General Expeditors/Dock Clerks and the Dispatch Coordinator Position Myth

The Dispatch Coordinator position myth is just another example of the Postal Service’s attempts to not only divide postal unions, but crafts within the APWU, pitting members of one craft against the other. Our fight is against the Postal Service.

In 2021, under the USPS Realignment, management tried to separate General Expeditors (working on the dock) and Dock Clerks from the General Expeditors, who worked exclusively within the facility. They wanted to place these specific employees under Logistics, answering to a Motor Vehicle Service (MVS) supervisor. We prevailed.

In a letter to the APWU, dated Dec. 23, 2022, the Postal Service proposed to update the General Expediter P7-07 (Occupation Code 2315- 11XX) job description. Additionally, the Postal Service was proposing the creation of a Clerk Dispatch Coordinator (P7-07) senior qualified position.

The Postal Service stated that the proposed changes to the General Expeditor job description were necessary to reflect the work more accurately, as it is currently performed, add national qualification standards, and clearly differentiate responsibilities from the newly proposed dispatch coordinator position.

The new Clerk Dispatch Coordinator P-07 position was proposed as a senior qualified job to coordinate arrivals and departures, ensure adherence to dispatch schedules, and ensure transportation is available in accordance with the operational plan.

The APWU filed an Article 19 National Dispute (APWU No. A19C20230125) in March 2023 contesting these proposals and revisions, to include the addition of a new qualification standard.

After the Clerk Division fi led our national dispute, the Postal Service revised the proposed Clerk Dispatch Coordinator, senior qualified position and replaced it with a proposed, newly-created position in the MVS craft as a level-8 best qualified position open to all crafts. In our 15-Day Statement, we amended our position to include the following issue:

Did the Postal Service violate the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) when it first proposed to revise and delete duties of the General Expeditor and create a senior-qualified Level 7 Dispatch Coordinator position, which was assigned to the Clerk Craft but was required to report to Function 3 – Logistics supervision? Secondly, was the CBA violated when, after meeting with the Clerk Division, the Postal Service subsequently assigned the Dispatch Coordinator position to the Motor Vehicle Craft, changing it to Level 8 best-qualified, and maintaining the minimum qualification Virtual Entry Assessment (VEA) Entrance Test – Mail Processing (MP) 476 Examination Requirement? If so, what is the appropriate remedy?

Note: Bulk Mail Dock Clerks are also included in the issue and remedy as they exist at Bulk Mail Centers and Network Distribution Centers.

We have shared a full detailed copy of the APWU Clerk Division’s 15-Day Statement with the field.

The minimum qualification for the newly-created MVS dispatch coordinator position still requires a minimum qualification for a mail processing clerk. They are still treating this job as a clerk craft position. This will only lead to the reduction of Bulk Mail Dock Clerks and General Expeditor positions in the long run, when the jobs should be increasing within the new Regional Processing Centers. This is the Postal Service’s end around effort to circumvent the national agreement. It is still the Clerk Division’s official position that the Postal Service must remove the exclusive MVS craft duties that were later added from the position, once properly returned to the Clerk craft. This position was created in lieu of the Clerk Dispatch Coordinator, which was already the subject of a pending national dispute.

The MVS craft also filed their own national dispute once the Postal Service created the newly proposed MVS Dispatch Coordinator position as a MVS best qualified position. MVS took the position that the revised standard position descriptions and qualifications created a hybrid position comprised of work from already established positions, which would also undoubtedly shift bargaining unit work to supervisors in violation of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. ■