FROM THE PRESIDENT Loren Adams LABOR-MANAGEMENT MEETING Friday, April 28, 2000 Friday afternoon at 2:30 Labor-Management meeting was held at P&DC conference room in Fayetteville. In attendance for Union were Loren Adams (Local Pres.), Dennis Taff (State Pres.), Vickie Alves (Local VP), and Gini Hickman (Local Financial Secretary). In attendance for postal management were Linda Patrick (Postmaster), Lee Thompson (Plant Manager), Rick McComber (Customer Service Manager), and Mark Bush (T-3 Supervisor). Meeting lasted almost 2 hours. Meeting was conducted in professional, courteous fashion (both sides). Main topics of discussion were: 1. New postal facility on Joyce Street; staffing package for such 2. RI-399 -- getting it finally resolved 3. Stewards' rights 4. Requests for information to be honored 5. Steward time 6. BMEU clerks; how they should be scheduled and where 7. Disparity of treatment in approval/disapproval of schedule changes 8. Job postings, reversions, abolishments 9. Withholding and how it will affect PTF conversions when residuals open up Concerning RI-399, plant manager promised to schedule meeting right away with mailhandlers and APWU to iron out differences; if nothing resolved, then it would be sent to San Antonio for resolution. BMEU clerk jobs were discussed. Postmaster indicated bulk job on Dickson will be abolished and moved to plant. Another clerk, she said, would check in carriers at Dickson Street. Union suggested, on recommendation from others in higher authority, that Fayetteville have one BMEU clerk begin tour at 10 am and the other at 12 noon, thereby covering for each other's lunches and providing reliable service to customers. The new building on Joyce Street, Rick McComber reported, would be complete sometime around the end of May and ready for occupancy sometime in June. He and Postmaster reported they had put in for 12 new positions at new facility but had been allowed only 4 new ones until the impact of the new facility can be computed a month after opening. The 4 positions, they said, would be window clerks / distribution clerks; they would perform dual roles. They said that was the best they could do given the District's refusal to grant 12 and until they could see what is needed after the installation is in full operation. They also reported that carriers for 72701 and 72704 would be located at Dickson Street facility; and carriers for 72703 would be located at Joyce Street. However, Rick McComber added that the changeover would come later than the new facility's opening. He said they would have to work into the changeover, leave the Annex operation in place until such time they are prepared for the move. I asked that the Union be a part of ribbon-cutting ceremony at the new facility. I told them last time we went to the groundbreaking and they didn't even mention that we were present. I invited State President Dennis Taff up for the Labor-Management meeting to add his experience to the question of steward time and stewards' rights. Dennis explained to managers that local president can, at any time, certify someone to function as steward, including the president himself (if need be). In Fayetteville we have been battling semantics over frivolous interpretations. Dennis, it is hoped, cleared it up for all. Dennis was also a great help in explaining the new Art. 12 withholding now upon us. He informed those gathered he would be mailing copy of McCarthy's report and national MOUs concerning the subject. Little Rock, according to Plant Manager, has notified Fayetteville to hire T.E.s to fill several jobs unrelated to any new technology, and this (from what I learned in Dallas in March) is diametrically opposed to the agreements. T.E.s are only to be used when automation impact statement is presented and are to perform one basic function -- and that function must be directly affected by the new technology. They are not to fill in anywhere at anytime. Dennis is going to send more information to us and local management explaining the T.E. situation. Emergency Meeting Called for March 27, 2000, for all Local Presidents of the Southwest Area Dallas-Fort Worth Airport - Sheraton Grand Hotel Spearheaded by Jim McCarthy, Bobby Donelson and Terry Stapleton The crux of the matter..... Postal management nationwide has announced the implementation of Article 12 in March, 2000, to be in effect over the whole country from 3 to 5 years. What is Article 12? Withholding, hiring freeze, excessing, and a host of other processes resulting from downsizing as a result of new automation. What automation are we talking about? Supposedly, new technology has eliminated the need for most REC sites over the country. Therefore, thousands of T.E.s are being let go and thousands of regulars from those sites are going to be excessed to other facilities. In addition, the AFSM100 supposedly will eliminate the need for any "keying" on flats sorters nationwide after the 881s are mothballed beginning in 2001. However, fresh reports from Baltimore, the pilot city for the new AFSM100, indicate as yet the equipment is inoperable. Another report claims they are also being installed presently in St. Paul, Minnesota and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. National officers at the Dallas meeting informed us that deployment is already delayed 6 months, but that there was an effort to "catch up" to original schedule. Fayetteville is scheduled to receive an AFSM100 by April 9, 2001. However, at present there is not enough room in the plant. Time will tell. What the AFSM100 supposedly will do is eliminate several thousand postal jobs, at least that's what the postal service is projecting (and hoping). With the delay of practical use where the technology does not work, who knows? The Postal Service also intends to downgrade all flats sorter operators remaining to Level 4. All they would be used for is loading the machine. According to these "specialists," there would be no manual flats cases; the machine would do it all. (Have we heard this before?) Of course there will be "saved grade" as flat sorter operators bid off. The question remains, however, whether Fayetteville will ever "qualify" for the FSM100. The new flat sorter is designed for larger cities. The tray management system, touted by the Postal Service as another job eliminator, has also experienced severe "kinks," according to internet sources in large cities. It may also be an Edsel. However, national union officials are convinced the new technology will eventually work and postal jobs will be eliminated. The REC sites are now being closed, and labor leaders expect them to all be shut down within 3 to 5 years, although the postal service claims they will maintain 9 or 10 remote sites after the downsizing period. What will happen to remote encoding? New keying stations will be set up inside processing plants to be manned by regulars and PTFs and will be called in-plant remote coding centers. The new remote coding center employees will code flats as well as letters sent through electronic transmission. The enormous expense the Postal Service went through to build or lease facilities all over the country for REC sites, will vanish within 3 to 5 years. What a waste! What are the challenges facing the union? Article 12 and excessing will occur. There may be transfers from Tulsa; some may come from Little Rock when that site closes sometime in the near future. The excessing is not the problem. The problem lies with management failing to honor the contract and MOUs signed in Washington. Does Article 12 mean there will be no conversions? No, but there are all kinds of twists and turns to agreements. Little Rock has already determined there will be no conversions when jobs go residual because of withholding. It was stated in Dallas that the same maximization and residual job rules apply during the implementation of Article 12, but management will try to put a spin on the agreements in order to hire a lower-paid supplemental workforce, according to national leaders who met in Dallas. I may have missed something in their statements that would allow management a loophole to freeze PTFs in place, but more documents are forthcoming. What is excessing? When regulars are displaced by automation or the closing of a facility, they are guaranteed a job plus moving expenses to another postal facility within 100 miles. However, since these proposed changes because of advanced technology and automation are projected to affect as many as 50,000 postal workers, the 100-mile limit has been extended in most cases (except in Des Moines and Davenport, Iowa, where district management refused to excess over 100 miles, thereby downgrading regulars to PTF status in violation of the contract). Must regulars (Level 4, 5 or 6) who face excessing transfer to equal job? Yes, they must be offered position equal to their former level. If none is available, they will be transferred with saved grade. Impact Statements and implementation of the T.E. 1 Agreement We will have to familiarize ourselves with Impact Statements in the near future, because we must request or demand such documentation from management in order to police the contract during excessing / downsizing. Also the T.E. 1 Agreement will have to be closely monitored. According to national labor leaders, these new T.E.s are to work in areas affected directly by the deployment of NEW automation equipment. They can only perform one operational function and not be used as "floaters" to work anywhere in the facility. If a T.E. is seen working an area outside their operation, we are to notify management at once and grieve it if necessary. If T.E.s are assigned to Fayetteville, what must we do? The first thing the union must do is request an "Automation Impact Statement" from management. If there is no automation impact, the Postal Service has no justification whatsoever of hiring T.E.s. There is no contractual basis for utilizing transitional employees outside a remote encoding center without "Automation Impact Statement." What is an "Automation Impact Statement"? Found in the back of the 1998 Contract, page 259, is a full description. Beginning on page 271 of the agreement are copies of impact statements which need to be filled out by the EMPLOYER. The employer must identify specific duty assignments for transitionals which are going to be directly impacted by the new automation. It requires specific information that links the technology to a specific duty assignment. That holds true if they want to identify a duty assignment as withheld pending reversion or whether they're going to identify a duty assignment withheld per Article 12. For either of these cases or for PTF attrition, management must provide to the Local an impact statement which specifically identifies the duty assignments which are being impacted by this new technology. Can management utilize T.E.s the way they formerly used them? No. A T.E. can only be used with an automation impact under 3 specific circumstances: (1) fill in for withheld pending reversions; (2) back-fill a withheld per Article 12 duty assignment; (3) or hired on PTF attrition. In all 3 cases, management at the local level must provide the union with an impact statement which specifically identifies the duty assignment which are impacted by new technology. Function 4 is not a basis to use transitional employees. Movement of mail from one installation to another is not a basis to use transitional employees. Only automation and the resulting impact is the basis for utilizing T.E.s. The future of AFSM100s According to national labor leaders, the postal service claims that the new AFSM100 will eventually replace all FSM881s. The FSM1000 will also be retrofitted to perform the same as the AFSM100. According to the USPS, all manual casing will be eliminated as a result. The 881s will be disassembled and a majority of them will be sold for scrap. About 20% of the 881s will be re-deployed in smaller offices. Not only Level 5 and 6 clerks for flats will be affected, but manual distribution in P&DCs and smaller branch offices (AOs). Whereas the current FSM1000 have a throughput of 17,000 to 18,000 per hour (the 881 substantially less), the new AFSM100 will have a throughput of possibly 50,000 per hour. It is projected by the Postal Service that the AFSM100 will not only sort the mail by route, but DPS (Delivery Point Sequence) flats -- same as the DBCSes do currently. So, what's the big deal? The impact of all this new technology will affect not only P&DCs, but associate offices, carriers and mailhandlers. All will be affected. Although the new equipment may not be housed in the same facility as the employee, the employee may be impacted when his/her distribution job is either eliminated or moved to another facility. Smaller offices will be affected, albeit indirectly. How should we keep track of impact statements? The Local must maintain accurate job posting records by job numbers. The impact statements must identify specific duty assignments by job number which are directly affected by the new automation. Management must itemize their reports (impact statements), copy found on page 272 of Contract. T.E.s are not a supplemental workforce, but must be identified in specific operation number directly impacted by the new technology. Anything beyond this is grievable. What can management do under Article 12? The duty assignment which management identifies as being impacted becomes "vacant." Like with any vacancy in the clerk craft, at that point in time management has several options available to them: (1) they can post the job for bid; (2) they could have reverted the job; or (3) with the implementation of the T.E. 1 Agreement, they now have the right to identify that duty assignment as a withheld pending reversion. So that duty assignment, though proposed to be eliminated due to automation, until the equipment is deployed and operating, the work of that position specifically identified by impact statement is still needing to be performed. That's why it is identified "withheld pending reversion." Dallas meeting on tape Much more complex issues were discussed at length in Dallas. Four hours of tape are available to any Local union leader for listening and study. Terms like "opting" and new terms to describe the processes we will be facing the next 3 to 5 years, were defined and explained in detail. Summary Local unions will be facing much change in the near future. The membership will be looking to its local leaders for answers. We must prepare for the inevitable. It was also strongly emphasized at the Dallas meeting that the Postal Service will remain strong throughout the century. Our duty is to police the contract and defend our people. It may seem like a contradiction, but we as the Union are directly connected to the success of the Postal Service. New technology, if practical, benefits the Postal Service, customers and the Union. However, technology that fails to produce is more like a millstone; what good is it? Hope to see you at the next meeting, May 21st! In solidarity, Loren Adams