ok you read article 41, now read article 12 and your Local Agreement these rules vary from branch to branch. This topic is usually tricky to fully understand so consult your steward for the correct interpertation in your branch.

no seniority /m2457 -- were routes posted? Were you allowed to bid? Then it is not the same situation that AIRBUD is alleging is taking place in his office.

AIRBUD /m2455 -- I don't believe that a large branch like Sacramento made that statement and is mis-interpreting a section of the contract that has been there for a long time, and implemented many times. IMHO, the misunderstanding is on your part. So, no, AIRBUD, I will not ask them. I make the same challenge to you that I would to management: show me in writing.

Airbud and No seniority are both right...the rts. in west sacto. are getting all chopped up, but there are no biiding except for the carriers below 14...and the national business agent Manual P. and the local NALC. both won't do anything.....so why should we pay these useless people....and that is why most carriers in our office will opt out of the union.....these so-called union reps are just plain gutless and nothing more but all talk, no action....I am ashamed to be associated with the likes of this local and business agent

/m2457 Sounds like the first route to be 100% changed and thus triggering a domino bidding process was #14. But that still doesn't preclude #1-13 from bidding on any of the routes that go up for bid.

what is #14

Original poster was saying no one above #14 on their office's seniority list was going to be allowed to bid when the routes went up for bid. We were just trying to ascertain the details of the situation.

Edited by author 06-23-2009 06:15 PM
In our office we have NO Local Agreement with the union at all things will
still stand the same, the bidding will start below carrier 14 on down not
1-13 stated by the POSTMASTER, so no bidding on any route above that.

AIRBUD /m2465 -- your have no local? Shame you you, you deserve whatever you get.

Now that I have vented, you should go read Article 41.3.O. Without having a local agreement, they don't have to post any routes. It sounds to me that the union got the post office to implement 41.3.O even though you have no local agreement. Article 41.3.O must be implemented exactly as written, no local modifications. And the procedure is that only the routes from the abolished route down in seniority get posted. Not perfect, but better than nothing. However, once routes get posted, anybody can bid. Any other arrangement is a violation of the contract, and I don't believe the union agreed to that.

/m2465 Right, the routes above the abolished route do not go up for bid, but the carriers currently IN those high seniority routes can bid on any of the routes that do get posted.

NECarrier /m2467 -- the problem is that the system allows them to crap on the senior carriers during adjustments, knowing that it is unlikely they will find anything better from number 14 down, for example. Another problem is that 41.3.O potentially protects the super-runners who get major additions to their routes, then bid off. I don't have a solution to that (Kevin Gilhooly ?); like I said, 41.3.O isn't perfect, but it is better than nothing.

Can mgt accomodate a (non on the job related) light duty carrier by swapping park and loop deliveries on his route for curbside deliveries on other routes, all routes have regulars on them

Common Sense /m2469 -- No. Article 13.4.C: The reassignment of a full-time regular or part-time flexible employee to a temporary or permanent light duty or other assignment shall not be made to the detriment of any full-time regular on a scheduled assignment or give a reassigned part-time flexible preference over other part-time flexible employees.

Has anyone heard the term "Available to Work" in relation to attendance control? eRMS, etc

I've heard of "available for duty". Look up June 19th's archives on this website.

Can mgmt. change what routes are on a string of comps? i.e. Carrier Technician covers rts. 1,2,3,4,5 can mgmt pull route 3 off the string and put rt 6 in its place?