It Is Still Our Work!

(This article appeared in the March/April 2026 issue of The American Postal Worker magazine)

The Motor Vehicle Division continues to initiate national disputes challenging the Postal Service’s violations of various articles of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA); however, we continue to focus on Article 32 Subcontracting and management’s use of non-postal personnel performing bargaining unit work.

We have bargained for and fought over these subcontracting provisions throughout the bargaining history, and undoubtedly, the fighting will continue in the future.

HCR Non-Notification

There is specific language contained in Article 32.2 “Motor Vehicle Craft Highway Movement of Mail” of the CBA that requires notice to the union.

Article 32.2.F requires that “For all routes for which the Union submitted a cost comparison, if a contract is awarded, the Union will be furnished the cost of the contract.”  When the parties meet on a Highway Contract Route (HCR) renewal for which the union has submitted a cost comparison, if the contract is not awarded to the Postal Vehicle Service (PVS) bargaining unit, the Postal Service is contractually obligated to provide the cost and terms of the contract.

In numerous HCR renewal notices, after meeting, the Postal Service has failed to provide any notice of decision regarding those HCRs, including the specifics of the HCRs. The APWU initiated National Dispute HQTV20250282 regarding management’s failure to comply with Article 32.2 of the CBA and the Joint Contract Interpretation Manual (JCIM). This violation prevents the union from verifying that the HCR vendor costs less than the costs assigned to PVS based on legitimate, established costs.

The Craft also initiated Step 4 National Dispute HQTV 20250283 regarding the inaccurate information and inflated cost analyses for comparisons under Article 32.2.

During contractually-required meetings to exchange HCR cost analyses, certain cost figures that management provided to the APWU were unrealistic and impossible for them to support. It is not enough for the Postal Service to simply provide information; they must provide accurate data so that we can have meaningful dialogue. By providing inaccurate data, they deprive us of the right to challenge the process based on factual information.

National Dispute HQTV20250054 pertains to the requirement for Vehicle Operations Assistants (VOA) or other bargaining unit employees to complete Postal Service forms for duties that have previously been performed by management and are outside the scope of the VOA position description. These tasks included issuing PS-Form 2081 or any other official document to Freight Auction drivers. In at least one facility, the manager was pre-signing PS-Form 2081 for the VOAs to provide to the Freight Auction drivers; these drivers then had unfettered access to postal facilities wherever they were directed to take the mail by the broker, with no real background check, as required by the Management Instruction PO 530-2009-4.

Like the grievance process at the local level, the MVS Division requests information about subcontracting in both the Vehicle Maintenance Facilities (VMFs) and the PVS. We requested a VMF cost analysis for each facility. Management took a prolonged period of time to provide only a portion of the VMF sites, so we filed National Dispute HQTV20250293. The combination of management’s failure to provide timely and accurate information for both VMF and PVS information requests has a detrimental effect on our ability to enforce the contract at every level. Much like management’s inaccurate PVS analyses, the VMF information was clearly inaccurate. When the APWU challenged a few chosen VMF sites, management admitted their costs were incorrect. As we go to press, we are still waiting for accurate information to provide to the field.

In many of these disputes, delays were due to management’s inaction in providing information. Information requests are covered by Article 17.3 and 31.3 of the CBA and cannot be unreasonably denied by the employer.

“The Struggle Continues”