Handbook F-15-A Revision: Reinstatement of Relocation Leave for Eligible Executive and Administrative Schedule
Effective September 19, 2011, relocation leave for eligible executive and administrative schedule (EAS) employees has been reinstated. Handbook F-15-A, Relocation Policy — Non-Bargaining Executive and Administrative Schedule Employees, is revised to include relocation leave for eligible EAS employees.
[Add new subchapter 26 as follows:]
26 Relocation Leave
EAS employees are eligible to receive paid time off generally for the packing, delivering, and unpacking of household goods or at their manager’s discretion as long as it is related to relocation. Employees are authorized to use up to 5 days (8-hour increments) of relocation leave. These days do not have to be consecutive. This leave is also available to the employee’s spouse, if he or she is also employed by the Postal Service. Relocation leave is charged to Code 080 in TACS.
USPS eliminated the Relocation Leave policy effective August 17, 2009 as part of major changes to Handbook F-15-A, Relocation Policy — Nonbargaining (EAS) Employees
- Relocation leave is eliminated.
2-5.1 Relocation Leave
You are eligible for a maximum of up to five days of relocation leave (code 80). This leave is in addition to any other authorized travel time. It may be taken consecutively or as individual days but must be used by the time you settle into your new home. An actual physical move of the employee’s household is a requirement for eligibility for relocation leave. Your spouse may be eligible for relocation leave if the following conditions are met:
• Employed by the Postal Service.
• Moving with you.
• Awarded a position competitively.
• Successful candidate for a bid position at the new location if a bargaining employee.
Note: Not applicable to external hires or if transferring from another government agency.
In 2009 USPS OIG issued an Audit Report on Postal Service’s Relocation Policy. The OIG found
In CY 2008, the Postal Service spent $73 million for relocation benefits for more than 2,000 employees.3 In our view, some of the relocations that occurred during this period were exorbitant. In one instance, the Postal Service paid over $1.9 million to relocate a vehicle maintenance program analyst intrastate. The majority of this cost came from a $1.7 million loss on the sale of this employee’s home.
In another instance, as cited by the national media, the Postal Service paid $1.2 million to purchase an employee’s home through its real estate management firm. The revised February 2009 relocation procedures (including the $1 million home purchase ceiling)were not in place at the time the employee took a lateral transfer and relocated from South Carolina to Texas. The Postal Service has paid over $75,000 to date to move this employee. This includes $16,075 for the employee and his spouse to take a house hunting trip, including per diem and temporary living expenses. These costs were paid using a lump sum reimbursement process.
Although USPS issued revised relocation policies on August 13, 2009 the OIG recommended:
Consequently, until such policies associated with vacancy announcements and benefit limits are implemented and the Postal Service’s financial situation improves, we believe the Postal Service should consider freezing its relocation benefits program.