Spring Count??

uselesshasbeen

Active member
People have said that management has told them it was going to happen.  People have countered with no contract=no spring count.That's what I hear.
 

btdtret

Well-known member
All -- "a national count in spring of 2019?"

-- The NRLCA successfully used "no contract, no count" in the past.

-- In theory, a 2019 spring count should be a 3-weak count. No doubt, the USPS would happily skip it. Kind of like the non-2017 count, which by some coincidence would have been a 3-weak count. Any one see a pattern here?
 

uselesshasbeen

Active member
<blockquote data-postid="37748" data-userid="2275"><div class="wpforo-post-quote-author"><strong>Posted by: btdtret</strong></div>All -- "a national count in spring of 2019?"-- The NRLCA successfully used "no contract, no count" in the past.-- In theory, a 2019 spring count should be a 3-weak count. No doubt, the USPS would happily skip it. Kind of like the non-2017 count, which by some coincidence would have been a 3-weak count. Any one see a pattern here?</blockquote>Yes, the leadership at NRLCA Headquarters thought not having a 3 week count was good because they believed a 4 week count was the alternative.
 

gotstamps

Well-known member
No contract means no count. The next count should be implementing the Study & ALL would have to be mapped Plus all the details would need to be agreed upon by February. A sure bet that that won’t happen.
 
Don't worry, there won't be a mail count for about 2 years.    I want one in Feb/Mar. I'm ready for the new time standards to kick in and they MUST be used on any count after June 2018.      So again, there won't be a count because the PS and the union don't want the new system in place.  PS will lose money on suburban routes and the union doesn't want it because rural rural route will lose.  But if they do have a count and new system isn't used, I will be contacting NRLB for the union not enforcing a arbitration award.
 

btdtret

Well-known member
u-h-b -- "No doubt there is an obvious reason, but still, what is to stop the NRCLA from signing a MOU agreeing to a count?"

-- That is scary thinking!!

-- Such a MOU probably would not have an assigned number like the ones at the end of the contract.

-- There have been MOU's which allowed regular carriers to do Sunday parcels on their route and to allow ARC's to do parcels on non-holiday week days during the Christmas crunch.

-- It seems the NRLCA does not use the MOU's already in place. Such as MOU #1:

It is the understanding of the parties that a national mail count may be initiated where rural delivery has been impacted on a NATIONAL LEVEL. Examples of such change would be a reduction in delivery days, a substantial change in mail volume, etc.

Apparently MOU #1 has not be used because it:

- does not specify who can initiate a national count, or

- rural delivery has not been impacted on a national level, or

- there has not been a substantial change in mail volume.

"No doubt there is an obvious reason.."

-- Numbered MOU's are only added with a new contract? Any one??
 

uselesshasbeen

Active member
Obviously since previous MOUs have been entered into outside of a contract it is unlikely that a new MOU could be entered into while there is no contract.Pretty obvious that the likelihood of both parties thinking they could gain an advantage by having a count is small.  If management had a net win for September count they might think they could pull off a gain in a mid month count in the spring (hands down).  The NRLCA might realize that not counting in 2017 was a mistake and might jump on it.  Lots of things are possible.Still looking for that clause in the contract that says all counts must be specifically scheduled <em>in </em>a contract.
 
They can sign all the MOU's they won't, it won't change an Arbitrator's award.  The award said once the chairman issues his final report, the resulting time values will be used in the next count.     I think those counted last month should be under the new system.  Again, I would be contacting the NRLB if I were affected by the Sept count.   If a new national count is conducted in spring 2019 or later and the new system isn't used, since I would be included, I would be contacting the NRLB.  
 
BTW, I did file a unfair labor practice against the union for not enforcing the arbitrator's award date of May 2015.  They said I would have a tough time winning the case since the parties could be still be  trying to complete the task handed to them. But they were still willing to proceed. I did drop it after the new contract was ratified but still included the award with the original language handed down by the arbitrator.   Now the task has been completed and the only thing left is to follow the language about the standards being used in the next count after the final report.   
 
Not including the new standards would be akin to an arbitrator giving new salary increases and then the parties claim they don't know how to calculate the new pay into existing payroll.       duh, i'm so dum I caint cipher like jethro bodine with hes sixdth grad edukaton to add the 10 pennys to wadges. 
 

btdtret

Well-known member
u-h-b -- "Still looking for that clause in the contract that says all counts must be specifically scheduled in a contract."

-- Might have to go in a round about method:

-- Article 9.2.C.3.a - Mail Counts:

The official evaluation of a route to determine eligibility for evaluated compensation shall be determined by a mail count. Mail counts will be conducted as follows:

-- The contract(s) then spell out the year, number of days and time frame ( month(s) ) involved.

-- If the specifics are not listed, then a count can not be conducted.

-- A count over the last 12 working days of September of any year is specified -- as long as the USPS gives the NRLCA 30 days notice.
 

uselesshasbeen

Active member
Fortunately it doesn't matter what I think is possible.  Time will tell.Still don't believe it is impossible that a MOU could be signed allowing a count.  Not sure what an arbiter might decide about the non implementation of new standards with a new count since I haven't heard about what actions were taken in the lack of meeting the original deadline and the extension that USPS and the union granted themselves in the process of finalizing the study.  Probably too severe for the general public to have been advised.
 
Top