This is the twenty-ninth FYI to be released to the membership. As always, I hope this FYI will provide you with relevant information on the Local’s activities. If you have any questions, feel free to convey them to the Local at 303-455-6400.

Local 321 would like to wish you all a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. The Executive Board recently voted to provide King Soopers Gift Certificates for Christmas this year to all of our members. The amount of the certificate will be $10.00 and is accepted by King Soopers and City Market (Grand Junction Area). These certificates are being issued in appreciation of your continuing support.

A separate posting is being distributed to provide you with an update of the National Contract Negotiation talks. The bottom line is talks are continuing, but the service does not appear to be compelled to offer anything that will lead to settlement. Our gut feeling is that we will end up in arbitration this year.

The Union will be looking at various things for possible distribution to the membership sometime after the first of the year. Obviously no decision has been made as of yet, but we are soliciting any ideas which the membership may have in this area. Keep in mind that clothing is almost impossible because of sizing problems. The decision will be made after we have an idea of our financial prognosis for next year.

As has been conveyed to you previously there are considerable abuse problems by management when it comes to your FMLA rights. Over the last month several things have occurred which offer some hope at resolvement.

According to what we understand the Department of Labor has conveyed the following positions to the Postal Service.

1. The 1250 hours of work in the prior year to be eligible is only to be evaluated for the first absence in a year for a qualified condition. If you have a covered condition, which requires intermittent leave, management should not be reevaluating you under the 1250-hour test on each and every occurrence. The Postal Service seems to have given in to the DOL position but has not made any change officially yet.

2. Frequently, when an employee takes time off for an FMLA covered condition, management wants to force the employee to submit a return to work packet. In essence the packet requires detailed medical information and the approval of the Postal Medical Director before a return to work is allowed. The Department of Labor attempted to resolve this position with the Postal Service but it appears they are unwilling to commit to a change in their practice. The Department of Labor position is that the law only requires a simple statement from the doctor and that the service cannot interfere with an employee’s return from an FMLA covered absence. Obviously if an employee is being told to submit to a return to work packet a complaint should be filed with the Wage and Hours Division of the Department of Labor.

3. It should also be noted that the Department of Labor has notified the Postal Service that they cannot be imposing time frames for medical information and then completely cut the employee off when that time frame expires. If management tells you that you have 10 days to provide information and it takes you 11 they are still obligated to receive your paperwork and consider it.

Recently a new Homepage on the Internet was established for the purpose of locating Uniform vendors for Postal Clothing. Additionally the Homepage gives access to several vendors where ordering can by done on-line. They also boast that they are developing a section where you can shop for the best value or cost. If anyone is interested this homepage is accessible through a new link added to Local 321’s homepage.

Recently there have been a couple of concerns about redress sessions and the participants. It appears that management would generally like to redress cases without involving the specific supervisor who the complaint was filed against. In some situations this may not be a problem but in many cases this does not actually allow for anything to get resolved because the responsible supervisor does not have to be subject to the process. If management attempts to hold a redress meeting without the charged supervisor involved and you feel it necessary you must ask for the redress to be rescheduled when the supervisor can be present. Also keep in mind that when you opt for the redress process on an EEO you should make it clear at that time if you want the supervisor involved.

As always, I can be contacted as follows: Office 303-455-6400, Pager 303-767-8293, Cell 303-520-7619 or at home at 303-451-7562.

David E Ross

President Local 321

NPMHU

11/29/00