THANK YOU POSTAL EMPLOYEE ADVOCATE, I APPRECIATE YOUR UNDERSTANDING AND YOUR ADVICE.

GLEN BECK,NEVER MIND UR COMMENT DESERVES NO ANSWER, YOUR COMMENTS TELLS ALOT ABOUT YOU...AND IT,S NOT GOOD......

Beware Glen Beck wanabee, what goes around comes around for sure.

/m 1763

What exactly is the difference between scheduled leave and unscheduled leave? I figured by filling the proper 3971 and supporting documents, that the leave is scheduled, especially since po is aware well in advance.
Thank you for your time.

Good luck with that. Around much of the country, Managers find WAYS to DICK employees around by getting it all called "Unscheduled". Don't think it is 'not important' either...as they ALWAYS use it to dictate their concoction they love most...Letters of Warning and termination. Bunch of conniving, unethical, and indignant parasites feeding off the greed abundant en masse in the Higher Ranks.

/m1768 Scheduled is all leave requested and approved in advance. Use 3971 in triplicate, get it signed under 'received', and pull back 3rd copy. Or hand it to boss with a witness who'll admit it later. If they dissaprove, they must give you copy and it must say why not. You can call an hour before your shift, ask to be off and if they say OK, it's scheduled. Call in sick 3 days in a row and each will be unscheduled. Call in once and say you'll be out for 3 days, days 2 and 3 are scheduled.

Unscheduled make it easy to be disciplined so dispute any you get.

FMLA call offs and appointments are also considered "scheduled"

god I hope she is out working off the big butt she says is not a problem.

It is a HUGH problem to those who have to look at her.

Never understood why fat people think others are picking on them. STEP AWAY FROM THE TABLE, PUT DOWN THE DONUT, and go for a walk instead.

Dont you just love it...I'm fat a lazy BUT EVERYONE ELSE IS PICKING ON ME...BOOO WHO

When I was @ the REC we had those standard issue red desk chairs. There was one keyer who was built like a linebacker (& she wasn't even one of those 'pretty fat girls'). She broke several chairs, and then several other larger people were complaining about the chairs being too small = it seemed they have a max weight limit of 200 lbs.

Mgmt ordered Big chairs. The linebacker refused to use it because she said she wasn't over 200 lbs (and yes, she kept breaking chairs).

... on the Flowers48 saga. I'm trying to picture the scenario: the only think I can envision is tha she works on SPBS, since she fell onto the conveyor.

We had high stools w/ a ring around the base that was the 'footrest'. We all used to (improperly) use it as a step when climbing up. Most of the rings were wiggly & loose, and we had some pretty hefty people up there, esp on T2 (you know, the ones who are huffing by the time they hit that 4th step?).

I can't imagine that her EEO claim has much weight (pardon the pun). This whine is right up there with the time some of my crew filed a grievance because not all of the keying stations had working radio jacks.

Chalk up another win for an employee based on discrimination because of her religion, race, and age. Complainant had met with her supervisor and postmaster (both named as RMO’s) as well as the agency’s Workplace Environmental Specialist to try to resolve the issues within her facility. The Workplace Environment Specialist and postmaster concluded that “the parties needed to work these things out amongst themselves in the office.” The AJ found that “essentially (they) washed their hands of the situation, and sent a clear message to Complainant that she was on her own.”
In my opinion this demonstrates the futility and cynicism of even having a Workplace Environmental Specialist. Apparently their only job function is to suppress legitimate complaints of discrimination (which, by law ADR Specialist can’t do). As a result of this complaint, the AJ ordered that the agency require the RMO’s, including the Workplace Environmental Specialist, are to be “provide(d) EEO training on Title VII and ADEA requirements, specifically including religious accommodation; race, age and religious discrimination and harassment; and the proper process to follow after receiving a complaint of discrimination and/or harassment.” What? Apparently Workplace Environmental Specialists aren’t required to have this training before they encumber a position that is supposed to resolve workplace environment problems. Just another useless $70,000 a year management position at a time when the Postal Service is in dire financial straights.
My editorial opinion aside, I just wanted to share with the skeptics that EEO complaints of discrimination can be won. So raise your glasses and offer a toast as this is a win for everyone.

workplace environment specialist? The po and their team of 2 to one security people are resposible for all the hell in the po. They have decoys on the floor and satellites and have an entourage of people watching and waiting for something to happen. And a lot of times they are the ones making employees lives hell. Anyone who complains about anything is usually treated badly one way or another.

I might as well throw in on this forum since I can lay some ideas on anyone who is like minded.
I used to EEO any postal manager who looked crosseyed at me. I did so , in many instances just to put them on the defensive to leave me alone and move on. I would wait until they had to wear themselves out with "postal paperwork/homework" and then I would withdraw the EEO after the post office had wisely given some higher salaried joe-college sociologist, the job security of researching "allegations." When the EEO came back for either inervention/one-on-one, or farther along, I simply dropped the case. I don't wish to discourage anyone from filing but I learned that the inconvenience and personal committment that I was able to delegate to a postal manager who required an attitude adjustment would suffice, and that was always enough for me.
I was able to quickly realize that all EEO's, legitimate or "almost," still have merit, in that management fools will build a case for you in the form of retaliation or anything that appeared to be.
I would simply relate to the person I had EEO-ed, that I "appreciated their retaliation because it gave me a much stronger and irrefutable case."
It didn't take managers long to look the otherway when I came around and to "get busy with other important issues."
That is all the hell I ever wanted anyway.
I encourage everyone who needs to help a postal manager with their attitude, File an EEO! You can always drop the damn thing and they can always "kiss your ass."
You see, management never knows how far you are personally willing to go once you call their bluff. Just be willing to go all the way with the fools who think YOU are bluffing.

Dave Kirtley

Great Post Dave!

Edited by author 11-07-2009 06:23 AM
/m1777 Above almost every post on these boards. The fact is...the fools stumble all over themselves to try to JUSTIFY or somehow condone a flagrant action/attitude...that in the end you caused enough backlash to settle the score. I never doubted EEO was all about getting even, never ending in any monetary or other worthy justice.

COULD YOU IMAGINE IF EVERY EMPLOYEE TREATED PATHETICLY BY A STOOGE MANAGER WAS TO FILE AN EEO EACH TIME...EVERY TIME?

The whole EEO system is a FRAUD. They never had me fooled for a minute and I told them so. No matter how you try to slice they are paid by the USPS. Directly or indirectly, it doesn't matter!

Al, can you imagine any postal manager having to have themselves continually inundated by paperwork? I personally can. I leveled the playing field many times by giving postal managers "homework" and "extra duties." I turned in over 100 Employee Suggestions during 28 years and most of the 55 which were adopted, dealt with legitimate postal and federal agency, general safety issues.
I eventually realized supervisors and managers were also subject to the same rules and regulations which applied to all postal employees, so submitting 20 suggestions at a time was no big deal for me.
One supervisor who I eventually became able to make literate, thought he could discourage me by saying: "your idea is not economically feasible." I took that for a very short time because the, then, director of personnel was a diligent and honest fellow postal employee who appreciated any employee who had anything constructive and worthy of their own personal time to submit through established postal channels, respectfully serious. The director had the supervisor provide me with respectful and considerate reasons, in specific detail as to why my suggestion did not merit adoption.
This supervisor patronizedd me from then on and made extra effort not to provoke me. ( The supervisor felt I was punishing them!) In other words, since I would not hesitate to submit suggestions, the supervisor mistakenly patronized me at every opportunity since they only assumed I submitted them to make trouble for them.
They were sadly mistaken and their vocabulary improved as a direct result. I submitted them out of my personal concerns for making the post office a more safe and tolerable place to wear out my body for money.
The same could be said of EEOs. I turned Legitimate EEOs in every time I felt the necessity was justified.
Whereas, EEOs are like trying to "beat the house" in a poker game, enough of them usually manage to improve certain situations when nothing else seems to work, so I therefore encourage employees to assert their rights as responsible employees who have the right for redress, to file an EEO.
It costs the post office a great deal of time, resources, manpower, and money, to defend agaisnt employee allegations and in many instances, EEOs are the only means for an employee to assure the post office they will not tolerate abuse.
I know the post office, predictably, managed to lobby the government to place a "ceiling" on the amount of compensatory damages, for any liabilities legally assessed against the postal service, so the argument that a person "EEOs" for the money, is superfluous.
Knock standing up for yourself all you want, but are you a man or a mouse?

I hope you are able to see my position objectively and with realistic expectations.

Respectfully,

Dave Kirtley