William Burrus  APWU President

Ask the President

Question:

Please enlighten us regarding the MVS Memo that has everyone outraged.

Don, Louisville Local

President Burrus:

Thank you for your inquiry regarding the Memorandum of Understanding [PDF] dated Jan. 15, 2009. I have been informed that there have been negative reactions to the agreement, which I attribute to a lack of understanding of the Memo’s purpose.

The terms of the Memorandum do not provide postal management the right to change any employee’s hours of work. More than a month after it was signed, not one MVS employee has had his or her hours of work changed as a result — and none will, unless explicit approval is granted by the union’s national office.

The Memo is intended to facilitate discussions. As you may know, a great deal of the work traditionally performed by MVS employees has been subcontracted, and we have found that we have little leverage to re-gain that work. While we will continue our efforts to stop subcontracting and to strengthen contract language on this subject, we must explore other ways to “grow the craft.”

We cannot grow the craft if we insist that we will only accept new work that fits within a nine-hour schedule. As an example, let us assume that we could re-gain the work of 10 MVS assignments that are presently subcontracted, but only if the work is spread over a 10-hour day.

The union would be foolish to take the position that we will bring the work back to the MVS Craft only if the assignments are established at eight hours within nine.

In discussions regarding the return of work, the union and management would present their positions, and negotiations would ensure. The union will retain the right to agree or disagree with management proposals.

In such negotiations, the union could propose a freeze on existing schedules of eight hours within nine. This would guarantee that no existing employees would experience a schedule change, but new employees performing new work could have extended schedules as agreed to. Management could reject this approach and the union could likewise reject any effort to change existing schedules. This is the process of negotiations.

Although no MVS employees have experienced a schedule change as a result of the Memo, likewise, no discussions have transpired to date about assuming work performed by contractors — because the process of negotiations has not begun.

The Memorandum was intended as a vehicle to facilitate discussions. I look forward to such discussions and the opportunity to grow the craft.

Feb. 24, 2009

[For more on this issue, see PVS Pilot Program to Amend Work Rules at Selected Sites].