Alan....
One of the biggest problems I've seen with the NRLCA is that it appears to be strictly reactionary. The board reacts to things that have already happened...and then has little success in getting them overturned. The medical world used to be much the same, but we've seen "preventive medicine" make giant leaps over the past few decades as insurance companies realize that it makes much more sense, and is far less costly, to PREVENT things from happening as opposed to simply treating them AFTER the fact.
While I am NOT running for national office, I've stated that if I was I would forgo part of my salary and encourage other board members to do the same,to create a new position who would pour over the contract and potential future developments and seek not only clarification on some issues, but elimination of others.
In other words, if you want to know management's next line of thinking, you have to think like management.
Postal district offices are filled with $80,000 salaried employees who do the same thing for the USPS year round. When the USPS announces one move aimed at eroding our salaries, you can bet there's another 20 such moves waiting in the can.
Speaking of clarification, the national agreement is filled with gray areas and despite the fact that the same disputes arise year after year, count after count, nothing is done to clarify these issues. Perhaps the contract should be re-written in layman's terms... black and white so that ALL can come to the same interpretation. Why should a contract be written in terms that only a lawyer can understand, when it involves 100,000 carriers?
