 Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee.
I am pleased to appear on behalf of the 240,000 active letter carriers represented by the National Association of Letter Carriers, to express our views on the latest GAO Report on labor-management problems at the United States Postal Service.
I know that the Committee has reviewed NALC's statement regarding the Report, printed on pages 80-88. I do not intend to repeat what was said there in any detail, but I do want to emphasize two major points, because they go to the heart of this entire process, and, in our view, they raise serious questions about inquiries of this character.
First, we believe that GAO's methodology was fundamentally flawed. The selection of ten so-called "specific improvement initiatives" and then attempting to measure success by interviewing a number of interested parties about them, is hardly a sophisticated approach. Labor relations in general is a highly-nuanced activity, and does not lend itself to a bean-counting methodology. Labor relations in the Postal Service, covering over 800,000 employees and a number of unions and management associations, is an extraordinarily complex subject; attempting to measure progress, or lack of it, in so crude a manner is simply not a very productive exercise. To compound this flaw, only four of the initiatives selected involved NALC in any manner. Three others are said to be too early in their history to provide a basis for full assessment.
The other major point I want to make is that we are very concerned about the role of government monitorship of, or inadvertent intrusion into, the practice of free collective bargaining.
The plain and simple fact is that labor-management problems must be confronted and settled by the participants to the relationship: labor and management. The idea of intervention into this complex relationship by government undermines the very concept of free collective bargaining. The bedrock principle of American labor law is that government establishes the basic procedural framework, but that the parties then have the burden--and the obligation--to shape their own relationship, bargain and balance.
That's where NALC stands on the fundamental question of the meaning and utility of the GAO Report.
On a positive note, I do want to report a number of significant developments in the often difficult relationship between USPS and NALC. These developments are a strong indication that the participants in this mature relationship will understand that it is in their joint interest--and the overriding interests of the American public--for agreements to be hammered out which address problems of joint concern.
First, the parties have agreed upon a one-year test of a new Dispute Resolution Process aimed at speeding action on grievances and reducing the number of arbitrations. Key elements of the agreement include:
- Deferral of discipline in test areas until after a decision by the joint NALC/USPS Team, except in certain removals involving crime, violence, intoxication or other specified incidents.
- A joint NALC/USPS contract interpretation manual will be used as the basis for the Team decisions.
- Joint training will be conducted for Team appointees. The representatives will not be certified until such training has been successfully completed.
In an immediate effort to reduce the current arbitration backlog, cases pending regular arbitration in test areas will be reviewed for possible resolution. The process will eventually be extended to all districts.
Second, the NALC and Postal Service have agreed to conduct a joint test to determine how letter carrier work can be changed to meet the future needs of the Postal Service and the inevitable changes in the mail environment.
The agreement states that the goal of both NALC and USPS is an efficient, highly productive and more competitive Postal Service, and that the union and postal management recognize that it is in the interest of both management and the union that the parties work cooperatively to this end.
To achieve this goal, NALC and USPS will engage in a joint test to determine how letter carrier work can be changed to meet the future needs of the Postal Service and the inevitable changes in the mail environment.
Third, NALC and USPS have agreed upon a procedure to resolve problems related to the so-called "fourth bundle" dispute, which has been a major source of contention. While this procedure has not been problem-free, there is a joint determination at the headquarters level of USPS and NALC to reduce areas of conflict.
Finally, NALC, together with the three other major unions, USPS management and management associations, have agreed to continue the Summit Process initiated by the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.
At our five and one-half hour meeting last month, the heads of each organization committed to continued top-level participation in this evolving process and agreed to quarterly meetings with FMCS participation and guidance to further the process.
In conclusion, I want to emphasize that, in our view, none of the foregoing is a magic solution to labor-management problems at the Postal Service. There is no magic wand that anyone, including GAO can wave. That is not to say that change is impossible. Of course, it is not. Indeed, it is necessary.
But it must, and will, come from the parties themselves.
We must, and we will, find our own way.
Thank you. |
