- About Us
- Legislative Center
January 5, 2020
The Oct. 22 consultative meeting was held in conjunction with the fall NAPS Executive Board meeting; all board members were present, except Northwest Area Vice President Cindy McCracken, who had an excused absence. Representing the Postal Service were Bruce Nicholson, Phong Quang and Henry Bear, Labor Relations Policy Administration.
Agenda Item #1
NAPS is concerned that the SWCs process has taken several years to get to a testing phase. NAPS also is concerned that the USPS’ documented needs for additional supervisors, Customer Service, went from over 5,000 to now approximately 1,300 over this same period. NAPS requested an update on SWCs, specifically:
Testing the new SWCs model has not received final approval from postal leadership. The Postal Service is not pursuing this process during peak season. We will follow up with NAPS in the new calendar year regarding the status of this test.
NAPS noted that during the fall 2019 board meeting, it was explained to NAPS that the Executive Leadership Team at Postal Headquarters had been given a presentation on the new SWCs model, but neither approval nor disapproval of piloting the model was given at that time. With peak season approaching and PMG Megan Brennan retiring at the end of January, there will not be a pilot process of the SWCs model until after Jan. 31, 2020.
Agenda Item #2
NAPS contends there is 100%proof that the Altoona P&DC is a plant facility and is being denied a Maintenance supervisor position because the USPS has determined the Altoona P&DC is not a plant operations facility. The USPS claims it is an F4 office. NAPS has validated that no F4 employees are working in this plant.
NAPS further contends this facility performs every duty performed in the plant facilities in Johnstown and Erie, PA. NAPS noted both of these facilities are plants.
NAPS asked how the Altoona P&DC is considered an F4 site and not F1. The Eastern Area representative stated they would check; the NAPS area vice president has not heard from the representative since.
NAPS noted the USPS Headquarters staffing matrix shows a facility gets a manager, Maintenance Operations-19 (MMO), and a supervisor, Maintenance Operations-17 (SMO), if it is a plant. NAPS contends the USPS does not want to give the Altoona plant this much-needed position.
NAPS has been informed the USPS has had someone “unofficially” working as a MMO or SMO or both in the Altoona postal facility for over two years to help get everything done. This issue was brought to the USPS Eastern Area in February; the area did pursue the issue. Eastern Area postal leadership got back to the NAPS area vice president only after they made an additional inquiry and stated this plant did not earn a position.
NAPS asked what the rationale is regarding why the Altoona P&DC is labeled a plant in all aspects except for its staffing.
Altoona was designated a Mail Processing Facility (MPF) in 2013 due to it no longer meeting the criteria of a P&DC. That criteria is based on volume and equipment inventory. An MPF does not automatically earn an MMO. In order for an MPF to earn an MMO, it has to meet a threshold greater than 27 Maintenance employees.
The Altoona facility currently has 24 Maintenance employees on the rolls. In addition, Altoona has an SMO on its rolls.
The Altoona facility has not been renamed since the time it was downgraded to an MPF in 2013. This was an oversight for Altoona and other facilities nationwide, which will be corrected.
Agenda Item #3
NAPS asked for continued discussion on the consolidated casing pilot based on additional data and information. Based on data received from the USPS, NAPS noted that FN2B OT has increased sharply since the beginning of this test. This would have a direct impact on Total Operating Expense (TOE) % to Plan. This indicator also has gone down since initiation of the test.
NAPS also noted a sharp increase in accidents at this testing site, which has had a devastating impact on the NPA Unit indicator, going from cell block 10 at the beginning of the test to cell block 0 in the latest data provided by the USPS.
NAPS noted that the impact of this pilot will go into future PFP years, impacting TOE and Grievance categories due to the escalated number of NALC grievances being filed daily in direct response to this pilot process.
NAPS contends this now expanded process will contribute to future NPA failures in the current failed PFP system.
NAPS also asked what mitigation the USPS has put in place to account for the NPA impact associated with this pilot test.
We provided a tour of the Annandale, VA, Post Office and a briefing during the September consultative meeting regarding the consolidated casing pilot. We also provided data showing an initial decline in TOE for Annandale at the start of the pilot in May. However, TOE rebounded shortly after.
As for accidents, Annandale had seven accidents before the start of the pilot, with several occurring in early May before beginning the pilot. Since NPA reports are generated monthly, this may have given the perception that the accident indicator was negatively impacted as a result of the pilot when the May scorecard was published. The significant drop in this NPA unit indicator was a result of the accidents that occurred before the pilot.
Agenda Item #4
NAPS has been made aware of changes to FY19 budgets that were made in week 47, retroactively to the beginning of FY19. NAPS asked what the impact has been to TOE based on this change in week 47. Also, why was this PFP impact made at the end of FY19?
NAPS asked what factors necessitated this negative impact on PFP at the end of FY19.
There is no impact on TOE due to the LDC 48 adjustments in the Customer Service Variance (CSV) model for FY19. The adjustment only changed the number of earned hours in CSV for specific tasks; budget hours were not changed. Therefore, there is no impact to pay for performance.
USPS Headquarters removed the District Function 4 coordinator’s ability to input benchmark values for Customer Service facilities for three workload elements in LDC 48, Collections, Express Mail Delivery and Offsite Travel/Admin. F4 coordinators were able to input benchmark values for each facility once a year.
These benchmark values were being applied inconsistently among many districts. USPS Headquarters determined that it was more effective to strictly use TACS clock rings to directly feed the variance tool, which, in turn, would determine the earned LDC 48 benchmark values for the following fiscal year. These values will provide a better representation in each office of the work being performed in these LDC 48 tasks.
Categories: The Postal Supervisor