Jump to:

Latest information

The Letter Carrier Resource Guide

Interpretive step grievance on scanning Delivery Unit Saturation Mail resolved

MOUs regarding Delivery Unit Optimization (DUO) and retreat rights under DUO

'Multiple Days of Inspection' MOU extended

NALC Route Protection Program

A Guide for Using COR

A Guide for Understanding Excessing Rules

Time projection rules

     Projections can not determine letter carriers’ workload

     Useful documents and forms

Interpretive Disputes

Article 12 / Excessing

     Non-Traditional Full-Time (NTFT) clerks

     Retreat rights

Other disputes

     Caser-Streeter

     Video recording study

FSS

National dispute

Work methods

Implementation

Phase 2

Postal Record columns

The Letter Carrier Resource Guide

This guide was created to help all letter carriers in the daily situations they face. It includes sections on letter carrier work methods and reporting requirements. It also explains how to read TAC's employee everything reports, Form 1840 reverse, and how to understand what time will not be credited to your route. Click here to download the guide (PDF 43MB).

Interpretive step grievance on scanning Delivery Unit Saturation Mail resolved

NALC and USPS have resolved a grievance at the Interpretive Step involving the scanning process used for Delivery Unit Saturation Mail. The settlement (M-01782) states that this scanning process is an internal measurement system used to verify the date a saturation mailing is scheduled for delivery. This settlement also makes clear that by scanning the mailing, the letter carrier is not verifying that he or she delivered the mailing. The scan only verifies that the mailing is scheduled to be delivered on that day.

MOUs regarding Delivery Unit Optimization (DUO)
and retreat rights under DUO

The NALC and USPS have reached agreement on two Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) regarding the issue of Delivery Unit Optimization (DUO). Generally speaking, this is where all the letter carriers in an office are moved to a different Installation and the post office where they used to work stays open with window services.

M-01744 addresses resolving the differences where two or more Local Memorandums of Understanding (LMOU) are involved as well as what happens in the event USPS changes its mind somewhere down the road and decides to move the letter carriers back to the original installation.

M-01745 addresses several issues involved when a Delivery Unit Optimization (DUO) occurs, including who goes, notice period, seniority, hold-down assignments, higher-level assignments (Article 25), and previously approved annual leave. It must be noted that these MOU's do not apply in situations where there are already clear contractual provisions that govern the movement of letter carriers and consolidation of post offices. This point is outlined in both MOUs.

NALC and the USPS have entered into another Memorandum of Understanding (M-01778) to clarify the intent of the previous DUO agreements as they pertain to the limited circumstance where letter carrier(s) have active retreat rights back to any installation involved in DUO. This new MOU (M-01778) requires such retreat rights for letter carriers to be carried forward to the gaining installation.

Letter carriers with active retreat rights to the gaining installation are not altered by this new MOU except the order of offering retreat rights may be affected. This is true because the seniority rosters of all installations involved in a DUO are merged.

Additionally, the new MOU requires that retreat rights to the original installation will be restored in the event the DUO process is reversed and letter carriers are returned to their original installation.

‘Multiple Days of Inspection’ MOU extended

President Rolando has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Postal Service (M-01777) which extends the terms of the previous MOU on ‘multiple days of inspection.’ During a six-day route count and inspection, the MOU allows management up to three ‘days of inspection,’ but limits management to only one day of completing PS Form 1838-C. Additionally, when two or three PS Forms 3999 are completed, the MOU dictates which PS Form 3999 will be used to transfer territory when adjusting routes. The terms of the new MOU are applicable through May 26, 2013, unless mutually extended by the parties.

NALC Route Protection Program—
Minor corrections made to chapters

Background information

NALC's Route Protection Program is a comprehensive educational publication explaining route examinations, route adjustments and "minor route adjustments."

A few minor corrections to the text of the three chapters were made, effective May 1, 2006. (See errata in the index of each chapter.) The corrections were printed and mailed to branches in an RPP mailing. They are also available for download below:

• Chapter One, Route Examination and the Letter Carrier is intended for letter carriers whose routes are scheduled for a formal six day count and inspection. It contains instructions on filling out the Form 1838-C Worksheet during the week of inspection, a brief outline of how management evaluates and adjusts routes, and advice on how to ensure that the results of the evaluation and adjustment are fair and accurate. Chapter 1 (pdf, 3.71 MB)
  
  
• Chapter Two, Route Examination and Adjustment for NALC Representatives provides in-depth information focusing on the adjustment process, and is intended primarily for NALC representatives who will assist and advise carriers through the inspection process. Chapter 2 (pdf, 1.81 MB)
  
  
• Chapter Three, The Minor Route Adjustment Process describes management's use and misuse of the minor adjustment provisions in Section 141 of the M-39 Handbook. Chapter 3 (pdf, 614 KB)
  
  
• The NALC Route Protection Program Pocket Handbook is a separate, pocket-sized booklet to be used by carriers as a quick and convenient reference during the week of count and inspection. NALC has mailed a copy of the Handbook to every letter carrier who is a member of NALC. The handbook it is intended for members only and is not available online.

NALC created the Route Protection Program after Postal Service management scuttled a joint labor-mangement task force that was exploring new methods for evaluating letter carrier routes.

A Guide for Using COR

This guide was created to take the mystery out of the workings of Carrier Optimal Routing(COR) when it is used to generate route adjustments. NALC representatives are encouraged to read this guide in advance of any proposed COR adjustments.

M-01766

Time projection rules:

Projections can not determine letter carriers’ workload

In 2007, the NALC and USPS settled a national-level dispute over management's use of DOIS projections (M-01664) in determining a letter carrier's daily workload. In 2011, the parties further agreed that projections can not determine a letter carrier's daily workload when they settled a national-level dispute that arose for the Greater Indiana District's use of an "office efficiency tool." This settlement (M-01769) is applicable to any other tool/system/program currently being used or developed in the future to project office and/or street time.

Useful documents and forms:

• M-01750 - LTATS-Weekly Summary Report with Designation and Activity Codes - This report shows work hours transferred from one Designation and Activity Code to another. This report should be reviewed to determine if work hours have been transferred to or from a city carrier assignment.
• M-01751 - Steward, Standby and Meeting Time Report - This report will show all time recorded under the following MODS operation numbers: 613 (Steward Time), 354 (Standby) and 632 (Meeting Time).
• M-01752 - Operations Summary Report - Weekly - This report shows the total number of work hours recorded under each MODS operation code in a zip code. To assist in reading this form see M-01754 below.
• M-01753 - Flash Last Four Weeks Report - This report shows a variety of unit information compared to Same Period Last Year including volumes, work hours by function, sick leave, etc.
• M-01754 - MODS Operation Numbers Listing - This report provides an explanation of all relevant MODS operation codes.
• M-01755 - Workhour Workload Report (by Route) - This report shows the work hours, volume and any auxiliary assistance for a particular route over a specified period of time.
• M-01760 - Instructions for obtaining a 3999 Audit Trail Report - Shows how to transfer a 3999 from the mainframe to the workstation in DOIS, data summary screen, function analysis screen and audit trail report.
• M-01762 - COR Presentation (PowerPoint) - Joint Power Point presentation on how to use COR.
• M-01697 is the National Memorandum of Understanding on the Approved FSS Work Methods.
• M-01694 is the October 22, 2008, National Memorandum of Understanding on the Assignment of City Delivery.
• M-01691 is the Flat Sequencing System (FSS) NALC/USPS Joint Task Force Report, the NALC FSS Task Force Members' Report, and the USPS FSS Task Force Members' Report.
• M-01664 - July 30, 2007 - Step IV Resolution. DOIS projections are not the sole determinant of a carriers leaving or return time, or daily workload. As such, the projections cannot be used as the sole basis for corrective action.
• M-01683 is the renewed (April 29, 2008) city and rural delivery National Memorandum of Understanding, renewing M-01606 below.
• M-01606 renewed the March 8, 2006 MOU (M-01568) below.
• M-01568 is the March 8, 2006 Memorandum of Understanding between the USPS and the NALC and the NRLCA regarding the processing of future city/rural disputes.
• M-01520 are the agreed upon principles in addressing city/rural delivery dispute issues, jointly formulated by the USPS, the NALC and the NRLCA.
• M-01519 is the City/Rural (dispute) Process Agreement which provides an agreed upon process and guidelines on how the USPS, the NALC, and the NRLCA are to handle disputes over whether deliveries should be assigned to the City Delivery or Rural Delivery craft.

A Guide for Understanding Excessing Rules

This guide was created to try to provide an easier way to understand Article 12. The guide breaks Article 12 down into logical “chapters” through the use of an index of events related to withholding/excessing. When you have a withholding/excessing situation, check the index first and it will direct you to the correct information. Click here to download the guide (PDF).

Interpretive disputes:

Article 12 / Excessing

Non-Traditional Full-Time (NTFT) clerks

The 2011 APWU National Agreement created a new category of clerks called non-traditional full-time (NTFT) clerks. Many of these NTFT clerks have a regular schedule of fewer than 40 hours per week. The problem is that management has begun to excess some of these clerks into full-time letter carrier jobs.

On February 22, 2012, the NALC notified the USPS that a case scheduled for regional arbitration out of Westerly, RI, concerning this issue was interpretive. Our position is that the newly created APWU positions are really part-time regular positions. Clerks holding these positions can’t be properly excessed into full-time letter carrier jobs.

Retreat rights

On March 7, 2011, the National Association of Letter Carriers declared that a regular panel arbitration case raised interpretive issues and appealed the matter to the national level pursuant to Article 15, Section 2 of the National Agreement.

The case involves a Grade 1 city letter carrier, who was involuntarily excessed from one installation to another pursuant to Article 12.5.C.5.b (1) of the National Agreement. Accordingly, the letter carrier had retreat rights under Article 12.5.C.5.b (6), which entitles an employee reassigned under subsections b (1) or (2) to be “returned to the first vacancy in the level, in the craft or occupational group in the installation from which reassigned.”

Subsequent to the reassignment of the letter carrier, a letter carrier retired from the original office, thus creating a vacancy. At that point the excessed carrier should have been returned to the original office. Management refused to do so, taking the position that the employee is not entitled to return unless there was an available “residual vacancy." The NALC maintains a position that the employee’s retreat rights are triggered by the “first vacancy” in the level, in the craft or occupational group in the installation from which reassigned.

Other disputes

Caser-Streeter

In November 2011, the USPS implemented Phase I of the caser-streeter program after opting out of our Joint Alternative Route Structure Test. The caser-streeter program is a unilateral test being conducted in numerous office around the country.

Here is how management has designed the routes in their test:

Letter carriers on caser assignments come in and case, pull down, and load up the hampers for two or more routes. They have everything ready to go for before the streeters get to work. The streeters come in and get their accountables, inspect the vehicle, roll the hamper out, load up and go. Then the caser carries a shorter street assignment.

There were 15 sites that made up Phase I of the caser-streeter initiative. These 15 site were offices that were receiving FSS but had not yet received their initial FSS adjustments.

The Reader’s Digest version of the story is that this system doesn’t work in its unilateral one-size-fits all form—big surprise. The casers can’t get the mail ready by the time the streeters get to work and the streeter assignments are grossly overburdened. That’s a recipe for disputes, and dinner is being served buffet-style in the Phase I sites.

Reports indicate that assignments in this system take between 9 and 12 hours to complete on average. (These times are much better than they were a few months ago.)

The Postal Service has since proceeded with implementing Phase II of this test. This second phase is for offices that are not receiving FSS. The service's goal was to have at least one site in each postal district. Many of the same problems that are occurring in the Phase I sites are also occurring in the Phase II sites.

On Sept. 28, 2011, we responded by filing a national-level interpretive dispute on the issue of whether the Postal Service may suspend compliance with the National Agreement under the guise of conducting a “test.” NALC outlined three specific violations in the interpretive dispute:

• The test redefines the terms and conditions of letter carrier assignments. Article 5 of the National Agreement prohibits management from making unilateral changes to wages, hours and working conditions.
• Flat Sequencing System (FSS) sites that are included in this test will be unreasonably delayed in the compliance with the memorandum of understanding regarding FSS implementation (M-01643).
• The route adjustment methods proposed for this test do not comply with the M-39 handbook.

There is also an array of additional contract violations that are not interpretive, as a result of implementation of the caser-streeter concept. In conjunction with your national business agent’s office, we will offer advice and guidance to the local branches involved.

Video recording study

Another battle in which we are currently in the middle is the Postal Service’s unilateral video recording study. This study is where the USPS comes into a post office, chooses a few routes, and films letter carriers from the time they punch in until they leave for the street and from the time they pull back into the parking lot until they punch out to go home.

The Postal Service told us it was going to use this information for bargaining purposes, related to trying to change current office standards used to establish standard office time. President Rolando initiated a national-level grievance to protest this practice.

The national-level grievance states:

The interpretive issue presented is whether the current study is covered by Article 34 of the National Agreement. It is our understanding that the Postal Service’s position is that the study falls outside the scope of Article 34. We disagree. It is the position of the NALC that Article 34 covers the making of any “time or work studies which are to be used as a basis for changing current or instituting new work measurement systems or work or time standards,” even if the Postal Service intends to achieve the new work or time standards through collective bargaining or interest arbitration. Moreover, the conduct of the study thus far fails to comply with the requirements of Article 34. For example, the Postal Service has failed to provide NALC with timely notice of when each office review is to be conducted in sufficient time to allow me, as NALC President, to designate a qualified representative to observe the making of the study, as provided by Article 34, Section B.

In addition, the study involves the use of new methods of gathering and analyzing data, such as the use of video cameras, which themselves have not been the subject of negotiation. This unilateral change in terms and conditions of employment violates Article 5.

Originally, we were notified that the USPS intended to film 400 routes, but it couldn't tell us any specifics in advance about which routes would be filmed. Filming began on Oct. 13, 2011. We were notified that the last day of filming was Feb. 4, 2012. That’s the last we’ve heard on this matter.

FSS

FSS National dispute

In August 2011, a local grievance was filed alleging management violated the COR settlement (M-01661) in the way initial FSS route adjustments were made using the COR program. The USPS claimed this case interpretive because they believe M-01643 (see above) gives them the right to make initial FSS route adjustments in any way and does not require them to conform with the COR settlement or the Handbook M-39.

Any grievances concerning the 60-day review period contained in M-01643 should not be held for this interpretive dispute.

For an explanation of how the COR program works and can be used properly, used see A Guide for Using COR.

FSS Work methods

In November 2008, the NALC and the USPS signed a national memorandum of understanding on approved FSS work methods (M-01697). This MOU governs how letter carriers serving park-and-loop or foot deliveries in FSS offices handle additional bundles of mail. The MOU states:

• City letter carriers serving park-and-loop or foot deliveries will not be required to carry more than three bundles.
• In order to maintain three bundles on pre-sequenced mail days, letter carriers serving park-and-loop or foot deliveries may only be assigned to either:
  • case residual mail, then collate with FSS mail while in the office (the pre-sequenced bundle must meet the definition of a third bundle under the Interpretive Step agreement for case Q98N-4Q-C 00189552) or,
  • case residual mail, then collate with the pre-sequenced addressed mail during pull down while in the office.
• There is no change to current work methods for other types of deliveries.
• When a simplified mailing is carried as a third bundle by city letter carriers serving park-and-loop or foot deliveries, the simplified mailing will be placed on the bottom of the appropriate bundle. In order to maintain three bundles in this circumstance, residual mail and any pre-sequenced mail delivered that day will be collated with the FSS mail.
• City carrier case configurations will be consistent with requirements in methods handbooks M-39 and M-41. City carriers working in an FSS environment will be consulted before case configuration changes are implemented.

The MOU came as a result of reviewing the final report of the joint FSS task force (M-01691). The report also memorializes each party's FSS perspectives and recommendations, as well as the conclusion of what has been jointly agreed to regarding the FSS environment.

FSS Implementation

In September 2007, the NALC and the USPS signed a national memorandum of understanding on the implementation of FSS (M-01643). This MOU established two things.

1. Once FSS is fully implemented in a delivery unit, management will determine the methods to estimate impact in a delivery unit and make route adjustments accordingly.
2. Sixty days after implementing route adjustments for FSS, the local parties will review the adjustments to ensure that routes are as near 8 hours as possible. This 60-day period will not count toward the special route inspection process (Section 271, Handbook M-39; Section 918, Handbook M-41). If either party determines that the route(s) is (are) not properly adjusted, then the route(s) will be adjusted In accordance with the provisions of Handbook M-39 or, if applicable, a locally agreed upon adjustment formula.

The terms of this memorandum were effective immediately and continue through all phases of Flats Sequencing System (FSS) implementation.

For a detailed explanation on your rights in and the procedures of adjusting routes in accordance with the provisions of Handbook M-39, see the NALC's Route Protection Program.

FSS Phase 2

Currently, the USPS is testing a smaller machine for possible use in a second phase of FSS. This test is being conducted in Lancaster, PA.

Postal Record columns

The Director of City Delivery writes a column in NALC's monthly magazine, The Postal Record, that covers a wide range of issues. These informative articles can be viewed using Adobe Reader.