Union Wins Motor Vehicle Subcontracting Case

Case Has Important Implications for All Crafts

The APWU has won an important arbitration case on subcontracting in the Motor Vehicle Craft that has important implications for the entire APWU, Motor Vehicle Craft Director Bob Pritchard announced on March 5.

“This is a big achievement for the union,” said APWU President Cliff Guffey. “It confirms that the 2010-2015 Collective Bargaining Agreement gives us more teeth to protect APWU jobs.

In the March 4 decision [PDF], Arbitrator Steven B. Goldberg ruled:

“The Postal Service can no longer justify contracting out work that would be less expensive to keep in house on the ground that it has given due consideration to cost as well as the other Article 32.1 or 32.2 factors. To be sure, each of those factors must be considered, but if factors other than cost do not rule out keeping work in house, and the cost of keeping work in house would be less than contracting out, both the text and the bargaining history of the Contracting MOU require that the work be kept in house.”

Award Summary

  1. Article 32.1.8 applies to the proposed California mode conversion. Accordingly, the Postal Service must comply with Article 32.1.8 before making a final decision on whether or not California PVS work will be contracted out.
  2. Article 32.2 does not apply to the California mode conversion.
  3. The Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Contracting or lnsourcing of Contracted Services applies to all contracting out of highway transportation work, including that controlled by Article 32.2.
  4. The “fair comparison of all reasonable costs” called for by the Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Contracting or lnsourcing of Contracted Services is to be made at the times called for by Article 32 — in an Article 32.1.8 proceeding at the time the Comparative Analysis report is being developed; in an Article 32.2 proceeding within 45 days of the Postal Service furnishing the Union with the information called for by Article 32.2.C.
  5. The Arbitrator shall retain jurisdiction of this matter to resolve such additional issues arising out of the proposed California mode conversion as the parties may bring before him.

5 thoughts on “Union Wins Motor Vehicle Subcontracting Case

  1. Preston, I agree.

    After seeing what the other 2 unions got I do believe our PTF’s got totally screwed by not being converted to regular. Why is that? I am a regular but it also hurts me because I will never have a good run to bid on becuase every time a regular leaves the run is CHOPPED up.

  2. wow, that @enufisenuf sure does hold a lot of postal jobs in a lot of various crafts!….lol i believe she/he voted in
    the NALC and the NPMHU elections as well
    as the APWU election. i’m just surprised she/he hasn’t professed belonging to the
    NAPS and NAPUS org as well.

  3. So does anyone really believe this brings a halt to subcontracting driver work? All it says is that each and every one of the 5 factors in Art 32 MUST be given due consideration. Once they do that and the figures add up, they are free to subcontract. Nothing new here. Goofey and the gang shouldn’t be peddling this as some sort of slam dunk. Goldberg did not prohibit subcontracting in his decision. Read it. It’s not as important as Goofey wants you to believe it is. USPS just needs to do their homework…that’s all. Does anyone know how I can tap the APWU Officer only Retirement Fund when I leave? You know…the one I paid for with my union dues.

  4. great work Bob and Mike and the team in DC. can you tell us whats the status of the 32 hour work week imposed on the PTF’s that were converted 2010-2015 collective berganing agreement. some of these employees were transfers and have many years in the post office and to add insult to injury no other craft have NTFI Duty Assignments. thanks in advance.

Comments are closed.