Postal Employees Rights During Surprise Investigations By USPS OIG
Filed under: APWU, oig, postal, postal inspectors, weingarten rights
GREG BELL, APWU DIRECTOR, INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
Visits by Postal Inspectors Or OIG Agents- which are usually unannounced – often catch employees by surprise, and sometimes cause them to panic. Our stewards, officers and arbitration advocates are doing an excellent job of defending union members, but this article should remind employees of their rights. After all, when you exercise your rights to the fullest, you help protect yourself the most. And unfortunately, postal inspectors and OIG agents have persisted in conducting overly zealous investigations that have resulted in employees being wrongly accused and issued notices of removals.
?Investigations by postal inspectors or OIG agents usually concern alleged employee misconduct in the workplace, but they also may relate to alleged violations of the law that could result in criminal charges. Whenever inspectors or OIG agents seek to interrogate an employee, the matter should be treated very seriously: Employees should always assert their right to assistance from a union representative. It is also important that employees be alerted not to give oral or written statements to OIG agents or inspectors unless they first have obtained advice from their steward and/or their attorney.
Before submitting to questions, employees should confer with a union representative, and ask inspectors the nature of the investigation. If the investigation potentially relates to a criminal offense, the steward should advise the employee to immediately inform the postal inspectors or Inspector General agents that he or she wishes to consult with an attorney before proceeding. Read more
USPS Increases Its Stations And Branches Closure List From 677 To 750
Updated list provided to the union this week includes Level 22 and below post offices
Initially the USPS review was limited to Post Offices at or above EAS Level 24..
The Postal Service states that the Initiative already began in May with the examination of the portion of the retail network consisting of stations and branches that report to Postmasters at or above the USPS Executive & Administrative Schedule level 24 pay grade.
From the Washington Post
The Postal Service will provide on Wednesday an updated list of facilities to be considered for possible closure, according to a letter sent Friday to the Postal Regulatory Commission. The list is sure to be scrutinized by impacted communities and lawmakers who have already criticized the Postal Service for its handling of the closure process. The list will identify the final collection of postal stations and branches to be considered for closure or consolidation. Earlier this summer, the Postal Service provided lawmakers with a list of 677 possible sites for closure. That number has since grown to 750 after further evaluation of eligible sites, according to Friday’s letter. Despite that high number, Postal officials privately suggest the final list will likely number around 200. Washington Post
Excerpt from letter(PDF) sent to Postal Regulatory Commision on Friday
The response to Question No. 15 is expected to be filed on Wednesday, September 2, 2009. That question requests certain data for each of the stations and branches that are candidates for discontinuance review as a part of the initiative under review in this docket. Originally estimated to be at least 3200, that number is expected to be approximately 3600.
As a related matter, the Postal Service is preparing to supplement USPS Library Reference N2009-1/4 on September 2nd. Originally filed on July 30th, that Library
Reference contains a list of 677 stations and branches that, as of July 28th, had been identified by the SBOC initial pre-screening process as candidates for further
discontinuance study. Further progress in pre-screening of additional facilities and corrections to the original list indicate an increase in that number to approximately 750.
The initiation of discontinuance studies in the field has led to numerous discontinuance feasibility determinations. Accordingly, it is expected that the September 2nd update to USPS Library Reference N2009-1/4 also will identify the subset of these approximately 750 stations and branches that, as of September 2nd, remain as candidates for discontinuance review. Subsequent updates if Library Reference N2009-1/4 will report further changes in facility status.
The narrowing of the scope to fewer than 750 stations and branches, as will be reflected in the September 2nd Library Reference N2009-1/4 update, motivates the
Postal Service to request the Commission’s reconsideration of its original request for all seven of the data elements enumerated in Question 15 for all of the approximately 3600 original candidate stations and branches. Accordingly, in a motion to be filed before September 2nd, the Postal Service will request permission to provide all of those data elements only for the stations and branches identified in the updated version of USPS Library Reference N2009-1/4, while providing only data elements (1) and (2) for the approximately 2900 stations and branches that will not be reflected in the update to that Library Reference.
NAPS: RIF Avoided – All Impacted EAS Postal Employees To Be Placed In Positions
The NAPS resident officers met on Friday, August 28, 2009 with Douglas A. Tulino, USPS Vice President, Labor Relations at 11:00 a.m. to discuss the final day of the restructuring prior to the implementation of the RIF on the remaining impacted EAS employees.
Due to the diligence of the members of the NAPS executive board, who worked closely with local Areas and Districts and the cooperation of USPS headquarters, we are able to announce today that remaining impacted employees are expected to be placed in positions thereby avoiding a RIF.
We will continue to monitor the remaining impacted EAS employees to ensure that they have been placed. If any member is aware of a situation where an EAS employee remains unplaced, please have that individual contact their respective NAPS area vice president.
We owe a debt of gratitude to all of our NAPS officers in the field for their efforts in working through this restructuring so that we have the conclusion that we achieved today. We will continue to work with the Postal Service to resolve remaining issues that have been caused by the restructuring.
source: National Association Of Postal Supervisors
Postal Worker's Removal For Disrespecting Supervisor Overturned By Appeals Court
Karla Malloy entered employment with the USPS on October 18, 1980. At the time of the events at issue she was in the position of data collection technician at the Seattle Bulk Mail Center. In November 2005 Ms. June D. Hamilton became Ms. Malloy’s immediate supervisor. Because Ms. Malloy and Ms. Hamilton usually worked on different shifts, they communicated primarily by email. The email evidence and other records before the Board show severe tensions and sharp exchanges, relating primarily to Ms. Malloy’s requests for medical and dental leave, but also concerning the quality or timeliness of Ms. Malloy’s work.
The record contains excerpts from Ms. Hamilton’s electronic work journal, emails, and notes. For example, on February 2, 2006 (Thursday) Ms. Malloy submitted leave slips requesting LWOP (leave-without-pay) for the following week, February 5 to February 9. Ms. Hamilton denied the request on February 6, 2006 (Monday) and charged Ms. Malloy with AWOL on each requested day.
The situation led to an Investigative Interview held on May 8, 2006. Ms. Malloy left the interview shortly after it began, citing stress. Another Investigative Interview was held on June 7, 2006.
On August 29, 2006 USPS issued Ms. Malloy a Notice of Proposed Removal, charging her with disrespectful communication to a supervisor and failure to follow instructions. The notice listed seven specifications for the charge of disrespectful communication, all of which are emails or notes sent by Ms. Malloy to Ms. Hamilton, including those quoted ante. The charge of failure to follow instructions listed two specifications, including an April 3, 2006 email from Ms. Malloy refusing to follow Ms. Hamilton’s instruction concerning PS Form 1767 (entitled “Report of Hazard, Unsafe Condition or Practice”).
In response to the proposed removal, Ms. Malloy and her union representative met with Plant Manager Mr. Vendetti, and then provided a twenty-nine-page written response to Mr. Vendetti. The written response states, in part, that Ms. Malloy has been under medical care and that she has supporting medical documentation. Mr. Vendetti issued a letter of removal, stating that upon careful consideration of all the evidence in the record, including the mitigating factors argued by Ms. Malloy, he decided to remove Ms. Malloy for the following reasons: “your behavior at our meeting and the tone and content of your written response to me further defines and delineates the very problem that forms the basis of your removal — that being lack of common courtesy and a blatant disrespect for others.” The letter mentions medical concerns:
Her removal from employment was effective on October 6, 2006.
Ms. Malloy appealed to the MSPB. She did not dispute that her communications to Ms. Hamilton contain inappropriate language, but argued at the hearing that mental impairment caused her to sometimes act inappropriately.
Thus the record shows that Ms. Malloy was seen by mental health professionals and physicians on multiple occasions from 2006 to 2007, before, during, and after her removal. The record shows many patient visit notes and medical opinions. The record also contains lay evidence that Ms. Malloy was perceived by colleagues as having mental impairment, including Mr. Merlino’s Investigative Interview notes shown ante, describing Ms. Malloy as “extremely hyper” and “not mentally well.”
The AJ found that Ms. Malloy’s written communications were disrespectful and unprofessional, and sustained the removal. The AJ’s opinion states that Ms. Malloy stated that “she was under stress, depressed, could not think straight, concentrate or perform simple tasks.” The AJ found “the appellant’s assertions in this regard not credible and unsupported by the record.” The AJ did not mention any of the medical documents, although she stated that she had “reviewed her submissions.”
The record before us does not show what consideration or argument may have been given to the medical evidence by the AJ, or on appeal to the full Board. The AJ stated only that the evidence was not submitted until the day of the hearing, and had been “reviewed.” Mental impairment is recognized as a mitigating factor, and even if this submission were tardy (the AJ did not so state) Douglas and other precedent counsel toleration of less than optimum responses by a petitioner who may be mentally impaired. (“We hold that it is patently unreasonable and fundamentally unfair to require or allow an incompetent to act as advocate in such a setting where even a sane attorney would be confronted with a difficult task.”).
Accordingly, we vacate the decision of the Board and remand for consideration of Ms. Malloy’s evidence of mental impairment, and reapplication of the Douglas factors in light of this evidence.
see Malloy vs USPS
Letter Carriers Union Mourns Kennedy Death
WASHINGTON – The National Association of Letter Carriers union today mourned the death of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-MA, who had championed many causes critical to letter carriers and all working men and women throughout his career.
The 300,000 members of our union, and indeed all postal employees, have lost a dedicated champion of workers’ rights,” said NALC President Fredric V. Rolando.
“Throughout his Senate career, Senator Kennedy was at the forefront in working with our union on many of the critical issues important not only to postal employees, but to the U.S. Postal Service itself,” Rolando said. “These included advancing budgetary legislation that facilitated an efficient, universal postal system to serve all Americans, and also ensuring that postal employees received wages, benefits and a workplace environment that they deserved.”
Rolando also praised Kennedy’s role in winning Hatch Act reforms that allowed all federal and postal employees a greater role in the nation’s political process.
Postal Retiree Not Happy About New Retirement Incentive
From PostalReporter Reader:
My name is Fredric ****. I was a data collection technician in Houston, Texas. I took the early out and retired on July 31, 2009. We were sent a memo(which I still possess) that the post office would not be offering early outs in the near future. The memo stated that they would lengthen the time needed to June 30st to be eligible to take the July 31st offer. Postmaster Potter also indicated before a congressional hearing that there wouldn’t be any incentives offered. Three weeks after retiring I find out that the memo and statement from the postmaster were all lies. I took them at their word and retired at the age of 49 with 26 years of service. I had to incur a 12% penalty (2%for every year under 55). I feel totally used and would like to know if I and the other recent retirees can dispute what is now happening. Thank you
Postmasters Request A "Me Too" On USPS Retirement Incentive
NAPUS Letter sent to Postmaster General Jack Potter
August 25, 2009
Honorable John E. Potter
Postmaster General, Chief Executive Officer
United States Postal Service
475 L’Enfant Plaza, SW Room 10022
Washington, DC 20260-0010
Re: Your Letter of August 25, 2009
Dear Jack:
Earlier today, I was advised that the U.S. Postal Service will extend to employees represented by the American Postal Workers Union and the National Postal Mail Handlers Union a $15,000 retirement incentive. The USPS projects that the offer will reduce operating costs by $500 million.
I urge you to make a similar offer to Postmasters. Equity demands that Postmasters be offered the same retirement incentive as the individuals whom they manage. In fact, at NAPUS’ May consultative with the USPS, I asked for such a Postmaster retirement incentive, but was advised by your representative that there were no funds available for my request. Apparently, funds are now available for clerks and mail handlers. Jack, NAPUS’ request must be revisited in light of to day’s news. Failure to provide Postmasters with a meaningful retirement incentive will further degrade Postmaster morale, and will confirm an incalculable level of disrespect.
At the same time, I am alarmed about the operational implications of the clerk and mail handler retirement incentive. Currently, postal operations are compromised by grave staffing inadequacies. These complement deficiencies yield late-arriving mail at destination Post Offices, and letter carrier scarcity that results in Postmasters performing after-hour delivery functions. Managers cannot safeguard quality customer service, while also filling processing, window and carrier vacancies. Among the situations that confront my members are: too many Postmasters work ten and twelve hour work days, six and seven days a week; and an increasing number are forced to violate the Fair Labor Standards Act. Consequently, the clerk/mail handler retirement incentives, as rolled-out, will intensify staffing problems – not increase operational efficiencies. Please recall the misguided reductions implemented by your predecessor, Marvin Runyon.
In sum, simple fairness requires that Postmasters be extended a financial retirement incentive, and the clerks and mail handler incentive may degrade postal service, rather than improve it.
Sincerely,
O Dale Goff, Jr.
National President
source: President Goff’s Request For Incentive Package, 8/26/09
NALC: No Retirement Incentives For City Or Rural Carriers
From the National Association of Letter Carriers (NALC)
The Postal Service has negotiated agreements with the American Postal Workers Union and the National Postal Mail Handlers Union to offer cash incentives of up to $15,000 to employees in the APWU and NPMHU’s crafts to accept a Voluntary Early Retirement offer between now and November 30, 2009. The agreements (here and here) were prompted by the large financial losses incurred by the Postal Service as a result of the steep decline in mail volume due to the recession, as well as the heavy cost of pre-funding retiree health benefits. The incentives are targeted to the crafts with complements in excess of needs. A moratorium on excessing in the two unions’ crafts will be imposed until October 9. The Postal Service has not offered to negotiate a similar program for city or rural letter carriers with the NALC or the NRLCA. At present, the complements of city and rural carriers remain more closely aligned with the Postal Service’s needs to cover last-mile delivery at current mail volume. The new early-out programs should reduce the number of postal employees in other crafts excessed to the city carrier craft in the months ahead.
A Letter To All Employees From PMG Jack Potter
While the Postal Service has had its share of challenges since the beginning of the current economic recession, I want to let you all know what an outstanding job you have done to meet those challenges. We have been very successful in implementing unprecedented cost-cutting and efficiency improvements in a relatively short time frame. We have also maintained high levels of end-to-end service performance and customer satisfaction during this period. You should take great pride in these achievements.
We have relied on natural attrition and the use of voluntary early retirement (VER) to reduce the size of our bargaining unit workforce. Unfortunately, we are projecting additional declines in mail volumes next year and therefore need to accelerate the pace of operational change to bring our costs in line with revenues.
We have an opportunity to improve efficiency in mail processing operations in plants and Post Offices around the country while maintaining very high levels of service. We met with the leadership of the American Postal Workers Union (APWU) and National Postal Mail Handlers Union (NPMHU) to discuss alternatives to achieve operational changes with the least amount of disruption to impacted employees. We concluded that a one-time cash retirement incentive was the best first step in the operational transition. The subsequent negotiated agreement creates an opportunity for select full-time employees to receive a $15,000 incentive to retire or resign. The $15,000 incentive will be paid in two installments, depending on retirement or separation date. Most employees will receive $10,000 in November 2009 and $5,000 approximately one year later.
With some exceptions, all full-time, part-time regular, and part-time flexible career employees who are represented by the APWU and the NPMHU, and who are eligible for optional or early retirement as of Oct. 31, 2009, will begin receiving annuity information at their home over the next few days. We hope as many of you as possible will take advantage of this opportunity. Although we don’t have the deep pockets to make a more generous offer, we believe this one-time incentive is a good value for those who are considering retirement.
Employees who receive this incentive offer will want to take the opportunity to consider their financial security and life beyond the Postal Service and consult with their family and friends. Those who accept the offer should know, as we all do, that even in retirement they will remain valued members of our extended Postal Service family.
This incentive offer is also an important step among the many we have been making recently as we seek to make structural changes in the way we do business. As an organization, we must continue to improve efficiencies and be responsive to a changing marketplace. Every employee plays a vital role. Your continued hard work and dedication to the Postal Service help inspire the confidence of our customers to choose the Postal Service as their preferred business partner and means of communication.
Thank you again for your continued dedication.
Jack Potter
Click here for more information on this one-time incentive.
Click here to view PMG letter.
Postal Service Continues Cost-Cutting Actions
Negotiated Incentive Plan Designed to Save $500 Million
WASHINGTON — In a decision to save hundreds of millions of dollars in labor-related costs, the U.S. Postal Service negotiated an agreement with two of its employee unions to offer select employees a financial incentive to retire or resign before the end of the fiscal year.
The one-time offer is a strategic move to accelerate targeted staffing reductions for employees represented by either the American Postal Workers Union (APWU) or the National Postal Mail Handlers Union (NPMHU).
Advances in mail processing technology and the continuing recession have led the Postal Service to more aggressively match work hours with work load. The majority of employees eligible for the incentive work in mail processing facilities.
Because the number of addresses grows by 1.5 million each year, letter carriers represented by the National Association of Letter Carriers and the National Rural Letter Carriers’ Association were not extended this offer.
The incentive provides eligible employees $10,000 to be paid during the first three months of Fiscal Year 2010, creating salary and benefit savings for the next nine months. The same employees will receive a second payment of $5,000 in Fiscal Year 2011. Fiscal Year 2010 starts Oct. 1, 2009.
As many as 30,000 employees could take advantage of the incentive offer. Savings to the Postal Service could be as much as $500 million next year.
The employee incentive offer is the latest in a series of cost reductions the Postal Service has made this year. Cost savings during 2009 are expected to total more than $6 billion, including the following actions:
- Cutting more than 100 million work hours, the equivalent of 57,000 positions;
- Halting construction of new postal facilities;
- Closing six district offices;
- Negotiating an agreement with the National Association of Letter Carriers that adjusts letter carrier routes to reflect diminished volume;
- Instituting a nationwide hiring freeze;
- Reducing authorized staffing levels at postal headquarters and area offices by at least 15 percent;
- Selling unused and under-utilized postal facilities;
- Adjusting Post Office hours to better reflect customer use; Consolidating mail processing operations; and
- Freezing salaries of all Postal Service officers and executives.
“This decision reflects our desire to provide a fair and equitable opportunity for some of our longest-serving employees,” said Anthony Vegliante, chief human resources officer and executive vice president. “It is important to the Postal Service that we take appropriate measures to address our current financial situation.”
The Postal Service receives no tax dollars for operating expenses and relies on the sale of postage, products and services to fund its operations.