Category: Content

Having just returned from our winter board meeting at NAPS Headquarters, I was quite frankly surprised at some of the motions the board entertained. Most notably, a resolution from Utah to buy the three resident officers condos while they are in office, which was soundly defeated by the body at the convention, was re-introduced by a Board member at our meeting. In attempting to explain why he was re-introducing the motion, he alleged that the membership was not fully informed about the resolution at the convention.

Needless to say, the motion failed again. Two of the three resident officers voted No because they realize that it’s not right to go against the vote of the convention body. While some on the Board are persisting on wanting to purchase the condos, the motion was again defeated. One resident officer voted YES and the other two abstained, or refrained from voting, which was quite different from the first vote.

Members persisting who spoke in favor of the motion stated that, at a cost of 2.1 million dollars, it would be a good investment for NAPS. They cited NAPS’ purchase of our Headquarters building as an example. However, that is not a valid comparison. Our building was purchased for somewhat over 3 million dollars, which much less than its actual value at the time. The ideal circumstance had presented itself because the builder had defaulted, as had the bank which had financed it. When NAPS purchased it in the early 90s under the leadership of Vince Palladino, it was purchased from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), which was quite anxious to get it off its hands. Additionally, Vince often recounted how, when NAPS showed up at the auction, we were the only ones who seemed to have the money needed to buy. Consequently, NAPS ended up with all four floors, whereas the original intention had been to purchase only one.

Those in favor of purchasing the condos contend that while the resident officers are serving NAPS, they would be required to pay $1,600.00 a month rent. Do the math: at that rate, it would take 46 years to pay for the condos. While I don’t think that investments that benefit NAPS are a bad thing, I know that I will never go against the membership wishes. I definitely will continue to vote NO on this issue. The board member who wants to vote Yes should not attempt to use the executive board to obtain, through the “back door” method, approval of a resolution that was defeated by the membership at the convention.

Jimmy Warden and I have been investigating the contracts of Martin Communications our publisher of the Postal Supervisor and soon to be ex-event planner for NAPS conventions. His last convention will be in 2014 at San Diego California. After examining all paperwork and bills submitted by Martin Communications we found a lot of irregularities. Our findings were turned over to the 3 resident officers at NAPS. They agreed to gather questions from the board to ask Ray Martin to try to find answers. This did not happen as they turned the questions over to him and he had to answer to the board. Jimmy and I led the charge with questions that Ray Martin did not answer correctly or could not answer at all, using such terms as “there were a few OVERSIGHTS,” “I DON’T REMEMBER,” “ABSOLUTELY NOT,” and other similar, evasive non- answers.

Our comparison check with another large printing firm using the NAPS bills submitted by Martin communications resulted in a finding that he has been overcharging us by 10-40%. When asked about this, Mr. Martin told me a contract is a contract and if I disagreed, I should get my lawyer and he will get his. To my surprise a board member who I had considered a friend, accused me of being unprofessional and having gone “over the top” in order to get answers. In my opinion I did not go over the top, what I was trying to do was get answers from someone who was not being truthful. The investigation will continue until we can get the truth.

–Tommy Roma

Tommy Roma
Northeast Region Vice President

We are now getting ready to head to Reno to conduct the business of NAPS at our 2012 national convention. This will be the first year that a long-time convention attendee will not be sitting in the delegate area. The person that will be missing this year is my personal friend, Andy Sozzi.

Andy loved NAPS and served with distinction as an officer and president of the largest NAPS branch in the country, Branch 100. Andy was elevated to serve on our national executive board as the Northeast Region Vice President, the job that I proudly serve in today.

Andy and I developed a strong bond over the years even though we came from different backgrounds. Andy graduated from the prestigious Fordham University while I got my degree on the streets of Brooklyn. Together we became the “one-two punch” for members in the New York Area and the lessons that I learned in diplomacy from Andy, coupled with my street-sense have helped me in following in his footsteps in the NAPS Northeast Region.

I am proud to have worked so closely with Andy and to have gained so much from his skills. When times were tough, Andy brought his objectivity and rallying skills to bring successful outcomes to difficult situations. Many times when I wanted to fly off the handle, Andy would calm me down, dissect the problem and, by the time we were done, the problem was solved.

Now, working with my team of Area Vice President in the Northeast; Jimmy Warden, Cy Dumas and Hans Aglidian I am remembering what Andy taught me. Our team of leaders in the NAPS Northeast Region is continuing to serve the interests of our members and it’s not a coincidence that we lead the country in NAPS membership percentage.

We recently held a successful one-day meeting in New York City, where branches from throughout the Northeast Region met with postal executives from postal headquarters, the Northeast and Eastern Regions. Our meeting included an opportunity for face-to-face dialogue between local branch leaders and their respective District Managers, where local issues were discussed and resolved.

Both the Postal Service and NAPS are going through some trying times, but as long as we keep the focus that my friend Andy fostered in his work for NAPS, we will weather the storms we now face and will face in the future. I know that Andy will be watching us in Reno this year and rooting for our continued success.

Fact finding with the U.S.P.S. and NAPS convened on Monday June 4th 2012. I know our leaders did their homework preparing for this event. I am sure the U.S.P.S. is equally up to the task. What can NAPS expect to achieve from the proceedings? We all know that money at this point is non-existent. The Government just came out with an additional freeze on pay for Federal workers in its 2013 budget. Let’s just say for example that the fact finding committee recommends a pay package for all EAS based on NAPS presentations, the U.S.P.S will counter with sorry we are not agreeing to it and that’s the end of it. We have no other recourse. We would have the panel’s recommendation and try to work with the U.S.P.S. in other areas. We could enhance job security, finally get our jobs posted, receive a realistic SWC’S formula, getting credit for the extra things that are filtering down to the stations, that are taking valuable time away from the supervisors. We have been working on reducing redundant forms and whenever possible putting supervisors who are on detail back to their assignments, reducing the need for 204’bs. We can work with the U.S.P.S to show the need for jobs that were done away with, only to have the impacted EAS or 204’b still do the job that does not technically exist.

We have to be proud of the fact that NAPS after being thrown under the bus by the other associations stood its ground and pursued Fact Finding when every thing else failed. This is nothing new when it comes to pay negotiations. NAPS will never say, We had to go to fact finding only because the other associations went, please reopen pay consultations or I was able to save the jobs but not the Postmaster. While I do respect the other associations I am a firm believer in NAPS negotiating on its own with the U.S.P.S., it’s been that way for years. My mentor and friend Vince Palladino always told me we have different agendas then our counterparts in the other associations so it beneficial to both to negotiate with the U.S.P.S. on it’s own. They accepted what the U.S.P.S. gave to save money and not go to fact finding, our organization put the membership first and pursued fact finding regardless of the cost. Our Resident officers and Executive board members who voted to go to fact finding must be commended. An old Roma saying applies here, While I might not win every fight, my opponent will definitely know they were in one. GO NAPS, STAY STRONG.

Tommy Roma
N.E.R.V.P.

Washington, DC – On May 31, the Postal Regulatory Commission issued Order No. 1361 establishing Docket N2012-2 to provide a public hearing and issue an advisory opinion on the U.S. Postal Service’s Post Office Structure Plan (POStPlan). The primary focus of the proposal is to reduce costs by changing operating hours at approximately 17,700 of the 32,000 postal retail locations nationwide. The Service’s previous plan, the Retail Access Optimization Initiative, to close 3,700 post offices has been put on hold.

Vice Chairman Nanci E. Langley will serve as “Presiding Officer” for this docket. “This proceeding will provide all interested persons with a full opportunity to provide input,” said Vice Chairman Langley. “At the same time, the Postal Service has said it would like to be able to begin to implement its plan in September, and the Commission will conduct a timely review with this in mind.”

The Commission proceeding provides a transparent, on-the-record process to ensure that any nationwide changes in postal services are consistent with the Postal Service’s obligation to provide prompt, reliable, and efficient postal services to customers in all areas and to all communities. The public is encouraged to share their written views with the Commission. Comments may also be shared via the Commission’s online customer service form at www.prc.gov.

“The public should have a clear understanding of the changes the Postal Service is currently proposing to reduce the overall level of rural post office service,” said Chairman Ruth Y. Goldway. “I encourage postal customers to become familiar with the new proposal and to let the Commission know of their interests and needs.”