Review of the USPS Public Meeting on March 6, 2024

The recent public notification regarding the relocation of operations from the South Jersey Processing and Distribution Center (P&DC) to the Philadelphia P&DC by the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) has been met with criticism. The announcement of the public meeting on March 6, 2024, at 1 PM, at the Cherry Hill Public Library was poorly timed and inadequately notified, leaving little opportunity for meaningful community engagement.

The public meeting held today, at the Cherry Hill Public Library saw minimal participation, with only one customer, several representatives of local unions, and employees, including veterans, in attendance. This low turnout is indicative of the inadequate public notification and highlights the lack of awareness or concern among the broader community regarding the potential impact of USPS’s decision. The fact that the meeting primarily attracted individuals directly affected by the relocation further underscores the need for more extensive outreach and transparent communication from USPS.

One of the concerning aspects of the community meeting was the false information provided regarding job displacement. While USPS claims that there will be no layoffs or closure of the facility, the reality is that employees may be uprooted from their base of operations, leading to instability and potential job loss for some. This discrepancy raised serious questions about USPS’s transparency and credibility in this matter.

The impact of the relocation of operations from the South Jersey Processing and Distribution Center to the Philadelphia P&DC has already led to a decline in delivery service standards, as evidenced by mail delivery delays and the loss of mail and packages. If this trend continues unchecked, it could have serious repercussions for employees and customers alike in the future. Employees face the prospect of job displacement and instability, while customers may experience further delays and disruptions in mail delivery. It is crucial that these issues are addressed promptly to prevent further deterioration of delivery service standards and mitigate the negative impact on employees and customers.

Furthermore, there was no substantial evidence provided to support USPS’s claims of inaccuracies in reporting statistical information. When questioned about the logistics of operations and the real impact on customers, USPS was unable to provide satisfactory answers. This lack of concern or knowledge about the real impact of their decisions on the community is alarming and further erodes trust in USPS’s decision-making process.

Instead of addressing these concerns, USPS seemed to be attempting to cover up the reality of the situation with promises of updating facilities, equipment, and vehicles. While these may be necessary improvements, they did not address the immediate issues at hand or the concerns of the community. Overall, the handling of this situation by USPS was very disappointing and raises serious questions about their commitment to serving the public interest.

Moving forward, it is essential for USPS to engage in more meaningful dialogue with the community, address concerns regarding job stability and operational impact, and ensure transparency in its decision-making processes to uphold its commitment to serving the public interest. It is imperative that we, as members of the community, demand greater transparency and accountability from USPS regarding the relocation of operations from the South Jersey Processing and Distribution Center to the Philadelphia P&DC. We must urge USPS to reconsider its decision and engage in more meaningful dialogue with the community, addressing concerns regarding job stability, operational impact, and public notification. Our voices must be heard to ensure that any changes made benefit all stakeholders involved and uphold USPS’s commitment to serving the public interest. Reach out to your local neighbors, businesses and people of local government and Congressional representatives to push back for a better solution!

Below, you can view and DOWNLOAD USPS’s presentation

Loader Loading...
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

Download [10.21 MB]

Latest Information & Updates

From the Desk of Robert Armentani
President, South Jersey Area Local – APWU

It has come to my attention that a Service Talk was given by management regarding the current financial status of the USPS and all the changes that need to be made so that we can remain financially solvent. I was also informed that this talk came with no explanations on how we are being impacted.

On Tuesday 7/14/2020 myself and Executive Vice President Ed Lafferty were asked to attend a meeting with the SJ P&DC Plant Manager regarding the removal of machines from the building and the impact it would have on staffing.

Here is a breakdown of the notes that I took during the meeting.

We have been informed that the SJ Plant will be losing 9 machines: 7 DBCS, 1 AFCS and 1 Flat Sorter. All will be out of service by 7/24/2020. The remaining DBCS machines will be expanded to 302 stackers. We asked about having two sweepers. This will be discussed further when the changes are set to be made.

There will be no more DPS 1st pass on Saturday nights and DPS will start earlier on Sundays.

Staffing for each tour will be changing and there will be re-bidding.

We were told that T-1 will be more like T-2 and T-2 will be more like T-1. There is possible sectional excessing.

The following will be needed on each tour. (Before the expansion to 302)

– T1 – 17 machines Sun to Fri and 5 on Sat (34 employees Sun to Fri and 10 on Sat)

– T2 – 9 machines every day (18 employees)

– T3 – 17 machines Sun to Fri and 4 on Sat (34 employees Sun to Fri and 8 on Sat)

Asked if PSEs will be moving to different tours and was told PSEs will not be moved to T2.

No reduction in PSEs at this time but will probably come later.

The approved Function 1 model is for 189 employees and we currently have 200 on rolls. Therefore, we are currently 11 employees over their approved plan.

Plan is not to excess from the facility but likely possible. We will be kept informed of any decision.

We requested that if there is a need to reduce FTR employees that it be done by attrition rather than excessing. We were told that this will be reviewed and may be possible.

Maintenance – Just with taking out the machines it will reduce workforce by 11 jobs

– Positions will be ETs, MPEs and MMs (not sure how many of each yet)

– Asked about open jobs to offset. Said there may be one on T-1

MVS – No affect on MVS at this point.

You can download this same letter from this link: President Letter for P&DC Bellmawr Plant 2020

Latest Updates and Information

NALC Food Drive Postponement
Our Sisters and Brothers at the NALC have had to postpone the annual food drive.  It will be rescheduled and we encourage you all to support it when it is rescheduled.

Please Disseminate.

Vance Zimmerman
Industrial Relations Director
____________________________________________ DON’T Sign the Petition  has a petition to sign for hazard pay. Our recommendation is NOT to sign this petition. The language could be construed as an act of bargaining unit rights of the Union as it deals with wages. I’ve also attached the Stand Up Talk given on social media from February 25, 2020, which signing the petition could be seen as a violation of this policy and we again recommend NOT signing this due to possible ramifications.

Michael J Wright
Director of Associate Offices

Maintenance Update_4.1.2020
COVID-19 SUT 19_ALL EMPLOYEES_Employee Privacy_4.1.2020

Brothers and Sisters,

Please see the attached notification and the email below in which the Postal Service provided answers to my questions regarding the updates to CODES and the changes to the F-55 and F-85 Handbooks.

Sam Lisenbe
Assistant Director, Clerk Craft

Notification No#3 FY 2020 (3.11.2020)_4.5.2020

    1. <1.> Regarding the Computerized On-Site Data Entry System (CODES) – Is there any dispute that data entry is a clerk craft function?

Data Collection Technician positions are clerk craft positions and are trained data collectors who perform data entry into the CODES software. 

    1. <2.> The 3-6-20 notification letter identifies the procedures for these programs as “data collection”. Who (which craft) will perform the data collection duties involving CCCS, RCCS, and SIRVI?

See above – clerk craft.

    1. <3.> Regarding the In-Office Cost System (IOCS) – At what point, once mail and mail containers are received, is it anticipated/expected that barcode scanning should be performed for IOCS? Is this scanning considered the same as or similar to Arrival-at-Unit scanning? In addition, is the clerk craft assigned to perform the scanning for IOCS?

No, the scans for IOCS have nothing to do with Arrival-At-Unit scans, which are focused on tracking the flow of mail. Instead, IOCS takes a “snapshot in time” of what the sampled employee is doing. After randomly selecting an employee and randomly selecting a moment in time of that employee’s workday, the IOCS data collector (clerk craft) gets scans of the one mailpiece that the employee is handling at that moment. They’ll also scan any barcodes on mail-holding containers (e.g. trays, APCs, pallets) that the employee is handling at that moment.

    1. <4.> Are these changes to the CODES software and data collection policies and procedures expected to affect data collection staffing?


Going the distance

COVID-19 MOU Work Exceptions
While I understand I am not signatory to the COVID-19 exceptions, I am making this suggestion/recommendation to the locals as the Clerk Division Director, in the best interest of our employees, while considering these are very trying times, requiring tough decisions.

The MOUs require the postal service to maximize the employees in many cases as part of the pecking  order.

If I were implementing these agreements at the local level, I would use my judgment on when and how I would be filing grievances.

Any employee that wants to maximize their work opportunities I would afford them those rights per the Agreements.

If an employee did not want to maximize the opportunities due to their own personal safety  reasons, I would secure it in writing from the employee and I would not file a grievance when the postal service failed to maximize the work opportunities per the MOUs pecking order as a result of the clerk employee choosing not to work.

These are very personal decisions. While we do not like opening the door for other crafts or Postmasters to perform bargaining unit work, it is a balancing act of not forcing our folks to work under safety conditions they choose not to work and providing service.

In a perfect world we would hope the overtime desired list and volunteers would suffice.

This pandemic only proves how imperfect our world is.

Be safe and work safe while considering your family and you,

This is not to take away a right already secured during the COVID-19.

We also don’t want this to turn into an open season with the Postal Service thinking they  can blatantly violate the national agreement after the pandemic.

Lamont Brooks
Clerk Division


Brothers and sisters, here is a valuable document the NALC and the USPS signed off on which stops CCAs from working in other offices and limits carriers to their home offices to prevent the spread of COVID.

NALC MOU_4.5.2020


Brothers and Sisters,

See the attached notification regarding the change in Customs Declaration Forms. Effective March 13, the Postal Service began using PS Form 2976-R when transferring information from customers to SSAs for data entry.

Please forward to your local and state leaders.

In Solidarity,

Sam Lisenbe
Assistant Clerk Craft Director

Handwritten Customs Declearation Forms PS 2976_4.5.2020


Other Stand-Up Talks, MOUs and Information
COVID-19 SUT 25_Guidelines for PVS drivers_4.5.2020
COVID-19 SUT 28_Interacting with VMF personnel_4.5.2020
COVID-19 SUT 29_COVID-19 Supplies_4.5.2020
COVID-19 FAQ-2020-04-01_4.5.2020
BME Tech & MRC Qualification Signed_4.5.2020
FFCRA Web Article_4.5.2020

Here’s how APWU has responded for YOU – the members –
APWU COVID-19 Response_4.5.2020