The issue in this grievance involves entitlement to compensation for scheme training. After reviewing this matter, we mutually agreed that no national interpretive issue is fairly presented in this case. The language contained in Section 264.23 of the PO 402T Handbook reflects the circumstances under which compensation is to be provided for scheme training. Language in that section states:
Compensation is made only if the senior bidder passes all of the required examinations and accepts the position, unless one of the following events occurs:
1. Training is terminated to correct Management error.
2. Employee expressing a preference for machine training, successfully completes manual scheme training and qualifies, fails machine application and then receives a position which requires the identical manual scheme which has been successfully completed.
3. Employee enters machine training, completes the manual scheme training and qualifies, then prior to machine application bids or is assigned to a manual distribution position which requires the identical manual scheme for which the employee qualified. Upon accepting a position identified in 2 or 3 above and being compensated, the employee will be deemed to have a live record and, therefore, currently qualified on that qualification. Under no circumstances shall an employee be compensated twice for the same training.
Accordingly, we agreed to remand this case to the parties at Step 3 for further processing, including arbitration if necessary. Timeliness arguments raised at Step 1, 2, or 3 of the grievance procedure are preserved for use in the further processing of this grievance.
Document Type: Step 4 Agreement
APWU National Grievance Number: H7C5TC15433
Craft: Clerk