USPS is a different animal. First of all, if it were a privately held company, or a publicly traded Corporation, it would no longer exist. USPS is losing $15 Million a day. I don't know of any publicly traded or privately held business that could suffer that kind of loss, and still exist.
USPS is endowed by the Federal Government, meaning every dollar it spends, comes from the American tax payer. With losses at $420 Million dollars a month, you can be sure that people are looking for ways to cut costs. Tightening up on labor is certainly one opportunity.
Paid sick time is issue. When money is tight, and it certainly is for USPS, even paid sick time becomes an issue. For the company, paying you for sick time, or personal time, or even vacation time that you didn't use is a benefit. The company actually comes out better, paying for time that you didn't use, than paying for time off that you did use.
Over and over again I her people make two claims; one is that it's cheaper for the company to give you the sick day vacation day or what ever day and pay you for it, than it is for you to work through it. WHile that initially sound logical, it is not true.
The company ALWAYS makes out better when you are on the job. No one knows your job better than you do. In an eight hour shift, you are far more productive at your job than anyone else. If they don't replace you at all during your time off, then the company is paying you and your job responsibilities are being completed. Eventually a back log is created, and that cost more money to straighten out.
The worse thing that could happen is that there is no difference in performance at the end of your shift when you aren't there. Do you know why? Well, if you're not there, and there, and if no one replaced you, and there is now difference in production, then you are dead weight. The company can meet the same production schedule with you, or without you.
FI you do something that causes you to lose time from work, either by failure to clock in, or as a disciplinary action, you are the issue. It's very difficult to fire an individual without cause. However, it is also VERY easy to get cause, simply by following the rule, the employment contract, the employee hand book, or the company/union contract.
All you do is document everything an individual does wrong. ...and every does wrong stuff, all the time. All the supervisor does is document it Time, place, infraction, witness (if any), outcome (no matter how minor). Even senior union employees can be fired for seemingly very little. It's not difficult, but it does take time, and due diligence.
No one is "secure" in any job where they have a boos, union, non-union, management, VP, even CEO's have been fired. It's just a matter of time, if you've been targeted.
However, if you are pulling your weight, and you decide to not take time off that you are owed, you essentially get paid double time for those hours. It IS costing the company more, but your output reduces the loss, and it not a one to one reduction, either. The company actually does better if you work though your vacation and they pay you an extra week's pay for it, than if you take your vacation and the company simply pays you your vacation pay.
The USPS has not been "the place to work" since the early 80's. and definitely since the advent of the fax machine, the personal computer and the internet. Add to that, companies like UPS, FedEx, DHL, and the rest of the alphabet soup of private deliver companies that took the lion's share of the package delivery business away from USPS, and there's trouble brewing.
Regarding a favoritism toward management, it might be an issue, but, I doubt that a manager with his cell phone on the floor is as much of a money loss to the organization as a worker with his cell phone.
During my last 5 years as a business owner, I did not allow my guys to take their cell phones out of the trucks when they were on the job site. Only the site supervisor or leadman could have a phone on the site.
Each crew were given the supervisor's cell number, and instructed to give that number to their spouses and children with instruction that they should use it only in the event of an emergency.
I didn't care if they used their own phone on the way to the site, or on the way back, but not on the site, and I held the supervisor personally responsible for that rule.
A supervisor or manager talking on the phone is less costly that a worker talking on the phone. It's not a point of favoritism, it's simply a matter of economic, and professional station. Also, it's one of the perks of being in management.
Labor gets their union, and management gets their perks.
