Photo by Timothy Eberly on Unsplash |
The change has been planned for years, but the information given to carriers has been inconsistent, and implementation has faced delays, Dayen reports: "Two years ago, as RRECS was getting finalized, workers were told that most carriers would see modest changes at most," Dayen writes. "But losing four hours a week can translate into an annual salary cut of $8,000, according to letter carriers who spoke on condition of anonymity. . . . Two weeks ago, the NRLCA said it was working to resolve disputes over implementation. RRECS' implementation was recently delayed. . . . There are rumors that it has been delayed again for one more pay period, but since it was established by a binding arbitration ruling, RRECS will eventually govern rural letter-carrier pay."
"The inner workings of the RRECS algorithm and the calculations that went into it remain a closely guarded secret. But rural letter carriers have been told what the new evaluation means for them, and message boards, private Facebook groups, and other social media sites have lit up in the past few weeks as a result." Dayden reports. "A TikTok video from a carrier, who claims he will lose $12,000 per year, cited the threats to the postal system from the changes. 'A lot of you may not be getting mail today. We've had some people walk out.'. . . . In a statement, a USPS spokesperson said, 'The compensation system for rural letter carriers is a nationally negotiated pay system codified in the parties' national agreement. . . . Parties worked jointly for years to implement these new provisions.'. . . The agency did not respond to questions about how it will ensure mail delivery if walkouts increase."
Rural carriers are not paid like their urban counterparts, "who are paid by the hour," Dayen notes. "Those who work in rural areas are paid based on an evaluation of how many hours per week it takes to complete their route. Some of these areas have an enormous footprint and require lots of driving. But under federal law, USPS must serve all mailboxes, regardless of whether they cost more money for delivery than the revenue they bring in. . . . For many years, an official mail count evaluated how long the route took to complete. . . .There were tensions between the union and USPS over whether the mail count could be manipulated to reduce pay. This became a point of contention in bargaining sessions."
No comments:
Post a Comment