Where to go from here

[Lindam]

So, I am sure most of you have noticed that I have changed the way I share articles from the NRLCA. The reason is I have received a certified letter from the NRLCA's lawyers. From the beginning the NRLCA has been against the Ruralinfo website, but this is the first time they have gone as far as to have the lawyers get involved. I am currently trying to figure out how to respond and what this means for Ruralinfo.net.

I will be retiring next year and I am not sure I have this kind of fight still in me. Not sure why they decided to do it after all of these years, but they did. So if anyone has any ideas please let me know. This would also affect the knowledgebase. They want anything downloaded from the NRLCA website removed from my website.

So, I will continue to try to figure out how to move forward with this or even if I will at all. Please know, no matter what happens, I will always be forever grateful to the support I have received from rural carriers across the country. It has been a long wild ride and all of you have made it worth my time and effort.

They have changed their login info, you can't see "whats new" with out signing in, and you can't do that unless you PAY DUES...
Personally I download info and share routinely. So what if YOU remove the info and just leave the message boards, and WE download and share? Are they going to go after all of us??? Won't be enough cash to pamper their useless bloated asses in VA and pay their lawyers...

 

[Surprise!]

Unfortunately, the NRLCA National Board convinced itself and its membership that its stewardship has no right to stand on the contract. In fact, it has withdrawn legitimate grievances filed by local stewardship under the mantra that "Stewards cannot file on individual violations".

The fear alleged is that the union could get sued for enforcing the contract against a member's wishes.

How have you arrived at your conclusion? I have wondered about this for many years.

We used to have that stewards are not supposed to come in looking for violations. Does this one still exist?

 

[Dominator]

How have you arrived at your conclusion? I have wondered about this for many years.

We used to have that stewards are not supposed to come in looking for violations. Does this one still exist?

Article 15.3. Step 1 (a) of he contract:

[T]he Union may also initiate a grievance at Step 1 in accordance with [15.3 Step 1 (a)] and may initiate a class grievance at Step 1 when the grievance concerns the complaint of more than one employee in the office.

"Class actions" didn't come in until either the 73-75 or 75-79 agreement. I don't have those contracts on this device. Point being, for stewards, the act of "initiating" a grievance can be either individual or group cases. "Initiating a grievance" is nothing more than disagreeing with something management did or failed to do.

Under the NRLCA mantra, when a steward sees a violation, they can not even disagree until a carrier disagrees first. Remember from Article 15.2, a "disagreement" is a grievance.

Under the mantra, even if the steward disagrees with management, the union paralyses its stewards from filing. Even though exercise of the mantra is inconsistent with the local settlement form, it carries on like this:

Steward to manager: You broke the rule!
Manager to steward: I sure did, and you can stick it!
Steward to manager: Good call!

Even Handbook EL-921, Supervisor’s Guide to Handling Grievances, acknowledges on page 6 that:

Employees and/or the unions have the right to file grievances if they believe the collective bargaining agreement has been violated.

Any remaining curiosities should be resolved by looking at item 1 of page 78 of the combined analysis where it states:

As a representative of the union, you are responsible for:

1. Enforcing the contract to ensure that management is in compliance.

For those still not convinced, paragraph 2 of MOU 14 (page 159 of the 2018-2021 Agreement) 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.

Many of you recall tthat our very definition of "grievance" includes "compliance with the provisions of the National Agreement", as stated:

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.

If I've been wrong this whole time, I can't help but wonder how a union can ensure compliance of its contract through silence.

Perhaps I am wrong and "givin' 'em the stink eye" is just another tactic I need to add to my arsenal. ?

 

[Dominator]

We used to have that stewards are not supposed to come in looking for violations. Does this one still exist?

Stewards and managers shouldn't hunt for violations in a "fishing expedition" style. If stewards see something though, I believe they should either say something, or utilize Article 31.2 to collect information necessary so that they may ...determine whether to file or to continue the processing of a grievance under this Agreement.

 

[Wilco183]

Ok, I'm all in. Do we burn him at the stake, or use the guillotine?

Gotta give him a fighting chance at least. Maybe a night para jump from a 737 with a couple of double dog foods strapped on.

 

[DB.Cooper]

I have a possible solution to take the heat off this site. I propose offering D.B. as a sacrificial lamb to appease the Gods of Duke St.
After all there is no denying he has been a major thorn in their side ( feel free to substitute another word) all these years he has dwelled here.

After wreaking havoc with them for about the past decade, now that I'm about to exit stage left.... now they wanna shut 'er down.... go figure.... ?‍

 

[MiddleOfNowhere]

probably more than anything, they know what they have done, has not kept us even with the other crafts in the po, and now on top of that exposure, there salaries have been published.

 

[neciat]

Dominator and all......................... there is also THIS from the National Agreement ; Article 15 sub and section 3

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.

The "above " is this

a. Any employee who feels aggrieved must discuss
the grievance with the employee’s immediate
supervisor within fourteen (14) days of the date
on which the employee or the Union has learned
or may reasonably have been expected to have
learned of its cause. The employee may be
accompanied by the steward or a Union representative,
if the employee so desires.

There is also this from the NLRB which , and I'll go out on a limb here and dare to say that they carry just a "tad more weight" than the NRLCA and / or the USPS , that was decided in 1970, yes, 1970 that ruled soliciting grievances is a protected activity and ANY infringement upon, restriction of, or retaliation due to soliciting grievance(s) is a violation of The National Labor Relations Act.

Bottom right hand corner of page 3 is where the heart of the ruling starts.

It's https://apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d45800a7ff1

 

[Surprise!]

It is my understanding in these cases the written word over rides a verbal understanding of what it means.

 

[Dominator]

@neciat Yep. I've seen this one. The case with Lenkurt Electric is one I gave the National Office when I was given the "stewards can't solicit grievances" speech.

Lenkurt ultimately doubled-down on that case. However, the 9th Circuit US Court of Appeals, regarding NLRB v. Lenkurt Electric Co., stated, in part:

"The [National Labor Relations] Board ruled that if the right of stewards to engage in specific protected activity is to be forbidden by agreement, the agreement in this respect must speak with clarity. It concluded that the agreement here did not clearly forbid stewards from initiating complaints on behalf of others or in soliciting them to file grievances. [The Court] agree[ s]."

The court ultimately ordered enforcement of the NLRB order against Lenkurt.

Exercise caution soliciting grievances though. Reps that choose to do this should only do it while under the steward clock (i.e., union rep capacity) so they will be guarded by the shield of the equality rule.

If you're in your employee capacity, soliciting grievances may be claimed as "causing interruptions on the workroom foor". Just as any other action that may be claimed as non-productive hours, go on lunch if you choose to solicit to others (who should also be on break time). Gauge the customs of your office. Some offices are more/less permissive than others when it comes to talking on the floor.

If you get blasted for "soliciting grievances" while other people/groups have similar discussion sessions over sports/video games/movies/whatever, consider pointing to that as discrimination and/or disparate treatment. There is also MOU 14. Whatever your defense, keep in mind, the sword can cut both ways.

"Quiet on the workroom floor" can be a reasonable rule. Filtering what can be discussed (excluding vulgar or abusive speech) is not reasonable. This is mainly because of enforceability difficulty via excessive broadness of the rule.

This thread alone is a perfect example of why this and similar boards are an asset. We can read, agree, disagree, or keep it to ourselves. No matter what though, we all get something out of it. Hopefully, it's always something positive. ?

 

[Guin]

Has there been any further updates as to what is happening with this site? Or has ruralinfo received clarification as to what specifically NRLCA has their boxers in a twist over?

 

[Rt2mailman]

Yes, there has been a wonderful update. Through the SEVERAL millions of dollars donated from the people on this site the Postal Texan has bought out the NRLCA. It will now be know as the NRLCA OF Rural Mail Talk. Thanks to all who have donated.

And that's when I woke up, looked at the clock and got up to get ready for work. Another sad, long over parcelized Monday working on the chain gang.

 

[btdtret]

Rt2mailman -- "Yes, there has been a wonderful update. Through the SEVERAL millions of dollars donated from the people on this site the Postal Texan has bought out the NRLCA. It will now be know as the NRLCA OF Rural Mail Talk. "

-- Should have posted the above on Thursday!

 

[Ruralinfo]

Nothing new yet. I sent them a certified letter and I am awaiting their response.

 

[Morty]

Nothing new yet. I sent them a certified letter and I am awaiting their response.

So basically like the rest of us who sent letters....no response will be given?

 

[DB.Cooper]

Nothing new yet. I sent them a certified letter and I am awaiting their response.

I wonder if a letter writing campaign by patrons of this site would do any good.... or maybe that'd just pi$$ them off even more.... hard to tell I suppose... ?‍

 

[flash]

I wonder if a letter writing campaign by patrons of this site would do any good.... or maybe that'd just pi$$ them off even more.... hard to tell I suppose... ?‍

Lol
Wait till after contract negotiations or they’ll dangle that carrot as a means of discipline against us?

 

[neciat]

I know we all refer to "it" as negotiations but why don't we just call it what it really is ; how much or little are we going to lose AGAIN this time.

 

[Morty]

I know we all refer to "it" as negotiations but why don't we just call it what it really is ; how much or little are we going to lose AGAIN this time.

Read how the Teamsters fight for UPS drivers.

Successfully got $40/hr wage.

Say using low cost part timers is not justified in negotiating wages down

NRLCA says the numbers don't lie. Regs work under 4/hr a week. And don't say jack about the use of RCAs to artificially lower our numbers. So it looks like we're all too efficient. Silent on actual miles vs evaluated. If we go over miles by 5% for all routes. That's over $200,000 a day donated to usps. But the idiots are too dumb to figure any of this out. The same group that said table1 and table 2 differences weren't even noticeable.

 

[Dominator]

I wonder if a letter writing campaign by patrons of this site would do any good.... or maybe that'd just pi$$ them off even more.... hard to tell I suppose... ?‍

I got one better for ya. ?

NRLCA National Constitution, Article II paragraph 5:

This Association shall not affiliate or merge with any other organization or group without a majority vote of the delegates at a National Convention.

Perhaps the NRLCA would like to be part of Ruralinfo's affiliate program. ?