All Sections ------------------------------- News & Events Pay & Benefits Departments & Divisions Members Only

Advanced Search

Printer-Friendly Page

Consumers, Workers Get Glimpse Of Future Plans

Some Operations Consolidated as ‘Network Realignment’ Begins

(This article was first published in the January/February 2006 issue of The American Postal Worker magazine.)

To the consternation of the American public and APWU members, the Postal Service began making announcements late last year that it was consolidating “some operations” at approximately a dozen processing and distribution facilities, and conducting Area Mail Processing feasibility surveys at others.

The AMP studies are likely to result in additional instances of consolidation, and the APWU, at all levels, continues to press the Postal Service for details on its plans.

In a battle that predates the Postal Service’s “Transformation Plan” (now four years old), the APWU has repeatedly asked the USPS for advance notice of its intentions to consolidate facilities. The failure to do so has aroused anger at the local level and suspicion at the highest level of the union. Last April, the Government Accountability Office released a report that criticized the Postal Service plan for “network realignment,” saying it lacked “clarity, criteria, and accountability.”

A Reluctance to Reveal

“The Postal Service has stated that it is reluctant to publicly disclose information on its realignment strategy,” the GAO report noted, “because it believes that it will meet with resistance from employees, communities, and government representatives if it tells them what it is planning on doing too far in advance.”

The GAO report noted that the Postal Service’s strategy was perceived as unclear in part because it “has outlined seemingly different strategies.”

“While the Postal Service has announced various plans ... it recently announced that it is pursuing an evolutionary strategy — that will respond to opportunities as they arise — and has provided little information about any of these efforts.”

The AMP studies clearly are part of a comprehensive plan that promises changes far greater than those experienced in the past. It will no doubt result in the dislocation of several thousand APWU members and deteriorated service.

“The union is determined to protect jobs and the level of service that the American public has the right to expect,” said APWU President William Burrus. “The national union will work in concert with dedicated activists at the local level to develop and implement a cohesive program to galvanize public response.”

Olympian Efforts

Activities by the Olympia (WA) Local in response to a plan to move the city’s mail processing to Tacoma (a much larger city 30 miles away) may prove to be a model for other APWU locals fighting consolidation. The Olympia Local has taken its message public — and loudly — and has challenged each claim the Postal Service has made.

“The Olympia APWU Local honestly believes that a plan to transfer mail operations to Tacoma will cost the Postal Service more money and will reduce service to the local community and the state,” said Clint Burelson, the Olympia Local’s president. “It is also our contention that the Postal Service is purposefully misleading the public on this issue.”

Olympia is Washington state’s capital, and when the Postal Service announced the realignment, it essentially meant that the “ Olympia ” postmark itself was history.

“At first the Postal Service tried to justify making the capital go without a postmark by saying that moving the mail processing to Tacoma would mean an overall increase in productivity,” Burelson said.

“That scenario might be possible if the Tacoma plant was more productive than the Olympia facility,” Burelson said. “But according to the Postal Service, the Olympia facility is the most productive of its size in the entire nation and 28th among plants of all sizes.”

Among other things, Burelson pointed out, management has repeatedly failed to follow the collective bargaining agreement in its excessing projections. To follow the agreement, it would have to separate all casuals in the installation, reduce the hours of all the PTFs, reassign temporarily injured employees in the carrier craft who are working in the clerk craft, and reduce the amount of overtime hours.

“If management followed the contract on excessing, there would likely be no employees excessed,”Burelson said.

Postmark’s the Spotlight

The USPS plans for Olympia proved to be a contentious issue, one that reached all the way to the offices of Washington congressmen Brian Baird (D) and Adam Smith (D). In a letter to Postmaster General John E. Potter, the two asked whether the Postal Service’s disdain for public opinion about the postmark was indicative of the rest of its plans: “Does the USPS consider the history of opposition by local, state, and congressional government representatives, local mailers and the community as they conduct analyses and consider plans to consolidate? If so, what is the rationale for proceeding with the consolidation of the Olympia P&DC?”

The postmark itself — the current plan is to have a shared “Tacoma/Olympia” designation — is no mere cosmetic matter. Washington state residents vote by mail and all ballots must be postmarked by Election Day: If the postmark is not applied that day, the ballots are invalidated. Property tax payments and IRS filings that are not postmarked on the day mailed will result in financial penalties. In addition, many business, legal, and state transactions involving the requirement of a postmark will also be in jeopardy.

“Most people can mail their letters after work and the Olympia Plant will place that day’s postmark on the mail and send it on its way in a timely manner,” Burelson said. “An earlier cutoff time would mean a major readjustment and will jeopardize important citizen, business, legal and state correspondence.”

Letters to the editors at Olympia-area newspapers make the same point. While there is concern about the postmark, primarily there is concern with the service historically associated with having the postmark in Olympia. The postmark usually signifies where the mail is processed. Processing the mail in Olympia provides better service to the entire state because of the mailing cutoff times that allow state agencies the time to get the mail to citizens all over the state.

Consumers across the country have joined the APWU and other groups to protest mail-processing realignment. Whether it is in Greensburg (PA), Memphis, Red Bank (NJ), Owensboro (KY), Utica (NY), or Albuquerque, the message is much the same: Since postal officials won’t answer questions about their plans or the expected results of their plans, they shouldn’t be allowed to take actions that would disrupt the lives of workers and consumers. Further review is warranted.

“The fact is that the Postal Service has already been criticized for failures of communication and that it continues to ignore the criticisms of its vague plans,” Burelson said, “It should be required to cease all consolidations until such time that transparency and fairness can be assured.”

[back to top]