So if an RCA comes back to the office after 12 hours and has not completed their work, that is not an emergency.
What makes it "not" an emergency? I'm interested in your argumentative supports.
Article 3.f provides:
The Employer shall have the exclusive right, subject to the provisions of this Agreement and consistent with applicable laws and regulations:
To take whatever actions may be necessary to carry out its mission in emergency situations; i.e., an unforeseen circumstance or a combination of circumstances which calls for immediate action in a situation which is not expected to be of a recurring nature.
The USPS
mission is:
- To serve the American people and, through the universal service obligation, bind our nation together by maintaining and operating our unique, vital and resilient infrastructure.
- To provide trusted, safe and secure communications and services between our Government and the American people, businesses and their customers, and the American people with each other.
- To serve all areas of our nation, making full use of evolving technologies.
Review the USPS mission statement (above) and consider this: what is the root of all "emergency" situations in the Postal Service?
While the Universal Service Obligation (USO) is undefined, I'm convinced the root is always going to be "getting the mail to its next step in processing". If you've got a different theory, please share.
Consider this scenerio:
An RCA has worked 11 hours and 59 minutes. Precisely 1 minute later (the 12 hour mark), that RCA becomes incapacitated.
1 hour of rural delivery remains. The only employees in the office and available are the manager, a regular carrier, and the newly incapacitated RCA.
Of the 3 employees in the office, who is qualified to perform the remaining one hour of bargaining unit work?
I'm convinced it would be the manager under Article 1.6.A.1 or 1.6.B due to an "emergency situation".
Section 6. Performance of Bargaining Unit Work
A. More than 100 Bargaining Unit Employees
Supervisors are prohibited from performing bargaining unit work at post offices with 100 or more bargaining unit employees, except:
1. In an emergency;
2. For the purpose of training or instruction of employees;
3. To assure the proper operation of equipment;
4. To protect the safety of employees; or
5. To protect the property of the U.S. Postal Service.
B. Less than 100 Bargaining Unit Employees
In offices with less than 100 bargaining unit employees, supervisors are prohibited from performing bargaining unit work, except as enumerated in Section 6.A.1. through 5. above or when the duties are included in the supervisor’s position description.
Now, remove the RCA incapacity element. Does the situation become any
less of an emergency? Mail delivery cannot be delayed.
What grounds would the manager have to deliver the mail themselves when a leave replacement is available? Remember, to use a regular carrier instead of a manager or leave replacement would be an admission of emergency conditions since application of the "regulars assisting other routes" MOU follows exhaustion of 30.2.D.6.
If management feels that immediate action is needed to finish that work then they are free to designate some other employee to finish it or do it themselves.
On that thought, Article 30.2.D.6 states:
In emergencies, when the services of a substitute, rural carrier associate, or rural carrier relief employee are not available, another qualified employee may be designated by the Employer.
In the scenario, a leave replacement
is available. Between:
- Not utilizing an RCA over 12 hours in a day, and;
- Using an RCA in an emergency situation, regardless of hours worked
It seems to me that option 2 is controlling, while your position is that option 1 is controlling. Please correct me if I'm mistaken. I don't want to misinterpret your position.
Managements failure to properly hire and staff their offices does not constitute an emergency.
I agree that this
particular element does not constitute an emergency, but this element of your theory serving as a prerequisite would leave access to emergency procedures only those offices that are fully staffed.
In other words, all offices with
less than a full staff could be deemed as "failing to properly staff their office" and therefore, ineligible to execute emergency procedures. This would include, at minimum,
all formula offices.
Are you prepared to support a theory that
all formula offices cannot have
any understaffing-related emergencies?
"Understaffing" triggers emergency procedures in a variety of fields. The postal service is no different. The Postal Service cannot
force people to apply or restrict them from resigning.
The Union's hands aren't entirely clean either. They jointly agreed to an unattractive wage.
Yes a rural route carriers day may vary and if that carrier is a regular then are compensated for anything over 12 hours a day or 56 per week under FLSA guidelines.
They're bright line laws, not guidelines, but yes, FLSA 7(b) requires 150% compensatory minimum for those workhour values.
Both the ELM and now this settled step 4 are very clear RCA's should not be worked over 12 hours a day.
Whether it
is permissible and whether is
should be permissible are two different questions. Additionally, tag lining a conclusion as "very clear" does not negate its refutability. Additionally, there's the exception in ELM 432.32:
Maximum Hours Allowed
Except as designated in labor agreements for bargaining unit employees or in emergency situations as determined by the postmaster general (or designee), employees may not be required to work more than 12 hours in 1 service day. In addition, the total hours of daily service, including scheduled workhours, overtime, and mealtime, may not be extended over a period longer than 12 consecutive hours. Postmasters and exempt employees are excluded from these provisions.
The union created
exceptions to the 12-hour rule through their Step 4's. They'd need an unambiguous "Leave Replacements who have been on the clock for 12 hours within a 24-hour period are ineligible for working any additional time, regardless of emergency" to close that hole. I don't think that will ever happen.
Let's say you're position is correct in in all cases, and that
even in emergencies, management were restricted from utilizing a leave replacement for greater than 12 hours. The emergency exception from the April 24, 2002 Step-4 (R-96) would be inherently unsafe as those leave replacements would be required to work faster than evaluated standards expect (with no additional compensation) to stay under 12 hours in a day.
Since both management and labor are bound to deal in good faith (NLRB §8) and safety (Article 14.2.A), R-96 would be a deliberate and mutual disregard of these obligations by both parties.
I agree that
non-emergency situations restrict access to an RCA for >12 hours. I do not agree that emergency situations share this 12-hour restriction.
I sense you are passionate about your position. While some may agree that your vision on this matter is accurate, others may not.
Your thoughts?
www.ruralinfo.net
