August 4, 2009

Omar M. Gonzalez
Western Region Coordinator
American Postal Workers Union, AFL-CIO
500 Airport Blvd. Suite 450
Burlingame, CA 94010-1940

Dear Mr. Gonzalez:

Please be advised that we are considering consolidating Central Forwarding System (CFS) offices within the Western Area as follows:

• Spokane to Seattle
• Portland to Seattle
• Fargo to Minneapolis
• Sioux Falls to Minneapolis
• Billings to Denver
• Wichita to Kansas City
• Des Moines to Omaha
• Boise to Salt Lake City
• Las Vegas to Salt Lake City and Phoenix

This will impact the employees in the losing CFS units. Reassignments will be made pursuant to the provisions of Article 12 by each affected district office. We will provide you updates as information becomes available.

Sincerely,

Chris A Jordan
Manager Labor Relations
Western Area

More Western Region Impact Statements are located here. Statements for the rest of the country can be found at the APWU Regional Coordinator’s pages at APWU.org.

Now that’s odd- it only takes a day to get mail from this place to anywhere in the state, but it takes four or five days to get it back from a plant 88 miles away? If you were a reporter, wouldn’t you find that a bit questionable? Apparently not in Alexandria.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_17gbxI2jvU

The PRC found that the plan’s flaws included:

• Questionable or Incomplete Cost and Service Estimates
• Inadequate Review of Local Impacts
• Insufficient Provisions for Public Participation

The commission analyzed the Area Mail Processing (AMP) process for evaluating individual plant consolidations, and found that:

• AMP Reviews Lack Consistency
• AMP Process Lacks Criteria for Approval
• The Post Implementation Review Process (PIR) is Flawed

The commission also criticized the USPS for failing to fully consider the service implications of plant realignments:

The Postal Service is a service organization, perhaps the largest such organization in the country.  It does not seem prudent, in the Commission’s view, for an organization of its size and economic importance to commit itself to a logistics network restructuring program of this magnitude, without first having a full grasp of its likely effect on the service that it provides its customers.  If the Postal Service’s representations in this docket are accurate, however, that is what the Postal Service is considering.  The Commission recommends that the Postal Service choose a “most likely” network realignment outcome for planning purposes, and estimate the full range of service impacts that would result from that outcome before it commits further resources to this program.

Commissioner Ruth Goldway wrote in a concurring opinion that the Commission’s opinion “fails to express sufficiently serious concern about the problems that have arisen in initial stages of the Postal Service’s consolidation efforts, in places such as Southern California, El Paso, Texas and Las Vegas, Nevada.”

I am concerned that unless the Postal Service management is truly attentive to improving the AMP change process, implementation of network realignment is likely to result in substantial, unexpected, and potentially expensive service disruptions throughout the nation.  A clear example is that the AMP change analysis performed prior to the recent consolidation of the Marina Del Rey facility into the existing Los Angeles facility totally failed to predict the myriad of service disruptions that occurred in the weeks and months after implementation.

…Before the Postal Service implements the dozens of consolidations required by network realignment, it should improve the AMP change process to insure that service disruptions are minimized.  The best way to improve that process is to fully review each consolidation that has already occurred. It should honestly face and thoroughly analyze mis-estimates and determine the lessons learned.  Going forward, the Postal Service should require forecasts of possible changes in service levels to the end users in planning every AMP change, require measurement of customer feedback in any post implementation review, and then accurately measure the net cost savings by including changes in post-implementation workforce, transportation or other adjustments.

ADVISORY OPINION CONCERNING A PROPOSED CHANGE IN THE NATURE OF POSTAL SERVICES

The act encourages the USPS to “expeditiously move forward in its streamlining efforts”, but adds that it must also “keep unions, management associations, and local elected officials informed as an essential part of this effort and abide by any procedural requirements contained in the national bargaining agreements.”

To that end, the USPS is required to produce a plan outlining the steps it plans to take, including “estimated timeframes, criteria, and processes to be used for making changes to the facilities network, and the process for engaging policy makers and the public in related decisions”. The plan must also include “a discussion of what impact any facility changes may have on the postal workforce and whether the Postal Service has sufficient flexibility to make needed workforce changes”, as well as “a comprehensive plan under which reemployment assistance shall be afforded to employees displaced as a result of automation of any of its functions, the closing and consolidation of any of its facilities, or such other reasons as the Postal Service may determine”.

The act requires that any consolidation efforts currently under way include notice to the communities involved of any service changes and impacts on employees. The USPS must also “afford affected persons ample opportunity to provide input on the proposed decision; and take such comments into account in making a final decision.”

Best line in the brief has to be the footnote on page 3. After pointing out the many layers of existing oversight the USPS operates under, the brief notes that ‘At page 74, the OCA [Office of the Consumer Advocate] refers to a need for “continued surveillance” of postal management.’ The footnote asks “Can postal rendition be far behind?”

USPS N2006-1 Reply Brief
USPS N2006-1 Initial Brief
Complete Listing of Briefs filed

The Olympia Local of the American Postal Workers Union will hold an all day informational picket on Thursday, October 26, 2006 at the Olympia Post Office to protest the Postal Service’s plans to consolidate facilities and reduce mail service to the public. The Olympia action is part of a nationwide informational picket by the American Postal Workers Union. Postal workers in cities across the United States will be informing the public about consolidation plans that will reduce service to their communities.

The Olympia outgoing mail has already been consolidated to Tacoma. It is worth noting that the Tacoma Plant cannot handle the extra Olympia mail. The Tacoma Plant is using overtime and often sending Tacoma mail to Seattle in order to handle the Olympia mail. In essence, Olympia mail is being worked in Tacoma and Tacoma mail is being worked in Seattle. The consolidation of the Olympia mail to Tacoma has increased costs and reduced mail service for the average citizen.

However, all too often, the Postal Service no longer acts in the interest of the average citizen. Similar to other government agencies, the Postal Service increasingly acts in the interest of large corporations who have been successful in electing and influencing government officials with large amounts of money. The power of large corporations over the Postal Service is illustrated by the fact that James C. Miller III, a long time advocate for the privatization of the Postal Service, is now the current chair of the Board of Governors for the Postal Service. The governing head of the Postal Service is someone who does not believe the Postal Service should be a democratic institution.

In the case of the Postal Service, the corporate influence has the added element of media power. Time Warner, the Newspaper Association of America, and other large corporate media interests are big customers of the Postal Service and have been actively supporting consolidation and other plans in their self-interest, which often comes at the expense of the general public.

It is difficult for postal workers and other advocates for a democratic postal service to get their views articulated when most of the media is corporate owned and in support of a corporate oriented postal service. Therefore, postal workers will utilize picket signs on Thursday, October 26, as one method of informing the public that unwarranted consolidations will reduce mail service and increase costs for the average citizen in the country.

For more information contact: Clint Burelson – clintburelson@comcast.net or 360-970-2965

An URGENT Message to NAPS Legislative Leaders and Members –

NAPS needs your help today in contacting your members of the House of Representatives to urge them to cosponsor the Veterans Reassignment Protection Act, HR 5894. NAPS endorses this important bill, introduced by Rep. Stephanie Herseth (D-SD).

The legislation assures that military veterans employed by the Postal Service and throughout the federal government receive veterans preference job protections during downsizing actions. As we know, USPS “repositioning rules” attempt to circumvent the spirit of veterans preference laws. The legislation will bar USPS from using repositioning to avoid veterans preference protections.

At this point, only three House members have cosponsored HR 5894. WE CAN DO BETTER THAN THIS!!! As a veterans’ protection measure, we know — from the reaction of lawmakers and staff during the LTS meetings — that many Members of Congress will cosponsor this legislation — if they are asked.

Little time remains for this legislation to be passed, but gaining cosponsors now is important. Why? Because this session of Congress is not over. Lawmakers are especially receptive to these kinds of requests during the election season. And House Members will return to Washington on November 17 for a lame duck session of Congress.

And securing cosponsors of HR 5894 now will help to build a base for next year, when the legislation is reintroduced at the start of the 110th Congress. Cosponsors simply reinstate their cosponsorship, an easy task. 

The best way to contact your House Member is by writing a letter — and doing that is EASY. Simply use the “model letter” on the NAPS website as the basis for your letter to your House Member. AND WRITE THEM TODAY!

Thanks for your help!

Bruce Moyer
NAPS Legislative Counsel

OK- enough sarcasm. But how else can you respond to the bizarre editorial in today’s “Olympian” “Tacoma-Olympian”?

Consider the second paragraph: “The battle to retain the local postmark has been waged – and lost. It’s time for South Sound residents to live with the results and make the best of an unfortunate situation.”

Can you imagine having to live with that? I mean really live with it day after day without totally losing it? CAN YOU?!?!?!

“The emotional attachment to something as artificial as a postmark is amazing.” I’ll say! What is it about people in Olympia that they seem to have this creepy attachment to something that gets sprayed on a few of their letters by an ink jet?

“When postal authorities announced consolidation plans last November, there was a fair amount of public outrage.” No mention of what the death toll was, but you can just imagine!

But just when you think it can’t get any worse, it does: “Postal officials did make one concession. They gave Olympia and Tacoma a joint postmark. The community was led to believe it would be an “Olympia-Tacoma” postmark, but it ended up being a “Tacoma-Olympia” postmark. That’s like pouring salt in the wound to postal employees who waged a valiant – albeit unsuccessful – campaign to save Olympia’s postmark.”

Bastards!!!!!

And if you don’t think that losing your postmark is the death knell for a city, consider this: “Had the city lost its postmark entirely, Olympia would have joined Annapolis, Md., and Carson City, Nev., as one of three state capitals without one.”

Notice anything missing, Vermonters? Yes, that’s right- Montpelier is SO forgotten that it doesn’t even make the list of state capitals that don’t have a postmark!

Not until the very end does the editorial get around to mentioning how the consolidation is actually working. The biggest fears the State Capital of Washington State had when this all started was that mail from the state government would be hopelessly delayed. So how’s that going?

“The biggest South Sound mail customer, of course, is the state of Washington. Consolidated Mail Services, a division of the state Department of General Administration that handles 100,000 pieces of state mail a day, has spent months preparing for the shift to Tacoma processing. So far, the planning has paid off, as it has been a smooth transition.”

Oh…

Well, never mind!

Postal promises must be kept – The Olympian The Tacoma-Olympian- Olympia Tacoma-Olympia, Washington