Includes speech by NALC President Young

The following information was released by the United States Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Florida:

Gregory R. Miller, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Florida, and James B. Davis, Special Agent in Charge of the Miami Office of the United States Postal Service (USPS) Office of Inspector General announced today Tony David Grimsley and Bobby Ray Pruett, both former employees of the United States Postal Service, were sentenced today by United States District Judge M. Casey Rodgers following their mail theft convictions. Grimsley was found guilty following a jury trial of theft of 214 movie coupons issued to mail customers by Movie Gallery, Inc. In a separate case, Pruett, the former local chapter president of American Postal Workers Union, entered a plea of guilty to mail theft charges in connection with his opening of first class mail parcels and theft of the contents. Evidence in both cases included covert surveillance video, oral and written confessions, and testimony from law enforcement and civilian witnesses.

Grimsley was sentenced to six (6) months of home detention, a $1,000 fine, $800 restitution to Movie Gallery, Inc., and two (2) years of supervised release. Pruett, who was on State of Florida probation for an unrelated crime at the time of the offenses, was sentenced to seven (7) months imprisonment, a $500 fine, two (2) years of supervised release, and a $200 special monetary assessment.

U.S. Postal Service employees are given a special trust to properly handle mail that comes into their possession, said U.S. Attorney Miller. When even one postal employee violates that trust, it is a cause for concern for all customers of the mail system.

Although the vast majority of the Postal Service’ 800,000 employees are honest and trusted public servants, there are a small number who betray that trust. In those instances, criminal prosecution is vigorously pursued, said Special Agent in Charge Davis. The Inspector General’ mission is to promote integrity and accountability in America’ postal system.

Both cases resulted from the investigation of the United States Postal Inspection Service Special Agents David Williams and Guy Nelson. Grimsley was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Thomas P. (Tom) Swaim, and Pruett was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Randall J. (Randy) Hensel.

NY Metro APWU press release:

Long lines anticipated at New York’s James A. Farley Station

It has been customary over the years to see long lines at the James A. Farley Post Office on tax day. This year was no exception. Unfortunately, long lines at the windows at the JAF, or the main post office, as most New Yorkers refer to it will be commonplace. On Saturday, April 28, 2007, the USPS is reducing sales associates at the windows at JAF from its current complement of 69 down to only 49. This is a facility that is open 365 days a year, 24 hours a day. Compounding the negative impact of this decision by postal management is the fact that on Monday May 14, 2007 there will be a hike in postal rates, which will only exacerbate an already difficult situation

With the passage Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006, the public was lead to believe that the USPS would now be able to meet its needs in the 21 century and be competitive.

Clarice Torrence, President of the New York Metro Area Postal Union has stated that the USPS has the contractual right to make staffing changes, no matter how shortsighted they seem. She stated that her union is challenging these proposed changes through the grievance procedure.

It is hoped that postal management will realize its error, understand its responsibility to meet the needs of the public and return the staffing necessary to its full complement.

The “analysis” Bill Burrus refers to in today’s “Burrus Update” is many things, but an analysis is not one of them. The argument made by the IRET is that “delivery point growth is self-financing”. It also makes the perfectly reasonable observation that “Normal businesses regard added customers as a financial opportunity.”

Sounds good- until you consider the fact that we don’t charge by the delivery. The only way added delivery points could be a financial plus is if the added deliveries produce more new mailings, and therefore revenue. IRET backs up its “self-financing” argument with hypothetical examples of how added delivery points should increase USPS revenues. Oddly enough, the paper never gets around to showing exactly how much new revenue has actually been produced by these “self-financing” new delivery points.

Why not?

Maybe because the facts don’t fit the argument?

In FY 2006, the USPS had a 1.28% increase in delivery points over the previous year. So that must have produced a healthy increase in revenue, right? Well, revenue was up 4.0% over the prior year- so maybe Burrus and the neocons are right?! No, sorry- the increased revenue came from the 5.4% rate increase that went into effect in January.

And take a look at revenue per delivery point. Not surprisingly, it was also up last year, but by just 2.7%. Hmmm… A 5.4% price increase in January produces a 4% revenue increase over the whole year, and revenue per delivery is only up 2.7%? So tell me again exactly how new delivery points pay for themselves???

And did I mention that even though revenue was up 4% thanks to the rate increase, expenses were up 4.9%?

But let’s look at the bottom line- how much additional volume did the new delivery points actually produce? Mail volume was up just 0.66%. So volume grew at less than half the rate deliveries did. See if you can find that number in IRET’s “analysis”. And don’t forget that the only volume growth the USPS had was in categories of mail that Bill Burrus detests- presort and advertising.

So why is Bill in bed with the people who are out to destroy the Postal Service? Beats me.

(By the way, if you’d like to play along at home, the numbers cited here are available in the USPS Financial and Operating Statements for FY 2006. If you’d like an unprotected version so you can come up with your own fascinating numbers, click here.)

Searching for a postal manual the other day, I came across a really handy resource from the APWU- their Industrial Relations web site has an extensive library of postal handbooks and manuals. Very handy if you don’t have access to the internal USPS library, or need to look up something from home.

USPS Handbooks & Manuals

APWU Files Suit on Jurisdictional Disputes

APWU Web News Article #01-07, Jan. 5, 2007

The APWU has filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court, charging that the National Postal Mail Handlers Union and U.S. Postal Service have violated a national-level three-party agreement that establishes procedures for resolving disputes over work assignments.

The memorandum, signed on April 16, 1992, outlines methods for the unions to challenge USPS work assignments they consider improper, and requires the parties to appoint a national-level arbitrator to resolve the disputes they are unable to settle. The agreement also requires the parties to meet frequently enough to render timely decisions, and to schedule arbitration hearings for unresolved cases.

In the 15 years since the agreement was signed, however, only two national arbitration awards have been issued. Five years elapsed before Arbitrator Dana Eishen was appointed in 1997, and he issued only one ruling before his term expired. It was not until 2003 that Eishen was
replaced by Arbitrator Joseph Sharnoff, who issued a single ruling in 2006, after his term expired. Although the parties agreed to reappoint Sharnoff on June 28, 2006, the suit notes, the Mail Handlers Union (MHU) has refused to finalize the appointment.

“The MHU has obstructed and delayed the appointment of a national arbitrator, at least in part,” the suit asserts, because 12 of the 14 pending disputes “concern claims by the APWU that the Postal Service has erroneously assigned work to the Mail Handler Craft which should have been assigned to the Clerk Craft.”

APWU President William Burrus said the lawsuit was “absolutely necessary.” “Regrettably, the Postal Service and Mail Handlers Union have acted in tandem to delay and deny justice to APWU members.” As a result of the breaches of the 1992 agreement, the APWU and the Clerk Craft employees it represents “have suffered and continue to suffer substantial injuries,” the suit charges. This includes the reassignment of APWU-represented clerks to lower-level work at distant locations, while the Postal Service assigns and hires Mail Handlers to perform the duties in question.

It also has denied the APWU of the opportunity to challenge work losses. The failure of the USPS and MHU to adhere to the agreement has left the APWU without an alternative method to resolve its claims, the suit contends.

The suit, filed Jan. 5 in District Court for the District of Columbia, seeks “injunctive relief.” It asks the court to find that the MHU is in breach of the 1992 agreement, and to order it to schedule “forthwith” arbitration hearings of the disputes over the assignment of work on the APPS (Automated Package Processing System) and in the Priority Mail Processing Centers (PMPCs).

The suit also seeks to compel the MHU to schedule and attend meetings of the Dispute Resolution Committees; to act in good faith on the issues pending before it; to sign a letter reappointing Arbitrator Sharnoff as the parties’ national arbitrator, and other relief.

Negotiations with two other unions continue

The Postal Service and the American Postal Workers Union (APWU) have reached a tentative four-year contract agreement. Upon ratification by union members, the agreement will run through Nov. 20, 2010, and affect approximately 272,000 career employees in the Clerk, Maintenance and Motor Vehicle crafts.

In announcing the agreement today, Labor Relations Vice President Doug Tulino said, “We believe this tentative agreement is in the best interests of our customers, our employees and all postal stakeholders.”

The Postal Service and the APWU formally opened national contract negotiations on Aug. 29, 2006. This year was the first time new contracts were negotiated separately at the same time with all four of the Postal Service’s largest unions. Negotiations continue with two other unions, the National Rural Letter Carriers’ Association and the National Postal Mail Handlers Union. Negotiations with the National Association of Letter Carriers were not successful and the two parties will now enter the dispute resolution process, which may include binding interest arbitration.