 |
| William Burrus, National APWU President |
As I reported in Update #15-2006 (Oct. 30, 2006), contract negotiations were proceeding as expected, with the union submitting proposals intended to improve the conditions of postal employees, and the USPS offering proposals that would degrade employee rights and benefits.
The Postal Service’s negative proposals were anticipated, and did not differ drastically from those presented in previous negotiations. As discussions transpired, we held guarded expectations that a final agreement could be reached on or before Nov. 20, the date the current Collective Bargaining Agreement expires.
Unfortunately, our hopes came crashing down at the negotiating session held Oct. 31, when management presented a series of proposals that, if adopted, would drastically demean postal employment. The subjects included:
- Elimination of no-layoff protection
- Increased use of casuals
- Expansion of part-time employment
- Elimination of local negotiations
- Modification of holiday scheduling and pay
- Expansion of work and/or time standards
The union’s response is straightforward: These proposals are “dead on arrival.”
The USPS decision to submit such outrageous suggestions can only hinder negotiations. Clearly, management knows the union would never entertain such regressive proposals.
What message is the Postal Service sending by introducing these proposals? Perhaps management has no real interest in reaching a negotiated agreement. If, on the other hand, this is merely a bargaining tactic, postal negotiators should rethink their strategy and work to get back on track by considering how we can move forward together toward a positive conclusion.
William Burrus
President
