| ET9 CODE |
| This web page, though slow in loading (PLEASE BE PATIENT), will provide detailed information and periodic updates about the 1993 Agreement that degraded the USPS ET9. A Certified Mail letter was sent to Jim Lingberg, and "CC"ed to Randy Sutton, and Moe Biller, more than a year ago, addressing the degradation of the ET9s.(please scroll down this page to view the letter and the ET9 Degradation Impact sheet) There has been NO RESPONSE "IN KIND"! ....why do you think that is? DISCLAIMER All information contained on this page is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Opinions expressed are my own and in no way reflect the opinions of the USPS or APWU. |
 |
|
|
| In spite of the current unfortunate situation regarding the downgrading of the Electronic(s) Technicians, the USPS is a good place to work. The APWU has done valuable work in uplifting the lot of all postal workers, including maintenance craft employees. Everyone concerned is urged to maintain the same high quality of work that they usually perform. Technicians especially are encouraged to maintain the same quality and standards of work that propelled the USPS to its status as a world class organization. It is hoped that this unfortunate situation will be resolved in the best interests of the technicians and all workers at the USPS. |
| Even though the USPS uses an Occupation Code Listing called "Qualification Standards", it's format is modeled after the OPM (4 digits-4 digits). Government agencies rely on the USPS code as an OPM code. Specifically, ALL US GOVERNMENT AGENCIES outside of the USPS and EVEN a foreign country's (Canada) Immigration Department evaluates your USPS occupation code as an OPM code. |
| The following letter is the FIRST one sent to APWU National Maintenance Craft EX-Director, Jim Lingberg. A SECOND, and THIRD, identical letter with the signatures of 13 APWU Maintenance Craft Dues Paying Member ET9s, from the Philadelphia P&DC, was mailed on March 1, 2001. Why doesn't Mr. Lingberg respond? Lingberg's silence seems to speak volumes! |
| PLEASE BE SURE TO SIGN AND READ THE GUEST BOOK! |
| THE FOLLOWING POSTING IS BY STEVEN G. RAYMER, OUR NEWLY ELECTED NATIONAL MAINTENANCE CRAFT DIRECTOR. WITH REGARD TO THE ET9 DOWNGRADING, HERE ARE STEVE'S COMMENTS: The bottom line, in a nutshell, is: 1.) This was done under the table and most of those rank and file members involved in the "consolidation" knew nothing of it. It was strictly a dog and pony show by APWU Maintenance HQ. 2.) There was NO point to doing this (changing the code) to the ETs. If the job code doesn't matter (as the incumbent purports), for pay or anything else, why change it?! 3.) This will definitely be used against us in any effort to upgrade ETs. Maybe that's why others, not ETs, are being proposed for re-ranking. 4.) It is inexcusable that this change would be passed through HQ Maintenance APWU without an understanding of the scope of the impact. The Union exists to provide choice to members, even if transfer to other Federal agency, not to put up such road blocks. |
| ELECTRONICS TECHNICIAN is not equal to ELECTRONIC TECHNICIAN OPM JOB CODE 0856 is not equal to OPM JOB CODE 2604 THE SMALL DIFFERENCE IS THE MISSING "S" THE BIG DIFFERENCE IS YOUR FUTURE If you don't understand, check your SF 50 before and after October 1993. Check the spelling of Electronic(s). |
| The following comment is a rebuttal to EX- Director Lingberg's "Electronic Technician Information" statement |
| Please visit 21st Century Postal Worker Maintenance Craft Message Exchange for important information regarding USPS/APWU Maintenance issues, including the ET9/MAINTENANCE DOWNGRADING |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |