Outstanding!

No help what so ever from the Union. President Franky boy is a management puppet

If the union had there way, veteran's preference would be out of the contract.

Disablevet /m448 -- veteran's preference is not in the contract, it is federal law.

disablevet- you are right the APWU president here in Buffalo (frankyboy)has told his stewards that he is "opposed to vet pref" as i guess it takes away jobs from nepotistic family members in management or something. we vets should all die in combat protecting their jobs and not return looking for jobs that their family members could have because the chickenshits werent men enough to fight for our freedom or way of life.

egark we all know vet pref is federal law but here in buffalo vet pref was denied to over 1000 vets after the law changed back in 1997. (myself included) the HR manager then stated that he made a mistake in denying the status but by postal reg. he didnt have to correct his mistake errr the worthless piece of crap committed a crime that he should be in prison for but 10 years later he still is the HR manager still screwing vets. oh i did fight and got my status but im still being discriminated against for being a war vet as they refuse to allow me access to the maintenance craft because my 12 years of military service was in electronics and they dont want me to become a tech.

i put in my request to transfer to custodial years ago i initially scored a 100% on the custodial entrance exam thats when he denied the pref status to me. since then i've taken all the maintenance exams went to the review board where "suprise" the same HR manager told me he was very impressed with my extensive certification, then gave me an "ineligible" rating on all the exams and still refuses to transfer me to custodial even tho numerous other non vets both junior and senior have been allowed to switch.

Epicon 66

Have a similar case here in my office.

The individual filed an EEO against the Maintenance Manager and at the REDRESS, the Maintenance Manager, Plt Manager and the HR guy from District went as far as to say that the individual was not on the register and had never been on the register. At that point, acting on behalf of the individual and not as a Union Steward, recommended that the REDRESS end and the next step started. We had the individuals letter showing his test scores and his Veteran Preference of 10 points, more than 30% disabled, with the dates emcompassing the current register. Not to mention proof of where the Maintenance Mgr and the Plt Manager had received and sign for copies of the letter. I never give anything to management unless they sign a receipt for it.

Two additional things then took place, grievances were file, one on behalf of the individual, and another class action for discrimination against Veterans and a second EEO popped up filed against the District HR member who was at the REDRESS and the District Manager of HR for discrimination against Veteran and reverse discrimination because of another individual that was hired after the first EEO was filed.

Management has asked the Union to hold the grievance at Step Two and at the REDRESS meeting of the second EEO, management asked the moderator and the individual to reschedule the REDRESS to allow management the time of consider their options.

Everyone at the meeting, including the Chief Steward for the Union, me included as the individual's representative, and the individual signed off for 30 additional day. After the meeting the moderator told us that the reverse discrimination charge has them chasing their tails especially since it deals with a Veteran who is disable more than 30%.

Forgot to mention that management has acknowledged that there are two residual vacancies that have existed for more than 12 months.

I have no doubts that he will get the job, and no doubts management will screw with him everytime they can once he does.

Will post what happens as soon something is determined, and if it goes over 30 days, will continue the Step Two to Step Three, amending it to include failure by management to meet at Step Two.
  
Just simply love helping them (management) make an ass out of themselves, its almost a full-time job anymore.

That sounds great

Epicon 66

"Reverse Discrimination"

If it applies go for it, postal management will go wild, it works as well under the proper situations.

If you can get a hiring history for the period of time you have been turned down and match faces with names and if male or female.

I have only used it four times in nearly 30 years and three were settled and the fourth is pending.

Its hard for management to defend because of federal hiring practices, especially if you are a Veteran on top of it.

To date managements on defense has been that the veteran preference only applies to the orginal hiring, but that is easily torn apart especailly when the Union formally request that policy in writting.

I might add that if management fails to provide the information you need, the Union has the right to formally request it for the purpose of the EEO.

Time to BT for 8 hours, then request Steward time, one of our recent ASP grads has screwed the overtime up again by using PTFs and Casuals in lieu of the ODL, looks like free money for a few mail handlers on the ODL. This fool is a real piece of work, and thinks our contract is identical to the clerks word for word.

I have 18 Step Ones filed against her for Officials Discussion, not the content, but the purpose of the Discussion in the first place. When I requested documentation from her to support her Discussions, she made me a copy of Section 650 of the ELM and even highlighted the paragraph that gave her that authority. You need to check out the heading of Section 650 and who it applies to. You'll crack up on the one.

just though i would let you folks know that the postal service has just finally made a determination on the staffing requirements on the FSS...

it will be assigned to the mail handler craft except for one and only one clerk positon...

way to go Hegarty, keeping mail handler jobs, your union at work for you, including you bottom feeding scum sucking scabs.....................

Release No. 10-16-08
Oct. 31, 2008
New law allows veterans' salutes during anthem
WASHINGTON (AFRNS) -- Veterans and active-duty military not in uniform can now render the military-style hand salute during the playing of the national anthem, thanks to changes in federal law that took effect this month.
"The military salute is a unique gesture of respect that marks those who have served in our nation's armed forces," said Dr. James B. Peake, secretary of Veterans Affairs. "This provision allows the application of that honor in all events involving our nation's flag."
The new provision improves upon a little known change in federal law last year that authorized veterans to render the military-style hand salute during the raising, lowering or passing of the flag, but it did not address salutes during the national anthem. Last year's provision also applied to service members while not in uniform.
Traditionally, members of the nation's veterans service organizations have rendered the hand-salute during the national anthem and at events involving the national flag while wearing their organization's official head-gear.
The most recent change, authorizing hand-salutes during the national anthem by veterans and out-of-uniform military personnel, was sponsored by Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, an Army veteran. It was included in the Defense Authorization Act of 2009, which President Bush signed Oct. 14.
The earlier provision authorizing hand-salutes for veterans and out-of-uniform service members during the raising, lowering or passing of the flag, was contained in the National Defense Authorization Act of 2008, which took effect Jan. 28, 2008. (Courtesy of VA News)

does veteran's preference factor in if someone is applying for postmaster relief?

I have heard both yes and no.

the no .... says there is no test, therefore no test SCORE to add preference points to.

the yes .... says a veteran is a veteran and therefore gets preference

who is right?

(yes... there were other people who applied for the job.

There is not yes or no to the veteran preference issue. Arbitrators have been split on this issue for years and will continue to do so until it is decided in the court.

The postal service says that veteran preference is for employment, at the time of hiring. This is stated in the ELM and in the employment practices that have withstood regional arbitrations, MSPBs, EEOs and NLRB rulings.

Unions, all of them, says that veteran preference continues to follow the veteran thought out their employment when dealing with a mail handler in mail handler craft assignment as does all other unions for their crafts. There are as many arbitrations sustained on this as denied.

In the situtation you are are refering to, my answer to question would be no, since, a craft employee is applying for, the key words, a "management postion", and that craft employee has already been hired and excerised their veterans preference for the craft they were hired for or transfered into. Not for a management assignment outside of a craft.

As a long time steward, I would not, repeat, not file a grievance, since there is no harm or violation of the mail handlers National Agreement.

I know that there are some that will disagree with me on this; however, I urge them to show me the facts rather than just simply disagree with me.

I always have time to learn.

Just my opinion.

thank you for answering, Union Member. maybe I didn't make it clear, though, the position is not being filled with a person already employeed. this is a PMR position being filled by applicants off the street so to speak (not from a postal roster). one of the applicants is a vet. the others are not. the postmaster doing the hiring says they have to choose the vet over the others. we have gotten different answers as outlined below.

Like I said, the ELM and current hiring practices require the Veteran preference in hiring. There are basicly 3 levels of Veterans Preference, 5 point, 10 point and disability more than 60%.

I have heard that when it comes to the hiring, lets say, all are 5 point, the one with the higher disability rating is the one that is hired. Just like the 10 point is hired over the 5 point. 60% or higher are automaticly hired.

Its as if there are actually two registers, one for non Vets and one for Vets only. I have been told, that Affirmative Action Hiring puts females disable veterans at the top of the list and a minority disabled veteran female at the top of that list.

I'm not sure on one point, and that is people who fall under ADA also have a hiring preference, and ADA folks maybe ahead of Veteran hiring. I have never been able to find anyone who will answer a question about ADA hiring over Veterans Preference.

Just my opinion