving the issue to recind it.

1973 language, where no "class action" function exists in the grievance-arbitration procedure.



1975 language marks the introduction of the "class action" function to the grievance-arbitration procedure. The additional function (as indicated by usage of the word "and") remains in the agreement to this day.

 

[Haygrrl]

That was a disappointment to read. Discouraging stewards to file for the craft right in the official manual.

You didn't read that correctly:
It says the steward is discouraged from filing on behalf of someone who doesn't wish to file..what's wrong with rhat?.. do you want your right to say no taken away from you?...stewards are discouraged, not mandated...
Js

 

[Dominator]

You didn't read that correctly:
It says the steward is discouraged from filing on behalf of someone who doesn't wish to file..what's wrong with rhat?.. do you want your right to say no taken away from you?...stewards are discouraged, not mandated...
Js

Not convinced?

1. MOU 14 states, Emphasis must be placed on the corporate objective that all managers, supervisors, and union representatives give the highest priority to compliance with our collective bargaining agreement. The United States Postal Service and the National Rural Letter Carriers’ Association are fully committed to abide by the provisions of the National Agreement.
2. Article 15.2 of our collective bargaining agreement states, A grievance is defined as a dispute, difference, disagreement or complaint between the parties related to wages, hours, and conditions of employment. A grievance shall include, but is not limited to, the complaint of an employee or of the Union which involves the interpretation, application of, or compliance with the provisions of this Agreement.
3. Article 9, Section 8 of the NRLCA National Constitution states, Any representative/steward may be disciplined for violation of the Constitution or policies set forth by the Association. The National Board, by a three-fourths vote, may suspend or expel a representative/ steward from office. Charges may be filed on the following grounds:
   
   A. Neglect of duty or breach of the Constitution;
   B. Conduct detrimental to the welfare and interests of the membership of the Association;
   C. Conduct which hinders the due process of the grievance procedure;
   D. Instigating or engaging in acts on the side of management that violate the principles of the National Agreement or Constitution.

As for (A) "Neglect of duty", below are "steward duties" as identified by the same manual that "discourages stewards from filing contractual grievances on behalf of individual carriers who do not wish to grieve the issue."

A steward that is not pursuing (at least) clear violations isn't "maintaining compliance".


As for (B) "Conduct detrimental to the welfare and interests of the membership of the Association", the Association agrees that "ensuring management is in compliance" is a responsibility of union representatives. While our contract specifically prohibits the union from initiating disciplinary grievances (Article 15.3 Step 1 (b)), all else is fair game to ensure compliance.

"Enforcing the Agreement" is detrimental to the welfare and interests of the membership and of the Association. What use is a union that doesn't want to defend its contract? When considering this path, it's easy to cross into "Duty of Fair Representation" concepts.




As for (D) Instigating or engaging in acts on the side of management that violate the principles of the National Agreement or Constitution, Article 15.1 and 15.2 indicate that compliance is a "principle of the National Agreement".




As referenced in post #7 of this thread, recall MOU 14's agreement to prioritize compliance with "the provisions of the National Agreement."



Point being, the National Association has no right to discourage stewards from protecting the integrity of the National Agreement and it violates its own rules  by doing so.

But you don't have to take my word for it.

 

[Dominator]

You didn't read that correctly:
It says the steward is discouraged from filing on behalf of someone who doesn't wish to file..what's wrong with rhat?.. do you want your right to say no taken away from you?...stewards are discouraged, not mandated...
Js

Regarding your response to what @Surprise! wrote, as to the "right to say no" to the Union filing a grievance, there is no such "right".

Just as the Union cannot demand a member of the Bargaining Unit not to file a grievance, neither can a member of the Bargaining Unit demand the Union not to file a grievance. This is supported by no less than Article 15.2 and 15.3 through usage of the word "or" which divides those entities qualified to "initiate a grievance" into two specific groups:

1. The employee OR;
2. The Union

Neither have control over the other's right to grieve. Further, if this weren't the case, employees could sidestep the agreement, make sweetheart deals with management, and the moment that the representative/steward decided to file in order to stop it, the carrier with the sweetheart deal could strike down the steward's grievance and maintain their sweetheart deal.



The only time something cannot be grieved is when there exists an agreement that clearly and unequivocally restricts grieving a particular action. Sometimes that restriction is only for one of the qualified entities, such as the restriction of union-initiated grievances on disciplinary actions as stated in (b) above.