NPMHU Local 317 - Alabama
Official Site of the National Postal Mail Handlers Union Local 317. Postal News for NPMHU 317 members. We consist of branches in Birmingham, Huntsville, Mobile, and Montgomery.
"...The fate of compensation and other issues for 250,000 employees now hangs in the balance..."
Reference: www.govexec.com
For the most current information available, please read the first of many Contract Updates produced and distributed by the NPMHU during the course of 2016 negotiations. These updates, along with the Union’s magazine and monthly bulletins, will keep mail handlers throughout the country informed and involved in the issues raised during this round of bargaining.
March 01, 2016 - The National Postal Mail Handlers Union and United States Postal Service bargaining teams met for the first of many main-table negotiations. President Hogrogian presented the Union's first packet of non-economic proposals to the Service.
NPMHU Prepares for National Negotiations
Hearings in the ongoing interest arbitration proceedings to determine the terms of the 2011 National Agreement between the NPMHU and the Postal Service are now complete, with the final hearing held on Friday, February 1, 2013. Although the record officially remains open for additional submissions that might be needed by the three-member arbitration panel, the formal hearing process is over, and a final award should be issued soon. On the last day of testimony, National President John Hegarty concluded the Union’s case, emphasizing issues that have been front and center during this arbitration. First, he argued that the actual evidence of the Postal Service’s financial condition was contrary to USPS claims: “Its prehearing brief in this proceeding claimed that the loss was $36 billion during the past six years. Most recently, the agency has been telling the public that it is losing $25 million per day, which is more than $9 billion per year. And for Fiscal Year 2012, which ended a few months ago, the claim is a deficit of $15.9 billion. These assertions are essentially political statements, aimed at emphasizing the need for legislative action. . . . [F]or the Postal Service to constantly repeat these statements in this forum is disrespectful to the intelligence of this panel. USPS operations for the four years ending with Fiscal Year 2010 showed a net income of $700 million, including a $3.3 billion surplus in 2007 and a $2.8 billion surplus in 2008. Even in the years since then, the operational deficit was only $2.7 billion in 2011; it then went down to $2.4 billion in 2012; and it has been projected to be significantly lower in the current fiscal year (projected at $2 billion, but running ahead of plan). So when the Postal Service claims that it lost $15.9 billion last year, that so-called loss was comprised of $11.9 billion in retiree health payments that were not made; another $2.5 billion in non-cash expenses related to fluctuations in interest rates and their temporary effect on the long-term portion of workers compensation; and an actual operational net loss of $2.4 billion.” After describing the ways in which mail handlers already have contributed to savings for the Postal Service – noting, for example, a decline of 27% in the mail handler bargaining unit during the past six years and reductions in the number of mail processing facilities – Hegarty turned to the issue of workforce flexibility, which has been the mantra of USPS management throughout these proceedings: “[T]he USPS has consistently failed to take advantage of the flexibility it has been provided,” not utilizing its complement of 10% PTFs and 6% PTRs. “Of particular importance to these proceedings, the Postal Service has failed to utilize its entire complement of authorized casual employees. . . . Frankly, it is only because the Postal Service has been unable to manage its own contractual commitments that it has made such a ruckus about elimination of the in lieu of clause under Article 7.” Hegarty noted that the use of casuals is always limited because Congress has mandated that employees of the Postal Service “shall be in the postal career service,” and that the USPS shall, as an employer, “place particular emphasis upon . . . the achievement of worthwhile and satisfying careers in the service of the United States.” Moreover, the parties have recognized, for more than forty years, that casual employees may only be hired for limited durations and may not be hired in lieu of, instead of, or in place of career employees. The Postal Service’s demand to eliminate this “in lieu of” clause, if granted, would be a fundamental shift in the parties’ long contract history. Such a change should not be made lightly, without full consideration of the impact that such a deviation from the norm means to the career mandate adopted by Congress or to future employees of the Postal Service. Finally, Hegarty noted that if the “in lieu of” clause that traditionally has governed the hiring of casuals were eliminated, then the panel also should adopt the Union’s key proposals for preserving and protecting mail handler work for the career bargaining unit: full protection against layoffs for all career employees and the establishment of a Task Force that will return previously subcontracted mail handler work. “It would be intolerable,” Hegarty concluded, “for the Postal Service to insist on the creation of a full-time non-career workforce, while continuing to claim the right to lay off career mail handlers or subcontract out mail handler work to the private sector.” When a final decision from the arbitration panel is issued, it will be distributed.
Reference: National Postal Mail Handlers Union
"...Now that the U.S. Postal Service and the National Postal Mail Handlers Union are officially arbitration-bound, it seems time for an overview of the state of USPS labor negotiations that will affect both the mail carrier’s bottom line, not to mention the incomes and working conditions of tens of thousands of postal workers...."
Reference: federaltimes.com
The upcoming arbitration will be conducted under the supervision of a three-member panel, with a neutral arbitrator serving as chair of the panel. The parties are currently discussing selection of the neutral arbitrator; if no agreement is reached, the parties will ask the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) to produce a list of potential arbitrators, and the parties will strike names from that list until one remains.
The arbitration phase of the dispute resolution process follows an attempt at mediation which proved unsuccessful. In March 2012, FMCS Director George Cohen announced the appointment of Herbert Fishgold as the mediator for the NPMHU/USPS dispute. Previously, Mr. Fishgold has served as a third-party neutral for more than 30 years, during which time he has mediated and arbitrated bargaining disputes in a wide range of industries at the national, state, and local levels.
Mediator Fishgold held several meetings with the parties and their representatives. Because he already was familiar with many of the basic facts and issues presented by the Postal Service, the mailing industry, and postal employees generally – based on, among other things, his service as an interest arbitrator in the 2006 dispute between the National Rural Letter Carriers Association and the Postal Service – Fishgold was able to jump into the mediation process quickly, without expending a lot of time and effort to familiarize himself with the unique industry that is the Postal Service. That also allowed the mediator and the parties to have frank discussions about their differences, and about possible ideas for narrowing or eliminating those differences.
While both parties held out hope for success during the mediation process, the success of that effort was more likely than not to depend on whether Congress acted timely to support the long-term financial well-being of the Postal Service as an ongoing institution and government agency. The current prospects for legislative action remain unclear, and that inaction certainly presented an obstacle to resolving the current bargaining dispute during mediation. The mediation effort continued for more than sixty days, and ultimately concluded when the parties determined that the process was unlikely to result in a negotiated settlement.
Several other factors also have come into play as the NPMHU dispute resolution process unfolds. First and foremost, the American Postal Workers Union and the Postal Service reached a comprehensive agreement in March 2011, and that agreement has been held out by some as a pattern or a baseline for future negotiations. Second, the National Association of Letter Carriers is also currently involved in interest arbitration, and has recently announced the selection of Arbitrator Shyam Das as the neutral arbitrator on that panel. Third, and perhaps of most importance, the Postal Service and the National Rural Letter Carriers Association have finalized their interest arbitration hearings, which began in December 2011, and are awaiting the decision from their panel, which is headed by Arbitrator Jack Clarke. The status of the bargaining agreements for our three sister postal unions clearly could have an effect on what is already an exceedingly complicated process regarding the NPMHU-USPS contract dispute.
With history as a guide, it likely will take several months to schedule, implement, and conduct the NPMHU arbitration process. To the extent possible, the National Office will keep all mail handlers informed of developments through the various modes of NPMHU communications, including monthly bulletins, Contract Updates, and website postings (at www.npmhu.org). Please continue to read these communications as they are distributed.
"...The mediation will continue for at least sixty days, unless the parties agree otherwise, either because they have reached a tentative agreement or because they and the mediator believe that an extension of the mediation process would be appropriate. ..."
Reference: www.npmhu.org
"...(January 20, 2012) National negotiations between the National Postal Mail Handlers Union and the U.S. Postal Service over the terms of their 2011 National Agreement have stalled, and the parties have been unable to agree to another extension of the deadline for their bargaining. (Two prior extensions previously had changed the original November 20, 2011 expiration of the National Agreement to December 16, 2011 and January 20, 2012, respectively.)
The parties at the National level are still discussing how they will proceed from this point forward, pursuant to their joint authority to establish dispute resolution procedures; the terms of the 2011 National Agreement will remain in effect until the completion of those procedures. Under the statute that governs postal negotiations, if both sides agree, the parties may first engage in mediation and, if unsuccessful, go to binding interest arbitration. As noted, the parties currently are discussing how they will proceed.
The National Office of the NPMHU appreciates the patience and support of the membership. More information will be shared with the Local Unions next week...."
Collective Bargaining Begins between the National Postal Mail Handlers Union and the USPS
The National Postal Mail Handlers Union bargaining team met with representatives of the U.S. Postal Service on August 30, 2011 to mark the official start of the collective bargaining process for a successor agreement to replace the 2006 National Agreement which is scheduled to expire on November 20, 2011.
“We recognize the tough financial straits in which the Postal Service finds itself,” said National President John Hegarty, “and notwithstanding the unjustifiable actions recently taken by USPS Headquarters in asking Congress to overrule our collective bargaining agreement, we intend to work hard, in good faith, to try to reach an agreement.”
“We are not happy that the Postal Service has tried to abrogate the no-layoff clause through Congressional action, or that the Service has issued ill-advised proposals to pull out of the Federal health and retirement systems” said Hegarty, “but we intend to devote significant time and resources to try and reach a contract that is fair for the hard-working men and women whom we represent, fair for the USPS, and fair for the American mailing public.”
The NPMHU will put out periodic updates, in the form of bulletin board postings, as bargaining progresses. Please stay tuned.
