{"id":5902,"date":"2013-03-07T19:56:15","date_gmt":"2013-03-08T00:56:15","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/postalemployeenetwork.com\/news\/?p=5902"},"modified":"2013-03-07T19:56:15","modified_gmt":"2013-03-08T00:56:15","slug":"landmark-arbitration-award-reshapes-california-pvs-subcontracting","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/postalemployeenetwork.com\/news\/2013\/03\/07\/landmark-arbitration-award-reshapes-california-pvs-subcontracting\/","title":{"rendered":"Landmark Arbitration Award Reshapes California PVS Subcontracting"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Landmark Arbitration Award Reshapes California PVS Subcontracting
\n<\/strong>Ruling Has Implications for All Crafts<\/em><\/p>\n

In one of the first decisions<\/a> [PDF] interpreting the 2010-2015 Collective Bargaining Agreement, Arbitrator Stephen B. Goldberg ruled on March 4 that the USPS decision to subcontract Postal Vehicle Service work throughout California violated the contract.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is a big win,\u201d said President Cliff Guffey. \u201cIt demonstrates that the 2010-2015 Collective Bargaining Agreement<\/a> [PDF] strengthens our ability to protect APWU jobs.\u201d<\/p>\n

Arbitrator Goldberg rejected the USPS assertion that the Postal Service can overlook higher subcontracting costs when making outsourcing decisions.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Postal Service can no longer justify contracting out work that would be less expensive to keep in house\u201d on the grounds that it has given due consideration to cost as well as other factors outlined in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, Goldberg wrote. A Memorandum of Understanding <\/a>[(MOU) – PDF] negotiated as part of the 2010 Collective Bargaining Agreement states that if work can be performed by postal employees at a cost that is equal to or less than the cost of subcontracting, it will be performed in-house.<\/p>\n

Each of the factors listed in the CBA must be considered, the arbitrator wrote, \u201cbut 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.\u201d<\/p>\n

Goldberg also ruled that the Postal Service must follow steps outlined in Article 32.1.B of the Collective Bargaining Agreement before it can make and implement a decision to contract out PVS in California. In doing so, he rejected the USPS assertion that Article 32.1.B does not apply to PVS.<\/p>\n

Motor Vehicle Craft Director Bob Pritchard praised the ruling. \u201cThis award will help us continue the fight to protect jobs,\u201d he said. \u201cThat\u2019s a fight we intend to win.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThere is still a great deal of work to be done,\u201d he cautioned. \u201cWe will be very busy compiling the evidence necessary to demonstrate that postal drivers can run routes at a lower cost than subcontractors.\u201d<\/p>\n

Significant Subcontracting<\/strong><\/p>\n

In accordance with Article 32.1.B, the Postal Service must take specific steps when it is considering subcontracting that will have a significant impact on bargaining unit work.<\/p>\n

The USPS must:<\/p>\n