Wednesday, September 25, 2013

NAPS Leg/Reg Update - September 25, 2013

NAPS Leg/Reg Update - September 25, 2013 Senate Hearing to Focus on Postal Health Care Benefits The Senate postal oversight committee on Thursday will hold its second hearing in two weeks on postal reform legislation, S. 1486, introduced in early August by the panel's top Democrat and Republican, Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE) and Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK). Thursday's Senate postal hearing will focus on the Postal Service's top legislative priority -- authorizing USPS to establish a postal-only health plan for its active and retired workers, one better integrated with Medicare to receive federal subsidies and bring down premium costs. Donahoe is expected to suggest at Thursday's hearing that the cost savings delivered by a USPS health plan, especially through Medicare integration, would offset the costs of retiree health benefit pre-funding and literally take pre-funding concerns off the table. Officials from the Office of Personnel Management, which oversees the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program, and the Government Accountability Office, which has reviewed the USPS health plan proposal, are expected to respond to those claims at Thursday's hearing. You can watch Thursday's hearing live, which starts at 10 am ET, here. Last week's Senate postal hearing focused on postage rates and revenues, in the lead-up to today's announcement that the Postal Service will seek Postal Regulatory Commission approval of an emergency postage increase, a move opposed by mailers. In a letter released today, USPS Board of Governors Chairman Mickey Barnett described the “precarious financial condition” of the Postal Service and the “uncertain path toward enactment of postal reform legislation” as primary reasons for seeking price changes above the CPI increase. He also indicated that the price adjustment above the CPI increase is necessary in order to ensure that the Postal Service will be able to maintain and continue the development of postal services of the type and quality which America needs. Postal-rate increases are capped at inflation, as measured by the Consumer Price Index. That would mean an allowable increase of about 2 percent for implementation in January. The Postal Service, under the 2006 postal law, may seek a higher rate increase beyond the CPI in "exigent" circumstances, when approved by the Postal Regulatory Commission, which has 90 days to approve the action. In 2010, the Postal Service submitted a request for an exigent rate increase of 5.6 percent, far above the CPI cap, that would have brought in more than $3 billion annually. But the mailers fought that increase in court and it was derailed. ===== Bruce Moyer Legislative Counsel to NAPS

 NAPS/USPS Consultative Meeting Minutes

December 12, 2012 @ 9 AM - USPS HQ

Agenda

1.  NAPS requests an update on the current restructuring including a listing of the number of EAS employees who remain impacted – their names and locations.

USPS Response: The Postal Service had a meeting in Tampa, FL with all Area HR managers in the past week to review the current RIF process. The list requested by NAPS is only current for a short time, due to Shared Services constantly processing Form 50’s of those impacted EAS receiving new positions. USPS stated that an EAS employee may be on the impact list, but their paperwork has not yet been completed by Shared Services. Therefore they appear as impacted when in reality they are not once their Form 50 is processed.

The USPS provided an overview of the current RIF process. The impacted list overstates the number of impacted EAS. This results when a unit loses one position, but other EAS in that office, by default, also become impacted. On November 6th approximately 1,964 General RIF Notices were mailed to potential impacted EAS; where 415 were Veteran Preference eligible with the ability to bump other EAS.

November 19th was the VERA irrevocable date, in which 197 EAS took the VERA. The USPS will be mail Specific RIF Notices on January 2, 2013 to those remaining on the impact list. March 8, 2013 is the effective date of separation. Round 3 of the RIF will be RIF assignments that will be done on March 9 for those left in the competitive area. This is not a directed reassignment, but a RIF assignment under RIF rules.

 In August there were 3,092 potentially impacted EAS. After the RIF Avoidance ended on November 6 only 1,964 EAS remained impacted. Originally, 409 competitive areas were involved in the RIF, now there are only 296 Competitive Areas with impacted EAS. As of December 1, 2012, a total of 1,133 EAS are potentially impacted in the following USPS Areas: Capital/Metro – 98; Eastern 114; Great Lakes -128; Northeast – 365; Pacific -165; Southwest -149; and Western -114. Be advised these numbers are overstated due to multiple incumbents.

As of December 8, Shared Services current list of potentially impacted is down to 1,046. NAPS was reminded that when a competitive area is no longer impacted by RIF, meaning all impacted EAS have been placed, then EAS Level-17 supervisor positions will be posted to all career employees, including craft, to apply.

2. NAPS had previously requested to be provided with an electronic file from HRSSC that would provide a summary of vacancy postings on a regular basis in conjunction with posting cycles. The listing could be by state or District. NAPS would like to know if this request can be accommodated as NAPS HQ does not have access to the USPS Blue page.

NAPS asked if Shared Services has a summary report of all vacancies that are posted each week and can NAPS get it by state. If yes, can NAPS get a list of the summary?

USPS Response: NAPS can access to USPS Liteblue to check all postings in eCareers. However, USPS HQ will investigate to see if such a report exists.

3. NAPS would like an update on the restructuring process in the NDC’s. We would like a breakdown of vacancies for each of the NDC systems’ facilities.

USPS Response: The implementation of the NDC restructuring started on August 25, 2012. There is always movement so the vacancy numbers will change. In addition, when doing an eCareer search for vacancies the results only show the first 100 at a time. A person must continually search to spool through the vacancies. USPS suggests employees search vacancies by state rather than nationally by position.

NAPS was provided with a summary of the number of vacancies currently at the NDCs

4. NAPS members have been advising us that there is a significant increase in the number of parcels presented for delivery. In DOIS, there is functionality to account for time used for delivery of high volume parcels, accountable mail and full coverage mailings, but the Postal Service does not allow the additional workload to be input into the DOIS system.

NAPS would like to be able to report to the field the current rationale that does not provide access for additional workload (over base numbers) to be entered into the DOIS database. NAPS members believe that the office performance is better than is stated as a result of the current situation. Because of unreported volumes our members are being called to task for office performance that is lower than it would be if workload volume was recorded properly.

USPS Response: This topic was prompted at the NAPS 2012 Fall Board meeting. USPS asked if this was a national problem. NAPS asked for a meeting on DOIS and the USPS is in the process of coordinating a meeting to include USPS DOIS department personnel.

The USPS stated that any changes with DOIS will require more Labor Relations involvement since DOIS involves and impacts the NALC National contract. USPS suggests a separate meeting on DOIS to review this issue in-depth with all parties involved.

NAPS stated the issue with DOIS is a USPS Area issue and is not limited to one specific district. NAPS concern is that mail volume is entered into DOIS, but the unit is not being properly credited for the workload reflected in DOIS reports.

USPS clarified NAPS’ position that if volume entered in DOIS establishes that workload has increased, then the office should receive the work hour credit.

5. In the process of resolving the FY 2009 PFP we have identified several instances where members who work in multiple supervisory offices had filed two levels of appeals, the cases were referred to USPS HQ and one or more of the cases was resolved favorably. In the same office, in an identical goal/result situation, there were other supervisors in the multiple supervisor office who were denied a settlement. We would like to discuss how this anomaly occurred. The names of the individuals in question will be provided under separate correspondence.

USPS Response: USPS will make one final review of this particular case, but all other cases related to the FY 2009 PFP Settlement are closed.

6. At our 2012 national convention, certain resolutions were passed that mandate that certain items are brought to the consultative process. Therefore the following resolutions are presented for consultation:

a. That all EAS employees will be given due process before any disciplinary action is deemed appropriate. (resolution #43)

USPS Response: The USPS ELM 650 addresses disciplinary action and appeals.

b. That an authorized supervisory position be required on each tour that has craft employees. (resolution #46)

USPS Response: Supervisor staffing is based on SWCs and a plant ratio of 25:1 and 22:1.

c. That approved annual leave not be denied by management at the newly assigned tours or facilities. (resolution #47)

USPS Response: It is referenced in the USPS ELM as a policy that previously approved leave is honored.

d. That USPS management be mandated to give affected employees a written statement indicating the specific needs of the service. (resolution #51)

USPS Response: NAPS raised the issue of involuntary reassignments and COO Megan Brennan issued a letter on August 24, 2012 addressing the handling of involuntary reassignments.

e. That an involuntary reassignment cannot be for more than ninety days. (resolution #51)

USPS Response: NAPS raised the issue of involuntary reassignments and COO Megan Brennan issued a letter on August 24, 2012 addressing the handling of involuntary reassignments.

f. That USPS management be mandated to send copies of all PS Form 1723 issued to EAS personnel and any employee temporarily assigned to EAS positions to the local NAPS branch office. (resolution #51)

USPS Response: Nothing prevents an employee from providing NAPS with a copy of the PS Form 1723. USPS has collective bargaining agreements to provide PS Form 1723’s to unions regarding craft employees on higher level jobs for an extended period. USPS does not have the same standing for EAS. The USPS will not mandate that copies of PS Form 1723’s be sent to NAPS.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Postal Service Plans Roll-Out of New Supervisor Program

The resident officers met with USPS Vice President, Employee Resource Management, Deborah Giannoni-Jackson and members of her staff on Wednesday, December 12, 2012 for a final briefing on the preparations for the roll-out of the new Supervisor Training Program.

We were advised that at the meeting that this program would be the largest hiring of EAS employees in recent history. This fact should dispel the constant rumors and theories that there will be buy-outs for EAS employees in 2013. NAPS fully supports the efforts that have been undertaken in the Postal Service’s development of this new program and the incorporating of many recommendations that have been made by the NAPS resident officers in meetings we have held with the development team during 2012.

As the restructuring nears its’ conclusion in early 2013, Districts that have completed placement of all impacted employees will commence postings for initial level EAS positions for promotions from the craft using the new training program. Expected start it early February, 2013.

The establishment of this new program and the expected hiring of new supervisors present our local branches with opportunities to increase membership. Our NAPS executive board will be coordinating the efforts of local branches to make appearances at local training sites during the first weeks of the training program to meet with new supervisors and provide them with applications for membership.

NAPS being there at the start of the training is critical because this new supervisor training program actually promotes candidates to EAS at the start of the program. This means that individuals can become NAPS members on day one! If we do not make contact with prospective candidates/members while they are in their classroom setting, canvassing new supervisors in the field will be more difficult and will not get the same results.

Local branch officers should start to prepare for the training session by having a supply of Form 1187. At the same time, recruiters should provide the new members with a copy of Form 1188 so that they can terminate their affiliation with craft unions and save the difference between our dues and their former craft dues.

NAPS headquarters can provide local branches with brochures and handouts upon request to help the new members familiarize themselves with our organization and to take advantage of programs that we will be offering for supplemental insurance, etc.

Local branch officers should provide their contact information to provide to the new members and make every attempt to have them attend a NAPS meeting in their local branch. Local branches can order NAPS lapel pins to be presented to new members at the time that they sign up and submit their applications for membership.

There is a special incentive for signing up new members during the first quarter of 2013 (January 1 – through March 31). NAPS will be offering a special incentive for new member recruitment. During this period, NAPS HQ will be providing $25.00 NAPS gift cards to both the recruiter and the new member. This means that both the recruiter listed on Form 1187 andthe new member will each receive a NAPS gift card.

Many NAPS members have been mentoring craft employees who have been serving as 204-B’s. Help these individuals to get through the screening and application process. Identify other employees who you think would become good supervisors and encourage them to apply for the program also.

NAPS headquarters wants to ensure the success of the new training program and support your efforts to sign up new members. Let’s work together to get this program off the ground and to increase the membership of NAPS and get the vacancies that we have in the field filled with qualified candidates.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NAPS FY 2012 PES Guidance

see restructure info section for help with your PES

As a result of the Fact Finding decision that directed NAPS and the USPS to meet to discuss the current SWC program, NAPS entered into consultations on a review of the current SWC evaluation system and made recommendations for changes in the current SWC evaluation system.

NAPS established a work team consisting of board members, Jay Killackey, Tommy Roma, Larry Ewing and Jimmy Warden who worked with Louis Atkins and Brian Wagner in the development and presentation of NAPS’ proposals to the Postal Service.

As a result of several consultative meetings with the Postal Service, the following changes will be implemented in the SWC process effective immediately:

Revision #1: RMPO to APO - Mapping Employee Credits

Bargaining Unit employees located in Remotely Managed Post Offices (RMPO’s) will be credited using the same factors as currently used in the SWC. Mapping will follow the same business rules used for finance unit mapping. If the Administrative Post Office (APO) has stations other than the Main Post Office, the Installation Head will determine mapping (either the main office or the station responsible for managing them).

Following existing business rules applicable to current SWC calculations provides a clear and understandable

format without adding unnecessary complexity to the existing model.

NAPS Note: This proposal was made by NAPS to address the management changes that will take place with Remotely Managed Post Offices and the responsibilities that will be required for Administrative Post Offices.

Revision #2: SWC Zone of Tolerance Period

A Zone of Tolerance will be established for loss of encumbered staffing to provide the losing office an opportunity to adjust craft complement and/or acclimate to reduced supervisor staffing. The twelve month Zone of Tolerance period will only apply to the lower side of SWC ranges and for encumbered positions only. The percentage for the Zone of Tolerance is 15%. This is how the 15% zone of tolerance is applied:

When a Customer Service office evaluation result in the new SWC calculation reducing the new authorized EAS complement to a point that is below the current threshold, where a supervisory position would be eliminated, then the newly established zone of tolerance of 15% is applied. There are 40 points that separate each step (increment) of the chart that assigns an additional supervisor to a Customer Service operation.

Should a reduction of craft employees cause the office to go below the threshold for a supervisor there will be a zone of tolerance (15%). As long as the Customer Service office does not go more than 6 points below an established EAS threshold then the current supervisor staffing may remain in place for a one-year period and thereafter the supervisor position will be eliminated based on the new SWC data.

All SWC’s changes resulting in increases to staffing will be processed immediatelyfollowing current business rules. A standardized approach with well-defined business rules (keeping the supervisor in place for one additional year) will provide impacted offices and supervisory staff the time necessary to explore opportunities and adjust accordingly.

NAPS Note: This proposal was made by NAPS to address the situation where an office falls slightly below the threshold for a supervisory position. This zone of tolerance will assist in transitioning an office to a lower EAS staffing level necessitated by craft staffing changes.

Revision #3: Changing Credit for Custodians

An increase will be made in the custodian workload factor raising the factor from .50 to .75. All other business rules specific to maintenance/ custodial staffing credits remain unchanged. A 50 percent credit increase brings this employee group in line with current SWC business rules.

NAPS Note: NAPS requested an upgrade in the credit for custodial/maintenance employees due to the increased maintenance requirements and oversight that is required by local management.

Revision #4 Eliminate Work Hour Requirement for Getting Full Credit for Window Titled Clerk

All work hour requirements currently in place for earning the 1.33 window credit for employees will be eliminated. Current business rules provide additional credit only where work hour thresholds are exceeded.

Changes will provide the 1.33 credit to all clerks with window duties as part of their position description (currently 18 positions). The 1.33 credit will be applied regardless of the location of the employee or the hours worked. These changes will streamline the SWC process providing clear and concise application of credits. Clerks without window credits will continue to be credited at 1.00 points.

NAPS Note: NAPS believed that the responsibility for management oversight of window credits should not have the work hour threshold of a 20 hour minimum. Management consented to our request to eliminate the 20 hour requirement.

Revision #5: Provide Exception Credit for Multi-Station Cities / Installations

An exception credit formula will be applied to multi-station cities to provide additional SCS staffing based on the number of earned SCS positions within installations. An additional SCS position will be authorized at the Lead Finance Level for every 35 currently earned SCS positions.

This position will be used at the discretion of the Installation Head but it is expected that leave replacement will be primary. With the establishment of this staffing coupled with the Lead Clerk positions, higher level use should be reduced.

NAPS Note: NAPS recommended the development of a formula to provide additional EAS assistance in certain geographic areas to provide coverage and reduce the need for utilizing 204-B’. NAPS will work with local management in implementing this provision.

All other provisions of the SWC that are not changed by these revisions will remain in effect.

The Postal Service will be providing briefings to the field to implement the changes in the automated SWC program that is utilized to determine EAS staffing in Customer Service operations. As these changes are implemented, we will need to be vigilant to ensure that SWC calculations that are presented to NAPS in the field are inclusive of these revisions.

If any issues are identified in the implementation of the changes and new provisions outlined above, they should be channeled to NAPS HQ through our NAPS Area Vice Presidents.

11/07/12

NAPS Headquarters has been informed by USPS Labor Relations that Delivery and Post Office Operations have decided that Delivery Unit Optimization implementations and Post Office closures will be suspended temporarily starting Monday, November 19 and continuing through Friday, January 4, 2013.

POStPlan activities will be suspended during Thanksgiving week, Saturday, November 17 through Sunday, November 25. No community meetings will be scheduled for that week and there will be no implementation activities. POStPlan activities will be suspended during the peak Christmas season, starting Saturday, December 8 and continuing through January 6, 2013.

NAPS inquired to the Postal Service to see whether or not employees earned additional annual leave due to the fact that there were 27 Pay Periods in 2011: The Postal Service had the below response to our inquiry:

The Postal Service's leave year calendar is different than the leave calendar used by the federal government. The Postal Service's leave year is defined as: The leave year is the year beginning with the first day of the first complete pay period in a calendar year and ending on the day before the first day of the first complete pay period in the following calendar year. The number of days in leave year 2012 is 364 days, which is 26 pay periods. The number of days in leave year 2011 was 378 days, which was 27 pay periods. In 2011, employees may have earned additional annual and sick leave due to the additional pay period.

The 2011 leave year begins January 1, 2011 (Pay Period 02-11) and ends January 13, 2012 (Pay Period 02-12) for a total of 27 pay periods. Therefore, employees may earn one additional pay period’s worth of annual leave during the 2011 leave year as compared to the typical 26 pay period leave year. For a full-time employee, the extra pay period amount will be 4, 6, or 8 hours, depending on the employee’s leave earning category; the pay period amount is prorated for part-time employees.

Although employees may earn one additional pay period’s worth of annual leave during leave year 2011, the annual leave carryover maximums will not increase for leave year 2011. Employees must use any annual leave in excess of the standard carryover limit that applies to them by the end of leave year 2011 (January 13, 2012) or they will forfeit the hours of annual leave that are in excess of their carryover limit.

Employees may also earn an additional increment of sick leave during leave year 2011. For a full-time employee, the extra pay period amount will be 4 hours; the pay period amount is prorated for part-time employees. However, there is no carryover limit for sick leave.

Definition: The leave year is the year beginning with the first day of the first complete pay period in a calendar year and ending on the day before the first day of the first complete pay period in the following calendar year.

September 19, 2012 at 9AM

The final decision from the Postal Service from the Fact Finding was issued last Friday. I will not attempt to regurgitate the agreement in this letter. What I do want to say is that, speaking for myself, I am just as disappointed and demoralized as you are about the outcome of Fact Finding.

I share all the same feelings as you do as I don’t think we got a fair deal either! Based on Title 39, once the recommendations are made by the Fact Finding panel is submitted and the USPS makes their final decision, our Title 39 rights have been met and completed.

We have been working on NAPS’ case since last summer when we opened up pay talks. We complied with every provision of Title 39, from the inception of pay consultations right through to the first hearing ever held in 42 years of the law. So, who’s to blame? Who is going to be held accountable? Certainly blame has to be affixed because we didn’t get what we deserved!

So, let’s look back at how this started, not all the way back to 2006 when the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act was enacted into law requiring the USPS to prefund retiree health benefits. Although that is where this all started, let’s just go back to the spring of 2011.

I want to start in the spring of 2011 because that’s when the APWU contract was settled. As we all know, the clerks got a 3.5% pay increase with no increases until 2013. Their COLA was also deferred. After this landmark agreement that gave clerks an average of a point .7% increase over five years, the USPS was raked over the coals by the Congress for agreeing to the deal with the APWU.

Never mind that the USPS got a two-tiered pay system and a lot of other cost savings with the agreement, in the eyes of the Congress the USPS should have paid anything. After the hearings that were held in the Congress about the 3.5% that the USPS “handed” the clerks over five years, it was pretty easy to see the handwriting on the wall that the USPS wasn’t going to easily fork over any increases to other employee groups.

As you may know, last year the NALC, the Mailhandlers and the Rural Carriers all went into pay negotiations and they are all in interest arbitration with no end in sight. The USPS may be forced by an arbitrator to give money to these unions, but if the unions succeed it won’t be because the USPS buckled-under
.
Now, this is the point where some of our members say, why can’t we have arbitration? We cannot have a “contract” because we are managers. Did you know that the USPS is the only government agency that negotiates (craft) or consults (managers) with their employees on pay and benefits?

The rest of the government gets their pay and benefits from the president and the Congress. The president has frozen federal pay for the past two years (and may do it again for another year) and the Congress is looking to slash benefits of federal employees too!

With everything this is and is not happening on Capitol Hill, the USPS was not about to take another pounding from the Congress by agreeing to give NAPS members a pay increase.

Now, in the middle of 2011, NAPS, NAPUS and the League were next at the table to work out a pay agreement. In preparation for our pay talks, we got input from our both executive board and members from throughout the country. After we developed all of our internal information, we hired a nationally known consulting firm to evaluate our pay versus the private sector and to prepare a comprehensive study to show the comparisons.

We had our consultants work out all the numbers taking data from comparative private sector companies that included UPS and FEDEX in the grouping. The consultants helped the resident officers develop a proposal to institute locality pay for EAS employees.

The 2010 data found that in two out of our five USPS areas our members were paid slightly higher than supervisors they were measured against and that the three other areas, our members were behind their counterparts in the private sector. Since we did not get an increase in salary in 2011, no all five areas were below their counterparts in the study group.

All of the proposals that NAPS placed forward were denied by the Postal Service. We extended the discussions in an attempt to get something out of the pay talks. After that failed, we invoked Fact Finding.

Once the Fact Finding schedule was set, we got together with our attorney, our consultants and others to prepare our case presentation. We then met with the Fact Finders and sat across the table from the Postal Service’s group of attorneys who were also armed with data that presented their position on the Postal Service’s huge deficit. After all our work in developing and presenting our facts, I believed that there was nothing more that we could have added to either our presentation or our documents to make our case more convincing.

I would like to specifically address those members who have made the point that we have touted the fact that we have a good working relationship with USPS Headquarters and that instead of presenting a comprehensive case with data that we should have just gone into the Fact Finding swinging a baseball bat. We concluded that facts would be considered more effective than bluster.
Unlike suing a car company or a pharmaceutical company where you as the plaintiff will never have to deal with that company again after the suit is settled in court, the resident officers still have to deal with our counterparts at USPS headquarters long after the Fact Finding is concluded.

With this stated, do you think that the Fact Finding panel would have made a different decision had we yelled, threatened and screamed throughout the hearing? Would banging on the tables or walking out in the middle of the USPS’s presentation made the Fact Finders give us a different outcome?

We presented our facts, along with a significant amount of valid data and the Fact Finders made a decision that was not in our favor.
A great majority of our members wanted us to go to Fact Finding. We have never gone that far before and we knew that the likelihood of a favorable outcome was a long-shot. But, we did everything we could to present our position for all of the members of this organization. We were the ONLY management association to exercise our rights under Title 39 to go to Fact Finding.

Did the fact that we were the only management association to invoke Fact Finding hurt us? Should the fact that NAPUS and the League did not go to Fact Finding make NAPS determine not to go forward? I can’t answer either of these questions. Can you?

What would our members said about the resident officers if we decided NOT to go to Fact Finding because NAPUS and the League didn’t? I can answer this question – we never would have decided NOT TO GO to Fact Finding.

I believe that going to Fact Finding was the right thing to do, and if the decision had to be made again, if it were my decision alone to make, we would be right there again. Why? Because that’s what our members wanted us to do – to take our case all the way! And that is exactly what we did.

Now that Fact Finding is concluded, what other steps do we have? Should we bring our case for compensation to the Congress? Do you think that Darrell Issa would give us a hearing for us to plead our case? Issa wants to eliminate another 150,000+ employees.

How about going to court and suing the Postal Service for 2011? Our pay agreement ended on September 30, 2010. After that date there was no pay agreement even though we continued to apply the rules of the Pay for Performance Program. We have had our attorney review the laws to determine our chances of success in filing suit for our members to get compensated for 2011 but there is little legal chance that a court would even hear the case, let alone rule favorably on the appeal.

In the last several pay agreements we have had, due to the fact that we don’t go into pay talks until after the major union (APWU) our prior pay agreements have lapsed but they were resolved before there were any payouts from the prior agreements. This time it didn’t happen and there was no pay.

These are the facts. So, what’s next?

This week we are starting the work of identifying EAS vacancies to get jobs posted and filled. As a result of our legislative success in stopping the USPS from closing 256 processing facilities and thousands of retail offices, there is now not the same need to have “landing spots” for impacted EAS employees. We hope to start by filling as many as 2,500 EAS vacancies in the coming months.

This week we will be submitting two proposals, the first is a comprehensive proposal to change the SWC program to provide better coverage in customer services facilities. We need to fill current vacancies and have the USPS adopt the recommendations that we are presenting to provide the necessary management control in post offices, stations and branches.

After visiting several Network Distribution Centers in two areas, we have completed our reviews and are ready to submit a proposal to improve the EAS staffing levels at our Network Distribution Centers across the country.

Since the USPS (not NAPS) has decided to continue to use elements of Pay for Performance, NAPS will be working to make sure the new program is more transparent and that rules are developed to keep a repeat of 2009 from happening again. It is expected that Core goals, the most contentious part of the old PFP system, are being eliminated and that there will be reliance on the Corporate and Unit scores to develop pay outcomes.

Based on the language of the final decision by the USPS, as long as the President of the United States does not freeze federal pay for 2013 we expect that we will be starting a new PFP process in less than four months.

For the few of you who are upset and contemplating submitting 1188’s to get out of NAPS, that’s your decision and yours alone to make. I don’t think it is NAPS leadership’s fault that Fact Finding didn’t rule in our favor. We did everything in our power to present our facts. So, if you want to blame the resident officers, go ahead. If you want to blame the Congress, the PMG, the Fact Finders or anyone for that matter – go ahead.

All I know is that we work hard for our members every day. We played a critical role in stopping the post office from totally eliminating overnight service and closing 256 processing facilities. Instead of people being RIF’s we will be pushing to get the landing spots filled.

Who’s preparing proposals for a new SWC and who’s trying to fix the NDC staffing and try to make the next pay system we get to work better than the last one. NAPS is!

Remember, NAPS isn’t just the resident officers, NAPS is ALL OF US. If NAPS wasn’t there, who would be?

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

Jay Killackey
Executive Vice President

On June 29, 2012, the United States Postal Service rendered their final decision following NAPS invoking the Fact Finding provisions of Title 39. At the conclusion of these proceedings, our members were provided with NAPS pre-hearing brief that was filed before the Fact Finding panel during the period of June 4-6, 2012. The brief was also published in the current, July 2012 edition of our publication The Postal Supervisor.

Our positions on pay and benefits were presented by our Resident Officers, our legal counsel and consultants during the hearings. We believe that our positions on the issues were sound, valid and truly considered the current financial position of the Postal Service while presenting the need to increase compensation and maintain benefit levels for our members.

We continued our objections through Fact Finding on the Pay for Performance Program mandated by our members through resolutions at the 2010 National Convention. The Postal Service has determined that they will continue with a Pay for Performance program beginning in 2012 unless there is a continued freeze in federal pay as announced by the President of the United States.

The Performance Evaluation System (PES) that was used to evaluate and score PFP ratings, due to the objections of NAPS, has been eliminated and the Postal Service has requested that NAPS enter into consultations to replace the PES system.

Bereavement Leave, which was available to EAS employees under the provisions of the prior pay agreement, will be restored and the future governance of this leave type will be provided in the Employee and Labor Relations Manual.

The Postal Service has determined that their percentage of employer contributions to the Federal Employee Health Benefits Plan will be reduced by 3% per year for the next three years to bring the contributions of the Postal Service more in line with other federal agencies.

There will be changes in the accrual of Annual Leave and Sick Leave for newly hired EAS employees who enter the Postal Service on or After October 1, 2012. No current EAS employees or craft employees who are promoted to EAS positions and are on the rolls prior to October 1, 2012 will be affected by this leave accrual change.

The Postal Service has agreed to work with NAPS to identify and fill vacant EAS Positions. We are expecting that at least 2,500 current EAS vacancies will be identified and posted for application once the positions are identified, review and approved for posting.

The Postal Service has agreed to work with NAPS in the Consultative process to review NAPS’ proposals for a new SWC process to better staff Customer Service operations. NAPS has been developing new proposals for SWC and will be presenting the proposals to the Postal Service the week of July 2, 2012.

The Postal Service has agreed to a request from NAPS to apply existing criteria to determine the correct EAS grade level for the following positions:

• Supervisor, Maintenance Operations;

• Supervisor, Maintenance;

• Supervisor of Transportation;

• Managers of Transportation;

• Mail Flow Coordinator;

• Supervisor, Vehicle Maintenance;

• Manager, Vehicle Maintenance;

• Operations Support Specialist;

The Resident Officers will be reviewing the decisions more thoroughly in the next several days and will provide additional comments on this decision. We were disappointed that the Postal Service did not see fit to provide our members with some guarantees of salary increases similar to the levels of increases that were granted to the APWU in 2011.

The Postal Service’s response to our concerns during pay talks was that the agreement reached with the APWU placed a two-tier pay system in place with newly hired employees represented by the APWU receiving significantly lower pay and benefits than current APWU represented employees. Also, APWU represented employees are currently experiencing the same pay freezes that are being applied to EAS Employees.

The Resident Officers will now proceed to achieve some of the positive outcomes that were derived from the pay talks, including: The filling of EAS vacancies, an improved SWC process for Customer Service and staffing changes for EAS positions in our NDC network. We will also seek to expedite the evaluations of the positions identified above to ensure that these positions are properly graded.

The expired pay agreement ended on 9/30/2010. Payouts from the last pay agreement were issued to eligible employees in January, 2011. According to statute, pay consultations between NAPS and the Postal Service commenced within the 45 day period following the ratification of a contract with the largest union (APWU). During FY 2011 we were working without benefit of a pay agreement, again by statute.

In essence, we had no pay agreement for FY 2011 until such time a new pay agreement was reached. We did not reach an agreement and the USPS issued their proposal that you all saw last week.To remind you also, at the 2010 national convention a resolution was passed that directed NAPS HQ to reject any continuation of Pay for Performsnce in our pay consultations. As a result, our proposals for changes in pay during pay consultations did not include a continuation of the PFP program. NAPS objected to the lack of fairness of Core Goals. Asnyou msy have seen, the USPS proposal eliminsted Core Goals.

Once the USPS issued their final proposal, that left us with two options; either to accept their proposal or exercise our rights to request the implementation of Fact Finding. Our request for Fact Finding was submitted today (11-14-11). A formal announcement of this action should be issued tomorrow once a receipt of service is received.

 Jay K.

Clarifying retirement incentives

The pension inducement is an alternative to the cash payments. CSRS retires would see their benefit increase by 2%. FERS retirees would see their benefit increase by 2% for those under 62 and or 2.2% for retirees 62 or older. The pension inducement provides the Postal Service with a lower cost incentive than cash payments currently in the law.]

It is unlikely that the Postal Service expects or would want 68,000 employees to retire early in one round of incentives. Instead, the incentives are likely to be proposed either:

• in two rounds nationally over the next five years or
• on a regional or local basis as the Postal Service’s need for employees providing retail, processing, and delivery services declines as it makes changes in its retail, processing and delivery networks.

The leadership of the National Association of Postal Supervisors (NAPS) has agreed to join forces with the four postal unions representing employees of the Postal Service to designate September 27, 2011 as a day of action to Save America’s Postal Service.

Together, NAPS, the American Postal Workers Union, the National Association of Letter Carriers, the National Postal Mail Handlers Union and the National Rural Letter Carriers Association will rally in every congressional district in the country to concentrate our efforts to build support for HR 1351, a bill introduced in the House by Representative Stephen Lynch (D-MA).

“NAPS members must take decisive action to let their member of Congress know that the Postal Service, an agency who serves every constituent in their respective districts needs relief that can only be assured through the passage of HR 1351. This is the time to join with all other employee groups to get this message to our members of Congress”, said NAPS President, Louis Atkins.

Atkins added; “This is an ideal opportunity for postal employees from a variety of positions to join forces in a common effort to save the Postal Service as we know it today”.

Passage of HR 1351, would prevent the financial collapse of the USPS — without closing thousands of post offices, eliminating hundreds of mail processing facilities, delaying mail delivery, laying off 120,000 workers, cutting postal workers’ pay, or ending collective bargaining rights. It would allow the Postal Service to apply billions of dollars in pension overpayments to the congressional mandate that requires the USPS to pre-fund the healthcare benefits of future retirees.

No other government agency or private company bears this burden, which forces the Postal Service to fund a 75-year liability in 10 years — at a cost of more than $5 billion annually. Without the mandate, the USPS would have shown a surplus of $611 million over the past four fiscal years.

Unfortunately, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has another idea. Word on Capitol Hill is that Chairman Issa is blocking consideration of HR 1351.

Instead of working with the Postal Service and its’ employees, Rep. Issa has introduced his own bill that would destroy the Postal Service as we know it. His bill (HR 2309) would do nothing to correct the cause of the USPS financial crisis: It would do nothing about the pension overpayments or the pre-funding requirement.

Issa’s bill would establish a new bureaucracy called the “solvency authority” with the power to unilaterally cut wages, abolish benefits, and end protection against layoffs. Issa’s bill would also create a board that would order $1 billion worth of post office closures in the first year and $1 billion worth of facility closures in the second year. If HR 2309 is enacted, thousands of offices throughout the country would be closed.

At the same time, the Postal Service is proposing legislative changes that would authorize management to lay off 120,000 workers and that would remove postal employees from the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program and from federal retirement plans.
At the rallies on Sept. 27, postal employees will be asking legislators to co-sponsor and support the passage of HR 1351, the bill that would restore financial stability to the Postal Service.

The legislation already has 193 co-sponsors, including both Democrats and Republicans. Where lawmakers have already signed on, the rallies will thank them for their support and ask them to pledge to do everything in their power to ensure its passage.
Each employee group will work together at the national level to identify responsibilities for specific congressional districts, and locals have already begun designating District Leads for various locations. The District Leads will secure permits (where necessary), contact the media, and make other arrangements.

The postal employee groups have developed a common Web site to provide information about the rallies, which will be held from 4-5:30 p.m. A complete list of rally locations will be posted on the site by Sept. 16, and the site will be updated frequently in the lead-up to the march.

Visit saveamericaspostalservice.org for the latest news about the Sept. 27 rallies.

USPS/NAPS/NAPUS/League

Meeting – USPS Headquarters

February 23, 2011

Participants:

Louis Atkins, President NAPS                                      Megan Brennan Chief Operating Officer

Jay Killackey, Executive Vice President, NAPS     Dean Granholm, VP, Delivery/Post Office Operations

Brian Wagner, Secretary/Treasurer, NAPS            John Cavallo, Mgr, Labor Relations, Policy Admin

Bob Rapoza, President, NAPUS

Charlie Moser, Admin Coordinator, NAPUS

Mark Strong, President, League of Postmasters

The meeting was scheduled to discuss a variety of issues:

Implementation of DUO and Post Office Closures:

The management associations advised the Postal Service that the guidelines that were established and agreed upon between the USPS and the management associations were not being adhered to in the field. The various steps that are outlined in the timelines are not being followed and the financial data used in decision analysis to make decisions on consolidations is not being shared with the management associations.

Both Ms. Brennan and Mr. Granholm responded that it was not acceptable for the field not to be following the prescribed guidelines and that financial data must be provided to local management association representatives for the association’s review.

USPS Headquarters recently met with the USPS Area VP’s relative to the movement forward of the DUO and Post Office process and this resulted in an apparent acceleration of the process in the field. The movement forward notwithstanding does not preclude the field from complying with the checklists.

The management organizations were advised to work with the specific Area office where there are failures in complying with the timeline. If the contact with the Area by the management associations does not result in a resolve, then the information needs to be brought to Dean Granholm at USPS HQ.

Area Meetings between USPS Area Vice Presidents and Management Association Leadership

 The management associations briefed Ms. Brennan on the fact that while a majority of the USPS Area Vice Presidents have been diligent in maintaining a relationship with field representatives of the management associations, that this was not the case with the Western Area.

Ms. Brennan stressed the importance of regular meetings in the field between USPS Area Vice Presidents and field representatives of the management organizations and advised the management organization representatives at the meeting that she would reinforce this requirement with her direct reports (USPS Area VP’s).

As a further indication of the importance of regular meetings between the management association and leadership of the Postal Service, Ms. Brennan committed that she would schedule monthly meetings with the management associations at the national level to discuss any topics that are of concern to the associations. This scheduled meeting is in addition to monthly meetings between the Postmaster General and the management associations.

Re-Delivery of Mail in the Field

The management associations brought up the point that Postmaster General Donahoe earlier this year made a statement about the continued practice of sending employees and management personnel back out to the street to deliver late arriving and missent mail.

When this practice was brought to the PMG’s attention, Mr. Donahoe stated that he did not want to see this happening in the field and that they would be advised. While we do not doubt that the word went out, it appears that not everyone in the field has decided to cease this practice.

The management organizations were instructed by Ms. Brennan to send to her the name of the District where the re-delivery of mail was still occurring and she would ensure that the practice was eliminated.

Work Service Credit Implementation

The management associations brought out a concern that Station Managers who were having their positions eliminated in compliance with ELM provisions and WSC determinations were only getting as little as 48 hours to make a decision on another assignment to choose for work.

·         Columbus, GA Customer Service Mail Processing Center Originating Mail Consolidation (NO-AR-11-005). A favorable business case existed to support consolidating the Columbus, GA Customer Service Mail Processing Center originating mail operation into the Macon, GA Processing and Distribution Center. Our analysis showed adequate space existed to support the consolidation, customer service scores were maintained, limited numbers of employees were impacted, and efficiency improved.

·         Facility Optimization: Eastern Area (DA-AR-11-002). This report presents the results of our audit of facility optimization in the Eastern Area (Project Number 10YG030DA000). The U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General (OIG) initiated this audit from a random sample of districts nationwide. For the Eastern Area, our objective was to identify opportunities to optimize existing real estate in the Appalachian, Western Pennsylvania, and Western New York districts.

ELM 415 Meeting

USPS Headquarters

February 11, 2010

The three management association requested a meeting with the USPS HQ Compensation Unit to initiate discussions under our Consultative Rights as outlined in Title 39.

Attendees:

Robert Rapoza, President NAPUS                                                             John Cavallo, Labor Relations, USPS

Mark Strong, President League of Postmasters                                  Kathy Lowry, USPS HQ Compensation

Jay Killackey, Executive Vice President, NAPS

John Cavallo opened the meeting advising us that this meeting was set-up to discuss the overall proposal for changes in ELM 415 that was provided to the management associations in a letter dated January 27, 2011. John stated that he was aware that there were discussions ongoing relative to the impact of ELM 415 changes on the Delivery Unit Optimization (DUO) process and that the discussion on that matter are outside of the scope of this meeting.

Questions from the management organizations:

Why was this change proposed?

                USPS Response:

The Postal Service determined to propose the implementation of this change to balance the interests of employees impacted by organizational changes as well as to address the current financial challenges of the Postal Service. In many other occupations there are no provisions for keeping one’s salary level if their job is eliminated and an employee takes a position that is in a lower pay scale.

What is the expected savings that this proposal would achieve?

USPS Response:

At the present time that information is not available but the USPS will research it and provide the information.

There is a provision in ELM 415 that makes a reference to a “reasonable assignment”. (See section f. below). The management associations want to have that term defined.

415.41 Reason for Terminating

A saved grade and/or retained rate ceases at the beginning of the pay period following a determination that the employee is no longer entitled to saved grade and/or rate retention for any one of the following reasons:

a.     A break in service of 1 workday or more.

b.    A demotion or employee–initiated change to a lower grade position.

c.     A promotion or assignment change to a rate in a grade or range equal to or above the saved grade and/or retained rate.

d.    A change in compensation of the employee, for any reason, to a rate equal to or higher than the retained rate.

e.     The employee refuses a reasonable assignment to a higher grade position.

f.     A change from nonbargaining unit to a bargaining unit schedule.

Note: This terminates nonbargaining unit saved grade and/or saved salary; however, an eligible employee may continue to receive rate retention subject to bargaining unit rules.

                USPS Response:

The representatives at this meeting can only respond to compensation issues and the definition of this term will have to be provided from another office at USPS HQ. Cavallo responded that he would get this information. 

Does the Postal Service consider that the proposed changes for ELM 415 should be an item that should only be discussed during pay talks?

                USPS Response:

The Postal Service does not believe that changes in the ELM are such that they can only be changed during pay consultations. In fact, the 2004 memorandum by Postmaster General Potter which changed the rules that are in effect today were done outside of pay consultations. 

General comments by the management associations:

 NAPS: Our organization is currently reviewing the proposal and will be developing several alternatives to the proposal that was offered by the Postal Service. It is NAPS’ opinion that individuals who seek higher level positions of more authority have to have some sense that the Postal Service will not just unilaterally eliminate the position and take a significant amount of money from their salaries.

As an example, several years ago the USPS established the position of Route Examiner Team Leader positions in each of the Districts at an EAS-22 level. These positions were deemed to be critical to the initiative of evaluating carrier routes.

The positions did their job and significant savings were realized. Then, some Districts added other responsibilities to the position taking their attention away from why the position was first established. Then, the Postal Service determined that the positions were no longer necessary.

Those individuals who stepped up to the plate and did the job then were left with no other options than to take positions, sometimes at a lower level, to secure a job. These individuals had some protection with indefinite saved salary.

Without saved salary, individuals may be less likely to compete for critical positions at higher level as the positions could be eliminated and the individual would be left with a significant financial impact

NAPS will be providing a number of alternatives to mitigate the impact to its members. 

NAPUS and League comments:

Our organizations want to reiterate that the Postal service’s position is that this is not an item that should be discussed during pay talks.

They also added their concerns to individuals seeking higher level positions only later to have these jobs eliminated and suffer significant reductions in pay. The postmaster associations advised that they would also be preparing alternative solutions for the ELM 415 proposal.

USPS comments:

In compliance with the rights of the associations under Title 39, the notification that was written on January 27, 2011 starts the consultative period. During the consultative period we welcome the recommendations and feedback of the associations. The USPS will provide full and fair review of all proposals that are submitted by the associations and provide responses to all proposals prior to making a final decision and implementing any changes that will ultimately be made in ELM 415.

Your NAPS resident officers attending a briefing today relative to changes in the management of Injury Compensation programs that will have far reaching effects on a national, area and local level. As you may have been aware, positions in this field have been frozen while a review was undertaken.

There are currently 32,494 USPS employees on either rehabilitation or limited-duty assignments. An unknown number of employees currently on light duty (estimated to be 15,000). The total cost to the USPS from these groups is in excess of $6 billion dollars. 

The consolidation of Injury Compensation programs pilot will be abandoned and oversight of the new program will come under a National Health and Resource Management Program managed from USPS Headquarters.

Attached you will find a new Headquarters matrix that was provided to NAPS and a second attachment providing an initial snapshot of the District structure, which we also discussed. At the Area level, the EAS 25 position will manage the function and the EAS-21’s will require extensive travel to initiate and complete project work and to implement new processes as they are developed.  

The plans at the present are still under review and the positions and levels will be established by USPS Headquarters. The planned timeline calls for these changes to be implemented by the end of 2007 but are still subject to approvals of positions and levels.

You will get questions about the levels for the District positions, (Manager and specialists) but they have not yet been established. NAPS will be provided additional information when it becomes available and you will receive this information as soon as it becomes available.

NAPS Headquarters

Attachments: Headquarters Matrix

                     District Structure 

Your NAPS resident officers attending a briefing today at Postal Service Headquarters relative to the rumored elimination of the Route

Examination  Team Leader positions throughout the country. The Postal Service advised NAPS that they completed a review of the

Route Examination Team Leader positions, which total 164 positions across the country, and determined that these positions were

no longer necessary.

It was stated that the intended objectives of the positions, when they were first established, was not achieved as there were wide variations

in route examination results and that the overall results of route examinations did not achieve the desired results.

The current plans call for a single position of Route Examination, Team Leader to remain in place in the 29 sites that are in phase

one of the FSS deployments to assist in route changes that are expected to occur as a result of Flat Sequencing. In the Districts

with FSS phase one implementation, also having multiple Team leader positions; we were advised that the senior position will

be maintained. 

Out of the total of 164 positions, minus the 29 shown above, it is expected that 135 incumbent position holders will be subject to

RIF avoidance procedures. The Postal Service is now drawing up plans to make all vacancies currently available at the District

and within local commuting distance available for impacted employees through limited competition. Positions will be held in each

District for impacted position holders.

Impacted individuals will have the opportunity to elect a VERA, apply for vacancies and will have the benefit of saved grade for

two years should they opt for a lower level position. The Postal Service is currently preparing the documentation to move forward

with this plan and expects to have the process completed by November, 2007.

We will provide you with further information as soon as it becomes available.

NAPS Headquarters