Which sub gets the day?

[Sandygirl]

Sub 1 has auxiliary route, Sub 2 does not, Sub 1 is asked to cover an auxiliary route ALONG WITH his own auxiliary rt. Sub 2 thinks he should get this gig since sub 1 is not even on the matrix and he works 6 days a week. Looked it up in our contract AND can seemingly find that one paragraph says Sub 1 gets it and another says Sub 2 gets it. What say ye all?

 

[btdtret]

Sandygirl -- "Sub 1 has auxiliary route, Sub 2 does not, Sub 1 is asked to cover an auxiliary route ALONG WITH his own auxiliary rt. Sub 2 thinks he should get this gig since sub 1 is not even on the matrix and he works 6 days a week. "

-- Article 30.2.G.5 -- After completion of the assigned auxiliary route or as the primary route assignment, a leave replacement assigned to serve the auxiliary route MAY BE UTILIZED on any other auxiliary route, to serve as a leave replacement or provide auxiliary assistance on any regular route.

-- If manglement is having or letting the AUX carrier case both routes and pull down before completing his AUX route, they may be violating the contract ( what else is new? -- has the Assistant District Representative been made aware of the situation? )

-- With that out of the way, we could use some additional information about your office:

• why is Sub #1 being asked to cover an additional AUX?
• has the other AUX ever been offered to any other sub? If not, why not?
• the type and number of routes and any other AUX routes besides the two in question
• how many with and without subs
• the evaluation of the AUX routes in question

 

[gotstamps]

This falls under the Order of Consideration.
Before mandating a sub to run 2 routes, mgmt must exhaust the list of available RCAs. All RCAs must be working before splitting or doubling up routes. I have fought this grievance before & won getting a handful of subs paid due mgmt doubling up on the Aux sub. Also keep in mind that if the 2 Aux route evals add up to more than 12 hours, Sub 1 cannot be scheduled on both if the need were valid (all subs scheduled).

 

[Sandygirl]

Well, I believe you BOTH just made my two contradicting points on who can run the route. Orders of consideration say sub 2, BUT the boss COULD give it to SUB 1. This topic is about as clear as mud.

 

[Sandygirl]

Sandygirl -- "Sub 1 has auxiliary route, Sub 2 does not, Sub 1 is asked to cover an auxiliary route ALONG WITH his own auxiliary rt. Sub 2 thinks he should get this gig since sub 1 is not even on the matrix and he works 6 days a week. "

-- Article 30.2.G.5 -- After completion of the assigned auxiliary route or as the primary route assignment, a leave replacement assigned to serve the auxiliary route MAY BE UTILIZED on any other auxiliary route, to serve as a leave replacement or provide auxiliary assistance on any regular route.

-- If manglement is having or letting the AUX carrier case both routes and pull down before completing his AUX route, they may be violating the contract ( what else is new? -- has the Assistant District Representative been made aware of the situation? )

-- With that out of the way, we could use some additional information about your office:

• why is Sub #1 being asked to cover an additional AUX?
• has the other AUX ever been offered to any other sub? If not, why not?
• the type and number of routes and any other AUX routes besides the two in question
• how many with and without subs
• the evaluation of the AUX routes in question

yes sub 2 has run this route many times, seems sub 1 was asked to run route(these are only my thoughts) just because Sub1 is already there to work an auxiliary and Sub 2 will not be coming to the office today(has not assignment)
10 routes, and only these 2 auxiliaries
3 hr RT and 4.5 hr RT

 

[btdtret]

Sandygirl -- thanx for the info follow-up.

-- Should also have asked what is the start time for Sub #1 on the AUX and which evaluation is the AUX?

-- When Sub #1 runs both AUX routes, any trouble making dispatch? Staying out of OT at the end of the week?

-- Are the AUX routes close to each other?

-- Are they in the same ZIP code? ( no reference, but my last PO was informed by District that there could not be two AUX routes in the same ZIP code ) Anyone??

-- Enough subs in the office to have one take on the other AUX without having negative effects on the regular routes?

-- IMHO -- just because sub #1 is already in the office, that's not a sufficient reason for him / her to run both AUX routes, especially if an RCA is sitting at home. Better yet have the RCA home grieve the situation. At worst, nothing happens. At best the RCA gets paid for the work done by sub #1. Which just might get manglement to offer the AUX route to another RCA.

-- Article 30.2.G.2. When an auxiliary is to be filled, the route will be offered to qualified substitutes, rural carrier associates, and rural carrier relief employees in the order of the longest continuous period of service at that office, without regard to classification.

-- To "muddy" the waters even more, the Order of Consideration is for "Covering a route when the regular rural carrier is absent".

- a "regular rural carrier" would not / should not be running an AUX route.

- from your OP, there is no RCA assigned to AUX #2, so there is no "regular carrier" assigned to the AUX.

- Maybe the ADR can shed some light on the situation.

 

[w2e2w2e]

I would stress ART 30.2.G.2 - If there is a vacant route in the office management is supposed to redo the Sub Matrix and offer the routes to RCA by seniority.
Then if Sub2 does not take it, then it is kinda on them as they could have had a route that leads to sick and annual leave being earned.

the other big thing is if they are in the same ZIP, then that is potential for a new route to be created and should be looked into for sure.

 

[Sandygirl]

Sandygirl -- thanx for the info follow-up.

-- Should also have asked what is the start time for Sub #1 on the AUX and which evaluation is the AUX?

-- When Sub #1 runs both AUX routes, any trouble making dispatch? Staying out of OT at the end of the week?

-- Are the AUX routes close to each other?

-- Are they in the same ZIP code? ( no reference, but my last PO was informed by District that there could not be two AUX routes in the same ZIP code ) Anyone??

-- Enough subs in the office to have one take on the other AUX without having negative effects on the regular routes?

-- IMHO -- just because sub #1 is already in the office, that's not a sufficient reason for him / her to run both AUX routes, especially if an RCA is sitting at home. Better yet have the RCA home grieve the situation. At worst, nothing happens. At best the RCA gets paid for the work done by sub #1. Which just might get manglement to offer the AUX route to another RCA.

-- Article 30.2.G.2. When an auxiliary is to be filled, the route will be offered to qualified substitutes, rural carrier associates, and rural carrier relief employees in the order of the longest continuous period of service at that office, without regard to classification.

-- To "muddy" the waters even more, the Order of Consideration is for "Covering a route when the regular rural carrier is absent".

- a "regular rural carrier" would not / should not be running an AUX route.

- from your OP, there is no RCA assigned to AUX #2, so there is no "regular carrier" assigned to the AUX.

- Maybe the ADR can shed some light on the situation.

wow, I guess I did not make things clear. This is not an auxiliary route that needs to be given to someone. The auxiliary was out for a sick day, I just wanted to know who gets the DAY not the ROUTE. Sub 2 wants the day and Sub 1(who has one of the auxiliary does not want it ) so we are on the same page. I just wanted to know what the contract is saying. I did misunderstand about the Order of consideration is only for Regular carriers who are absent. thanks for the info guys.