 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| What Every T.E. Needs to Know |
The rollercoaster ride you all are experiencing must be difficult to live with,
considering the Union continues to tell you that you do in fact have rights, yet
your supervisors are trying very hard to make you feel as if you do not. I will say
it again . . . YOU DO.
I am hearing quite often that T.E.s skip their breaks and lunch. I understand
there are days you do this and I would be lying if I told you I did not when I first
began carrying mail as a T.E. Things have certainly changed over the past 11
years and fortunately for me, I started when the postal service was in better
financial shape then they are today and the pressure was far less. Remember,
you all are not the problem; you are the solution to the understaffing that has
gone on forever, and we are glad you are here.
The only difference between skipping our entitlements now as opposed to when
I did it is that when I did it, I wanted to get out early. You all are seemingly doing
it because you have been convinced you must make your supervisor’s times to
prevent yourselves from being fired; regardless what the union continues to tell
you.
Here’s the deal:
If you go out and do the best you can, you have done all that is required. Your
best will never require you to run your route, skip a break(s), or skip and/or
shorten your lunch. These entitlements have been negotiated for all letter
carriers, including Transitional Employees. Very clearly, I am going to explain
what T.E.s should do – Example:
You come in and the supervisor gives you a route that you have done before.
Let’s just say you have done the route a few times and are somewhat
comfortable and know it takes roughly six hours for you to deliver. Your
supervisor may tell you at 10am that you have until 4pm to complete the route. I
suggest you ask if he/she is expecting you to take a ‘No-lunch,’ as 4pm with a
lunch is not likely to occur. If the supervisor says something like, “that is how
long the route is,” or “this is a 6 hour route,” or “That does include lunch,” I
suggest you ask for a union steward. I know this is not the most comfortable
thing in the world, but they cannot fire you for this. A union steward will help
clarify to the supervisor what your rights are – they are pretty well informed
when it comes to you all being forced to do things that are unreasonable and will
help you with this uncomfortable situation. Please do not allow yourself to be
intimidated by your supervisor’s pressure and if they do not allow you a steward
when you ask, take the mail as instructed and call me at 271-0178 when you get
to the street. If I do not answer the phone, please leave me a message. I will
get back with you very soon.
Another example that is likely occurring goes something like:
At 10am they give you 2 hours off this route – 2 hours off that route – and half
of another route; be back by 4:30pm. If this seems like too much for you, inform
your supervisor that you believe this is impossible by 4:30. Remember . . . you
should not have to run the route or skip or shorten breaks and lunch to make
their numbers. Again, if they refer to “the numbers,” ask for a steward and call
me when you hit the street if you are not afforded a union steward within 2 hours.
I tell you these things because I do not want you to kill yourself to make their
numbers. Many regular carriers that have been here for a period of time have
difficulty with this pressure and usually skip their entitlements to keep the boss
off their back and avoid the scrutiny. On the other hand, those of us that know
and exercise our rights receive little, if any grief from our supervisors. This is
because it is easier for them to push carriers that are unable to push back. If
you learn and understand your rights, I believe in a short period of time, they will
begin putting far less pressure on you.
Please do not misunderstand what I am saying – Always give an honest effort.
Carrying the Nation’s mail is a noble profession and your paychecks should
prove the respect given to letter carriers. It is because we work hard that we are
paid well. Nobody in the organization works harder than the letter carriers; not
even on their busiest days.
Continue to work hard and try to avoid confrontational situations with your
supervisors. Let the stewards take care of the uncomfortable situations for you
as they occur until you begin to understand your rights better and prove to them
that you have every intention of ensuring your rights are defended. (Notice
under Article 16 below as it relates to your being retained)
Your Union will not allow them to continue to beat you guys up but we need your
help in this battle we are having with them. Our postmaster, as you know or
have heard, is not very nice and our supervisors are seemingly scared to death
of her; prompting this incredible amount of pressure on you. We can stop it! It
takes time and your help. Stand your ground and I am certain we will succeed at
making your work environments as comfortable as possible; at least as good as
mine is. You should expect no less respect as a letter carrier than I expect for
myself.
Below is my attempt to bore you with actual contract language. I did add my
input in spots; for what I hope is better clarity to some confusing issues. You
should be able to spot my input rather easily. The rest is ACTUAL contract
language, right out of the manuals.
Remember, you do have rights and firing you is possible, but you must really do
something wrong. If you were at the T.E. meeting we held recently, you
undoubtedly read the memo signed by the USPS and the union that makes
perfectly clear, “There are no street standards.” You continue to do the best
you can and begin asking for a steward when they are expecting you to do the
impossible.
Enjoy YOUR contract.
Mark Harrington
President
NALC Branch 246
Joint Contract Administration Manual (JCAM)
Article 3 (Management Rights)
The Employer shall have the exclusive right, subject to the provisions
of this Agreement and consistent with applicable laws and regulations:
A. To direct employees of the Employer in the performance of official
duties;
B. To hire, promote, transfer, assign, and retain employees in positions
within the Postal Service and to suspend, demote, discharge, or take
other disciplinary action against such employees;
C. To maintain the efficiency of the operations entrusted to it;
D. To determine the methods, means, and personnel by which such
operations are to be conducted;
E. To prescribe a uniform dress to be worn by letter carriers and other
designated employees; and
F. To take whatever actions may be necessary to carry out its mission
in emergency situations, i.e., an unforeseen circumstance or a combination
of circumstances which calls for immediate action in a situation
which is not expected to be of a recurring nature.
(The preceding Article, Article 3, shall apply to Transitional
Employees.)
The Postal Service’s “exclusive rights” under Article 3 are basically the
same as its statutory rights under the Postal Reorganization Act, 39
U.S.C. Section 1001(e). While postal management has the right to
“manage” the Postal Service, it must act in accordance with applicable
laws, regulations, contract provisions, arbitration awards, letters of
agreement, and memoranda. Consequently, many of the management
rights enumerated in Article 3 are limited by negotiated contract provisions.
For example, the Postal Service’s Article 3 right to “suspend,
demote, discharge, or take other disciplinary action against” employees
is subject to the provisions of Articles 15 and 16.
(Article 3 is a line our supervisors use when they cannot think of a better
answer. I am not trying to bash them; it is a fact. Oftentimes, Article 3 does not
apply, as other language (that they are not aware of) counters what they believe
(or what they are being told to believe).
Article 5 (Prohibition of Unilateral Action)
The Employer will not take any actions affecting wages, hours and
other terms and conditions of employment as defined in Section 8(d) of
the National Labor Relations Act which violate the terms of this
Agreement or are otherwise inconsistent with its obligations under law.
(The preceding Article, Article 5, shall apply to Transitional Employees.)
Article 16 (Special Transitional Employee Rules)
A January 16, 1992 Mittenthal Panel Arbitration award established the
category of Transitional Employee (TE). The award, which appears as
an Appendix to this publication, provided the following in Items 9
through 11:
9. Transitional employees will have access to the grievance procedure
for those provisions which apply to transitional employees.
10. Transitional employees are temporary N.T.E. (not to exceed)
employees who may be terminated at any time prior to completion
of the 359-day term as provided in paragraph 11 or as otherwise
required by this Award.
11. Transitional employees may be separated at any time upon completion
of their assignment or for lack of work. Such separation is
not grievable except where the separation is pretextual.
PRETEXTUAL – not a real word, but this is what it means as far as you are
concerned:
(Meaning they must have a legitimate reason to let you go after 360 days (new
contract). They cannot separate a T.E. without first making it known the T.E.
was either a problem, or having problems that they must attempt to fix. Letting
you go cannot come as a surprise if they choose to make this decision)
Transitional employees may otherwise be removed for just cause and
any such removal will be subject to the grievance-arbitration procedure,
provided the employee has completed ninety work days, or has been
employed for 120 calendar days, whichever comes first. Further, in any
such grievance, the concept of progressive discipline will not apply. The
issue will be whether the employee is guilty of the charge against him or
her. Where the employee is found guilty, the arbitrator shall not have the
authority to modify the discharge.
(The ‘Just Cause’ principles are listed here – there is a lot here, but further proof
they cannot fire you just because they want to; regardless what they may want
you to believe.)
Just Cause Principle
The principle that any discipline must be for “just cause” establishes a
standard that must apply to any discipline or discharge of an employee.
Simply put, the “just cause” provision requires a fair and provable justification
for discipline.
“Just cause” is a “term of art” created by labor arbitrators. It has no precise
definition. It contains no rigid rules that apply in the same way in
each case of discipline or discharge. However, arbitrators frequently
divide the question of just cause into six sub-questions and often apply
the following criteria to determine whether the action was for just cause.
These criteria are the basic considerations that the supervisor must use
before initiating disciplinary action.
• Is there a rule? If so, was the employee aware of the rule? Was the
employee forewarned of the disciplinary consequences for failure to
follow the rule? It is not enough to say, “Well, everybody knows that
rule,” or, “We posted that rule ten years ago.” You may have to prove
that the employee should have known of the rule. Certain standards
of conduct are normally expected in the industrial environment and it
is assumed by arbitrators that employees should be aware of these
standards. For example, an employee charged with intoxication on
duty, fighting on duty, pilferage, sabotage, insubordination, etc., may
be generally assumed to have understood that these offenses are neither
condoned nor acceptable, even though management may not
have issued specific regulations to that effect.
• Is the rule a reasonable rule? Management must make sure rules
are reasonable, based on the overall objective of safe and efficient
work performance. Management’s rules should be reasonably related
to business efficiency, safe operation of our business, and the performance
we might expect of the employee.
• Is the rule consistently and equitably enforced? A rule must be
applied fairly and without discrimination. Consistent and equitable
enforcement is a critical factor. Consistently overlooking employee
infractions and then disciplining without warning is improper. If
employees are consistently allowed to smoke in areas designated as
No Smoking areas, it is not appropriate suddenly to start disciplining
them for this violation. In such cases, management loses its right to
discipline for that infraction, in effect, unless it first puts employees
(and the unions) on notice of its intent to enforce that regulation
again. Singling out employees for discipline is usually improper. If
several similarly situated employees commit an offense, it would not
be equitable to discipline only one.
• Was a thorough investigation completed? Before administering
the discipline, management must make an investigation to determine
whether the employee committed the offense. Management must
ensure that its investigation is thorough and objective. This is the
employee’s day in court privilege. Employees have the right to
know with reasonable detail what the charges are and to be given a
reasonable opportunity to defend themselves before the discipline is
initiated.
• Was the severity of the discipline reasonably related to the
infraction itself and in line with that usually administered, as
well as to the seriousness of the employee’s past record? The following
is an example of what arbitrators may consider an inequitable
discipline: If an installation consistently issues five-day suspensions
for a particular offense, it would be extremely difficult to justify why
an employee with a past record similar to that of other disciplined
employees was issued a thirty-day suspension for the same offense.
There is no precise definition of what establishes a good, fair, or bad
record. Reasonable judgement must be used. An employee’s record
of previous offenses may never be used to establish guilt in a case
you presently have under consideration, but it may be used to determine
the appropriate disciplinary penalty.
• Was the disciplinary action taken in a timely manner?
Disciplinary actions should be taken as promptly as possible after the
offense has been committed.
Corrective Rather than Punitive?
The requirement that discipline be “corrective” rather than “punitive” is
an essential element of the “just cause” principle. In short, it means that
for most offenses management must issue discipline in a “progressive”
fashion, issuing lesser discipline (e.g., a letter of warning) for a first
offense and a pattern of increasingly severe discipline for succeeding
offenses (e.g., short suspension, long suspension, discharge). The basis
of this principle of “corrective” or “progressive” discipline is that it is
issued for the purpose of correcting or improving employee behavior and
not as punishment or retribution.
In the case of removal for cause, a transitional employee shall be entitled
to advance written notice of the charges against him/her in accordance
with the provisions of Article 16 of the National Agreement. Article
16.11 does not restrict the union and management from agreeing to a
lesser penalty during discussions at earlier steps of the grievance-arbitration
procedure. However, it does provide that where the employee is
found guilty of the charge against him or her, the arbitrator shall not have
the authority to modify the discharge.
National Arbitrator Mittenthal held in G90N-4G-D 93040395, August
18, 1994 (C-13837) that a Transitional Employee removed for cause is
entitled to advance written notice of the charges against him/her and, in
accordance with Article 16.5, is entitled to remain on the job or on the
clock at the option of the employer during the notice period provided by
Item 11 above.
In the Step 4 Settlement F90N-4F-D 94022367, January 4, 1995 (M-
01202) the parties agreed that when an NALC transitional employee has
completed a previous 359-day term of employment in the same office
and in the same position, a termination for cause during the first ninety
work days (or 120 calendar days, whichever comes first) of an immediately
subsequent appointment is subject to the grievance-arbitration procedure.
Article 19
Article 19 shall apply in that those parts of all handbooks, manuals and
published regulations of the Postal Service, which directly relate to
wages, hours or working conditions shall apply to transitional employees
only to the extent consistent with other rights and characteristics of
transitional employees negotiated in this Agreement and otherwise as
they apply to the supplemental work force.
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN THE
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE AND THE
AMERICAN POSTAL WORKERS UNION, AFL-CIO
Re: Use of Privately Owned Vehicles
The parties agree that the following represents the policy of the U.S. Postal
Service and the American Postal Workers Union concerning the furnishing of
privately owned vehicles (POV) by employees of the crafts represented by the
APWU:
No craft employee represented by the APWU may be coerced into furnishing a
vehicle or carrying passengers without the employee’s consent. The use of a
personal vehicle is the decision of the employee and it is not the intent of the
parties to discourage such use of personal vehicles when transportation is
needed from one postal facility to another or in the completion of the employee’s
assignment. When an employee begins his/her work day at one postal unit and
is provided transportation to another unit to complete his/her tour of duty, that
employee will be provided transportation back to the unit where his/her
tour began if transportation is needed. If the employee ends tour at the new
location the return trip will not be on the clock but transportation will be provided
promptly by management upon request.
Date: July 21, 1987
(The preceding Memorandum of Understanding, Use of Privately Owned
Vehicles,
applies to Transitional Employees.)
Employee Labor & Management Manual (One of the manuals referred to above)
Section 432.13 (Transitional Work Force)
Employees in the transitional work force are noncareer bargaining unit
employees categorized as transitional employees (TEs) and utilized in
accordance with the terms of their respective collective bargaining
agreements. They are hourly rate employees hired for terms designated in
the appropriate national bargaining agreement.
considering the Union continues to tell you that you do in fact have rights, yet
your supervisors are trying very hard to make you feel as if you do not. I will say
it again . . . YOU DO.
I am hearing quite often that T.E.s skip their breaks and lunch. I understand
there are days you do this and I would be lying if I told you I did not when I first
began carrying mail as a T.E. Things have certainly changed over the past 11
years and fortunately for me, I started when the postal service was in better
financial shape then they are today and the pressure was far less. Remember,
you all are not the problem; you are the solution to the understaffing that has
gone on forever, and we are glad you are here.
The only difference between skipping our entitlements now as opposed to when
I did it is that when I did it, I wanted to get out early. You all are seemingly doing
it because you have been convinced you must make your supervisor’s times to
prevent yourselves from being fired; regardless what the union continues to tell
you.
Here’s the deal:
If you go out and do the best you can, you have done all that is required. Your
best will never require you to run your route, skip a break(s), or skip and/or
shorten your lunch. These entitlements have been negotiated for all letter
carriers, including Transitional Employees. Very clearly, I am going to explain
what T.E.s should do – Example:
You come in and the supervisor gives you a route that you have done before.
Let’s just say you have done the route a few times and are somewhat
comfortable and know it takes roughly six hours for you to deliver. Your
supervisor may tell you at 10am that you have until 4pm to complete the route. I
suggest you ask if he/she is expecting you to take a ‘No-lunch,’ as 4pm with a
lunch is not likely to occur. If the supervisor says something like, “that is how
long the route is,” or “this is a 6 hour route,” or “That does include lunch,” I
suggest you ask for a union steward. I know this is not the most comfortable
thing in the world, but they cannot fire you for this. A union steward will help
clarify to the supervisor what your rights are – they are pretty well informed
when it comes to you all being forced to do things that are unreasonable and will
help you with this uncomfortable situation. Please do not allow yourself to be
intimidated by your supervisor’s pressure and if they do not allow you a steward
when you ask, take the mail as instructed and call me at 271-0178 when you get
to the street. If I do not answer the phone, please leave me a message. I will
get back with you very soon.
Another example that is likely occurring goes something like:
At 10am they give you 2 hours off this route – 2 hours off that route – and half
of another route; be back by 4:30pm. If this seems like too much for you, inform
your supervisor that you believe this is impossible by 4:30. Remember . . . you
should not have to run the route or skip or shorten breaks and lunch to make
their numbers. Again, if they refer to “the numbers,” ask for a steward and call
me when you hit the street if you are not afforded a union steward within 2 hours.
I tell you these things because I do not want you to kill yourself to make their
numbers. Many regular carriers that have been here for a period of time have
difficulty with this pressure and usually skip their entitlements to keep the boss
off their back and avoid the scrutiny. On the other hand, those of us that know
and exercise our rights receive little, if any grief from our supervisors. This is
because it is easier for them to push carriers that are unable to push back. If
you learn and understand your rights, I believe in a short period of time, they will
begin putting far less pressure on you.
Please do not misunderstand what I am saying – Always give an honest effort.
Carrying the Nation’s mail is a noble profession and your paychecks should
prove the respect given to letter carriers. It is because we work hard that we are
paid well. Nobody in the organization works harder than the letter carriers; not
even on their busiest days.
Continue to work hard and try to avoid confrontational situations with your
supervisors. Let the stewards take care of the uncomfortable situations for you
as they occur until you begin to understand your rights better and prove to them
that you have every intention of ensuring your rights are defended. (Notice
under Article 16 below as it relates to your being retained)
Your Union will not allow them to continue to beat you guys up but we need your
help in this battle we are having with them. Our postmaster, as you know or
have heard, is not very nice and our supervisors are seemingly scared to death
of her; prompting this incredible amount of pressure on you. We can stop it! It
takes time and your help. Stand your ground and I am certain we will succeed at
making your work environments as comfortable as possible; at least as good as
mine is. You should expect no less respect as a letter carrier than I expect for
myself.
Below is my attempt to bore you with actual contract language. I did add my
input in spots; for what I hope is better clarity to some confusing issues. You
should be able to spot my input rather easily. The rest is ACTUAL contract
language, right out of the manuals.
Remember, you do have rights and firing you is possible, but you must really do
something wrong. If you were at the T.E. meeting we held recently, you
undoubtedly read the memo signed by the USPS and the union that makes
perfectly clear, “There are no street standards.” You continue to do the best
you can and begin asking for a steward when they are expecting you to do the
impossible.
Enjoy YOUR contract.
Mark Harrington
President
NALC Branch 246
Joint Contract Administration Manual (JCAM)
Article 3 (Management Rights)
The Employer shall have the exclusive right, subject to the provisions
of this Agreement and consistent with applicable laws and regulations:
A. To direct employees of the Employer in the performance of official
duties;
B. To hire, promote, transfer, assign, and retain employees in positions
within the Postal Service and to suspend, demote, discharge, or take
other disciplinary action against such employees;
C. To maintain the efficiency of the operations entrusted to it;
D. To determine the methods, means, and personnel by which such
operations are to be conducted;
E. To prescribe a uniform dress to be worn by letter carriers and other
designated employees; and
F. To take whatever actions may be necessary to carry out its mission
in emergency situations, i.e., an unforeseen circumstance or a combination
of circumstances which calls for immediate action in a situation
which is not expected to be of a recurring nature.
(The preceding Article, Article 3, shall apply to Transitional
Employees.)
The Postal Service’s “exclusive rights” under Article 3 are basically the
same as its statutory rights under the Postal Reorganization Act, 39
U.S.C. Section 1001(e). While postal management has the right to
“manage” the Postal Service, it must act in accordance with applicable
laws, regulations, contract provisions, arbitration awards, letters of
agreement, and memoranda. Consequently, many of the management
rights enumerated in Article 3 are limited by negotiated contract provisions.
For example, the Postal Service’s Article 3 right to “suspend,
demote, discharge, or take other disciplinary action against” employees
is subject to the provisions of Articles 15 and 16.
(Article 3 is a line our supervisors use when they cannot think of a better
answer. I am not trying to bash them; it is a fact. Oftentimes, Article 3 does not
apply, as other language (that they are not aware of) counters what they believe
(or what they are being told to believe).
Article 5 (Prohibition of Unilateral Action)
The Employer will not take any actions affecting wages, hours and
other terms and conditions of employment as defined in Section 8(d) of
the National Labor Relations Act which violate the terms of this
Agreement or are otherwise inconsistent with its obligations under law.
(The preceding Article, Article 5, shall apply to Transitional Employees.)
Article 16 (Special Transitional Employee Rules)
A January 16, 1992 Mittenthal Panel Arbitration award established the
category of Transitional Employee (TE). The award, which appears as
an Appendix to this publication, provided the following in Items 9
through 11:
9. Transitional employees will have access to the grievance procedure
for those provisions which apply to transitional employees.
10. Transitional employees are temporary N.T.E. (not to exceed)
employees who may be terminated at any time prior to completion
of the 359-day term as provided in paragraph 11 or as otherwise
required by this Award.
11. Transitional employees may be separated at any time upon completion
of their assignment or for lack of work. Such separation is
not grievable except where the separation is pretextual.
PRETEXTUAL – not a real word, but this is what it means as far as you are
concerned:
(Meaning they must have a legitimate reason to let you go after 360 days (new
contract). They cannot separate a T.E. without first making it known the T.E.
was either a problem, or having problems that they must attempt to fix. Letting
you go cannot come as a surprise if they choose to make this decision)
Transitional employees may otherwise be removed for just cause and
any such removal will be subject to the grievance-arbitration procedure,
provided the employee has completed ninety work days, or has been
employed for 120 calendar days, whichever comes first. Further, in any
such grievance, the concept of progressive discipline will not apply. The
issue will be whether the employee is guilty of the charge against him or
her. Where the employee is found guilty, the arbitrator shall not have the
authority to modify the discharge.
(The ‘Just Cause’ principles are listed here – there is a lot here, but further proof
they cannot fire you just because they want to; regardless what they may want
you to believe.)
Just Cause Principle
The principle that any discipline must be for “just cause” establishes a
standard that must apply to any discipline or discharge of an employee.
Simply put, the “just cause” provision requires a fair and provable justification
for discipline.
“Just cause” is a “term of art” created by labor arbitrators. It has no precise
definition. It contains no rigid rules that apply in the same way in
each case of discipline or discharge. However, arbitrators frequently
divide the question of just cause into six sub-questions and often apply
the following criteria to determine whether the action was for just cause.
These criteria are the basic considerations that the supervisor must use
before initiating disciplinary action.
• Is there a rule? If so, was the employee aware of the rule? Was the
employee forewarned of the disciplinary consequences for failure to
follow the rule? It is not enough to say, “Well, everybody knows that
rule,” or, “We posted that rule ten years ago.” You may have to prove
that the employee should have known of the rule. Certain standards
of conduct are normally expected in the industrial environment and it
is assumed by arbitrators that employees should be aware of these
standards. For example, an employee charged with intoxication on
duty, fighting on duty, pilferage, sabotage, insubordination, etc., may
be generally assumed to have understood that these offenses are neither
condoned nor acceptable, even though management may not
have issued specific regulations to that effect.
• Is the rule a reasonable rule? Management must make sure rules
are reasonable, based on the overall objective of safe and efficient
work performance. Management’s rules should be reasonably related
to business efficiency, safe operation of our business, and the performance
we might expect of the employee.
• Is the rule consistently and equitably enforced? A rule must be
applied fairly and without discrimination. Consistent and equitable
enforcement is a critical factor. Consistently overlooking employee
infractions and then disciplining without warning is improper. If
employees are consistently allowed to smoke in areas designated as
No Smoking areas, it is not appropriate suddenly to start disciplining
them for this violation. In such cases, management loses its right to
discipline for that infraction, in effect, unless it first puts employees
(and the unions) on notice of its intent to enforce that regulation
again. Singling out employees for discipline is usually improper. If
several similarly situated employees commit an offense, it would not
be equitable to discipline only one.
• Was a thorough investigation completed? Before administering
the discipline, management must make an investigation to determine
whether the employee committed the offense. Management must
ensure that its investigation is thorough and objective. This is the
employee’s day in court privilege. Employees have the right to
know with reasonable detail what the charges are and to be given a
reasonable opportunity to defend themselves before the discipline is
initiated.
• Was the severity of the discipline reasonably related to the
infraction itself and in line with that usually administered, as
well as to the seriousness of the employee’s past record? The following
is an example of what arbitrators may consider an inequitable
discipline: If an installation consistently issues five-day suspensions
for a particular offense, it would be extremely difficult to justify why
an employee with a past record similar to that of other disciplined
employees was issued a thirty-day suspension for the same offense.
There is no precise definition of what establishes a good, fair, or bad
record. Reasonable judgement must be used. An employee’s record
of previous offenses may never be used to establish guilt in a case
you presently have under consideration, but it may be used to determine
the appropriate disciplinary penalty.
• Was the disciplinary action taken in a timely manner?
Disciplinary actions should be taken as promptly as possible after the
offense has been committed.
Corrective Rather than Punitive?
The requirement that discipline be “corrective” rather than “punitive” is
an essential element of the “just cause” principle. In short, it means that
for most offenses management must issue discipline in a “progressive”
fashion, issuing lesser discipline (e.g., a letter of warning) for a first
offense and a pattern of increasingly severe discipline for succeeding
offenses (e.g., short suspension, long suspension, discharge). The basis
of this principle of “corrective” or “progressive” discipline is that it is
issued for the purpose of correcting or improving employee behavior and
not as punishment or retribution.
In the case of removal for cause, a transitional employee shall be entitled
to advance written notice of the charges against him/her in accordance
with the provisions of Article 16 of the National Agreement. Article
16.11 does not restrict the union and management from agreeing to a
lesser penalty during discussions at earlier steps of the grievance-arbitration
procedure. However, it does provide that where the employee is
found guilty of the charge against him or her, the arbitrator shall not have
the authority to modify the discharge.
National Arbitrator Mittenthal held in G90N-4G-D 93040395, August
18, 1994 (C-13837) that a Transitional Employee removed for cause is
entitled to advance written notice of the charges against him/her and, in
accordance with Article 16.5, is entitled to remain on the job or on the
clock at the option of the employer during the notice period provided by
Item 11 above.
In the Step 4 Settlement F90N-4F-D 94022367, January 4, 1995 (M-
01202) the parties agreed that when an NALC transitional employee has
completed a previous 359-day term of employment in the same office
and in the same position, a termination for cause during the first ninety
work days (or 120 calendar days, whichever comes first) of an immediately
subsequent appointment is subject to the grievance-arbitration procedure.
Article 19
Article 19 shall apply in that those parts of all handbooks, manuals and
published regulations of the Postal Service, which directly relate to
wages, hours or working conditions shall apply to transitional employees
only to the extent consistent with other rights and characteristics of
transitional employees negotiated in this Agreement and otherwise as
they apply to the supplemental work force.
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN THE
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE AND THE
AMERICAN POSTAL WORKERS UNION, AFL-CIO
Re: Use of Privately Owned Vehicles
The parties agree that the following represents the policy of the U.S. Postal
Service and the American Postal Workers Union concerning the furnishing of
privately owned vehicles (POV) by employees of the crafts represented by the
APWU:
No craft employee represented by the APWU may be coerced into furnishing a
vehicle or carrying passengers without the employee’s consent. The use of a
personal vehicle is the decision of the employee and it is not the intent of the
parties to discourage such use of personal vehicles when transportation is
needed from one postal facility to another or in the completion of the employee’s
assignment. When an employee begins his/her work day at one postal unit and
is provided transportation to another unit to complete his/her tour of duty, that
employee will be provided transportation back to the unit where his/her
tour began if transportation is needed. If the employee ends tour at the new
location the return trip will not be on the clock but transportation will be provided
promptly by management upon request.
Date: July 21, 1987
(The preceding Memorandum of Understanding, Use of Privately Owned
Vehicles,
applies to Transitional Employees.)
Employee Labor & Management Manual (One of the manuals referred to above)
Section 432.13 (Transitional Work Force)
Employees in the transitional work force are noncareer bargaining unit
employees categorized as transitional employees (TEs) and utilized in
accordance with the terms of their respective collective bargaining
agreements. They are hourly rate employees hired for terms designated in
the appropriate national bargaining agreement.