Certified Mail Tracking Number:

Transcription

1 March 4, 2013 Mr. Cliff Guffey President American Postal Workers Union, AFL-CIO 1300 L Street, NW Washington, DC Certified Mail Tracking Number: Dear Cliff: As information, enclosed is a copy of the second and final Post Implementation Review for the Panama City, FL Processing and Distribution Facility (P&DF) Area Mail Processing (AMP). If you have any questions, please contact Rickey Dean at extension Sincerely, Patrick M. Devine Manager Contract Administration (APWU) Enclosure (CA )

2 Type of Distribution Consolidated: Originating Facility Name & Type: Panama City P&DF Street Address: 1336 Sherman Ave City: Panama City State: FL 50 Facility ZIP Code: District: North Florida Area: Southern Finance Number: Current 3D ZIP Code(s): 324 Miles to Gaining Facility: 106 EXFC office: Yes Plant Manager: Eugene Green Senior Plant Manager: Arthur A Rosenberg District Manager: Charles J. Miller Facility Name & Type: Pensacola P&DC Street Address: 1400 W Jordan St City: Pensacola State: FL 50 Facility ZIP Code: District: North Florida Area: Southern Finance Number: Current 30 ZIP Code(s): 325 EXFC office: Yes Plant Manager: Ethel M. King Senior Plant Manager: Arthur A Rosenberg District Manager: Charles J. Miller Approval Date: April28, 2010 Implementation Date: Jul PIR Type: Final PIR Date Range of Data: Jul : Jun Processing Days per Year: 310 Bargaining Unit Hours per Year: 1,750 EAS Hours per Year: 1,825 Date of HQ memo, DAR Factors/Cost of Borrowing/ May, New Facility Start-up Costs Update Date & Time this workbook was last saved: :02 Area Vice President: Vice President Network Operations: Area AMP Coordinator: NAI Contact: Jo Ann Feindt David E. Williams Andrew Benefield/Steve Jackson Barbara Brewington PIR Data Entry Page

3 Approval Signatures Losing ~me and Type: Faclifty ZW' Code: Flrumc Numb$r: Cw rgnt SCF lip C000(s): Type oi Distribuiion Consolidated:..:O;:..;r;.;;ig;a;;ina=ti::.:..OO:.;z... Gainfng ~ma and Type: Pensacola P&DC Faclmy ZW' Code: FlmaMe Numb$r: Cum:~nt SCF ZIP Code{s): Implementation Date:..;::0..;..7/:..;;0..;.;1/-:.1.;;.0 Date Range of Data: to ACKNOWlliDOEMENT OF ACCOUNTA81!.JiY I ad<~!ilai I am ~ntilble fot rt!$jli!c!irog al'lll svi'ix)i'iil'lg WI til~ of an ~ posilli r<!pot!ing systems, ll'ldudi!'!g llna!!ci:lli tepl.ll'l$ lvld triose nill!ltins lo OOfl'IP!iance with conltacltng. com!)lll:ment, or simil!lr el'l'or!s involvlnglhe in~ end expendj~ of rui'id~;;, as well a~;;!ill s)i'sfem$ to service to rn;r eu!ltome!'s. LOSli'fG El!Cli.ITY: Senior Plant Mtimager: Arthur A Ro$enbeig jl,{fuqff~ Area Vice Pnasfctem: Jo Ann Feino't David E. Willlams Comme~:

4 Executive Summary Last Saved February 6, 2013 Date Range of Data PIR Type: Final PIR Jul Jun Losing Facility Name and Type: Street Address: City: State: Current SCF ZIP Code(s): Type of Distribution Consolidated: Gaining Facility Name and Type: Street Address: City: State: SavjngslCosts Final PIR vs Pre AMP Final PIR vs Approved Function 1 Workhour Savings Non-Processing Craft Workhour Savings (less Maint/Trans) PCES/EAS Workhour Savings Transportation Savings Maintenance Savings Space Savings from Workhour Costs - Combined from Other Curr vs Prop from Other Curr vs Prop from Transportation HCR and Transpottation PVS from Maintenance from Space Evaluation and Other Costs Total Annual Savings Total One-Time Costs $0 $0 from Space Evaluation and Other Costs Total First Year Savings 53 Staffing Craft Position Loss PCES/EAS Position Loss from Staffing-Graff from Staf/ing-PCES!EAS Service Losing Current Qtr Gaining Current Qtr First-Class Mail Service Performance (EXFC 0/N) 95,39% 95,87% from Service Perfonnance & CSM First-Class Mail Service Performance (EXFC 2 Day) 93.72% 93,62% from Service Perfonnance & CSM First-Class Mail Service Performance (EXFC 3 Day) Customer Experience Measurement Overall Satisfaction Residential at PFC level Customer Experience Measurement Overall Satisfaction Small Business at PFC level 82.00% 90,38% 89.4% 86.7% from Service Perfonnance & CSM from Service Perfonnance & CSM from Service Perfonnance & CSM 3 PIR Executive Summary

5 Calculati'm Beftmmces Combined Losing and Gaining Facility Data: PreAMP Proposed Final PIR Function 1 Workhour Costs $16,416,818 $16,192,384 $14,219,205 Non-Processing Craft Workhour Costs (less Maintenance & Transportation) $713,059 $712,394 $527,493 PCESIEAS Workhour Costs $2,439,162 $2,375,900 $2,226,845 Transportation Costs $4,291,392 $4,141,937 $4,552,322 Maintenance Costs $8,119,714 $7,982,834 $8,584,126 Space Savings $0 $0 $0 Total Annual Cost $31,980,144 $31,405,449 $30,109,991 Total One-Time Costs $0 $0 $0 Total First Year $31,980,144 $31,405,449 $30,109,991 Staffing Craft Position Total On-Rolls PCESIEAS Position Total On-Rolls Final PIR vs Pre-AMP Final PIR vs Proposed (Approved) AMP Approved AMP Function 1 Workhour Savings $2,197,612 $1,973,178 $224,434 $185,566 $184,901 $665 Non-Processing Craft Workhour Savings (less Maint/Trans) PCES/EAS Workhour Savings $212,317 $149,055 $63,262 Transportation Savings ($260,930) ($410,385) $149,455 Maintenance Savings ($464,412) ($601,292) $136,880 Space Savings $0 $0 $0 Total Annual Savings $1,870,153 $1,295,458 $574,695 Total One-Time Costs $0 $0 $0 Total First Year Savings $1,870,153 $1,295,458 $574,695 Staffing Craft Position Loss PCES/EAS Position Loss PIR Executive Summary

6 Summary Narrative Last Saved: February 6, 2013 Losing Facility Name and Type: Panama City P&DF Current SCF ZIP Code(s): 324 Type of Distribution Consolidated: Originating Gaining Facility Name and Type: Pensacola P&DC Current SCF ZIP Code(s): 325 Background: The Southern Area, with the assistance of the North Florida District, has completed the Final Post Implementation Review (PIR) of the Area Mail Processing (AMP) proposal that consolidated originating mail from the Panama City P&DF to the Pensacola P&DC. The transfer of originating mail from the Panama City P&DF to the Pensacola P&DC was completed on July 1, The data for the pre-amp period was FY 2009 and included all operations for the Panama City P&DF and the Pensacola P&DC. The data for the Final PIR was July 1, 2010 thru June 30, Financial Summary: Total Annual Savings Total First Year Savings Final PIR Vs Pre-AMP $1,870,153 $1,870,153 Final PIR Vs Proposed $1,295,458 $1,295,458 The Final PIR savings is above the proposed annual savings of $574,695 with the majority of savings attributed to position reductions across all crafts. Transportation was realigned to maintain the overnight service commitments between 324 Panama City and 325 Pensacola P&DC. There were operational savings that contributed to the increased Function 1 savings. Local efficiency initiatives in SPBS and LCTS operations at the Pensacola P&DC and Automation operations at both facilities led to large savings. Also Panama City P&DF and Pensacola P&DC consolidated flat processing at the Pensacola P&DC in a work-hour saving initiative resulting in the removal of a UFSM 1000 at the Panama City P&DF. PIR Summary Narrative 5

7 Customer Service Considerations: The EXFC overnight, 2-day and 3-day mail service performance is shown below for the Panama City P&DF and the Pensacola P&DC. Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF District: North Florida Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC District: North Florida Transportation Changes: The approved AMP projected an annual Transportation savings of $149,455. The Final PIR shows an increased cost of $410,385. The largest contributing factor was the increased costs of HCR 328SE (Part A), where the annual rate went from the proposed $2,669,161 to $3,035,162. This was due to changes on HCR 328SE (Part A) on trips serving other facilities other than Pensacola and Panama City. Also all HCR's had an increase in the Annual Cost/Mile due to fuel increases. 6

8 Staffing Impacts: The approved AMP proposal identified a reduction of 8 craft employees and 1 EAS employee due to the consolidation of originating operations into the Pensacola P&DC. Complement data for the Final PIR shows that complement has been reduced by 32 craft employees and 2 EAS employees through attrition and transfers. Local Initiatives involving staffing and scheduling impacts and the recent retirement incentive in Fall 2009 have contributed to the larger than expected complement reduction. Maintenance Impacts: The approved AMP projected an annual Maintenance savings of $136,880 with the consolidation of originating operations into the Pensacola P&DC including the retirement in place of 2 AFCSs with the associated support equipment. The Final PIR is showing an increase of $464,412. The cost is the direct result of filling vacant authorized Maintenance Mechanic positions at the Pensacola P&DC under LDC 37 unrelated to the AMP. At the time of the AMP study, Pensacola was 11 positions under their authorized staffing. Space Impacts and One-Time Facility Costs: The approved AMP projected no one-time cost associated with the AMP. No one-time costs were identified at the time of the Final PIR. PIR Summary Narrative 7

9 Service Performance and Customer Satisfaction Measurement Last Saved: February 6, 2013 Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF District: North Florida PIR Type: Implementation Date: Final PIR 07/01/10 Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC District: North Florida (15) Notes: *Customer Satisfaction Measurement (CSM) became Customer Experience Measurement (CEM) in 2010 Data reflects most recently completed quarter available in CEM. 01 Overall Satisfaction (Overall Experience) Q4a Q8a Satisfaction with Receiving (Experience with receiving) Satisfaction with Sending (Experience with sending) Q12a Satisfaction with most frequently visited PO (Experience with most frequently visited PO) Q16a Satisfaction with most recent contact with USPS (Experience with most recent contact with USPS) Q 19 Likely to recommend the USPS 8 PIR Service Performance and Customer Satisfaction Measurement

10 r - - co~inecil=-a~ilities ] Workhour Costs - Combined Facilities Last Saved_ February 6, 2013 PIR Type':,,,., r"' *l');b~p-iq'";:;;i~~,::;~,:;;;:;r&,7f;':i,;;p,,., Type of Distribution Consolidated: Originating Date Range of Data: ~~~ to ~n..j P!R Workhour Costs- Combined Facilities

11 PIR WorkhourCosts Combined Facilities

12 (2nNOTES:======================================================================================================================================================== :~-im$~)~(' 11 PIR Workhour Costs~ Combined Facilities

13 Losing Facility:..!:_anam~. City P&DF Workhour Costs - Losing Facility Last Saved: February 6, 2013 PIR Type": IH!~l rfl'\ ~oata in PIR columns is annualized for First Type of Distribution Consolidated: Originating Date Range of Data: ~ to Jun PIR Workhour Costs- Losing

14 PIR Workhour Costs~ Losing

15 i'-';;.,.~:~t~y-- 14 P!R Workhour Costs - Losing

16 Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC Workhour Costs Gaining Facility last Saved: February 6, 2013 PIR Type*: :.,:~,::~,: ~.:,,..,_ "~~"' - r: :::;-"'"'' Type of Distribution Consolidated: Originating Date Range of Data: ~~ to Jun-30-~20'-'1c.1 PIR Workhour Costs -Gaining

17 PIR Workhour Costs Gaining

18 PJR Workhour Costs- Gaining

19 {27)NOTES: P!R Worl<hour COsts~ Gaining

20 r other Workhour-llliove Analysis I P!R Other Workhour Costs

21 20 P!R Other Workhour Costs

22 PIR Other Workhour Costs

23 22 P!R Other Workhour Costs

24 I Distribution to Other PIR Worksheet Tabs --] 23 Pl R Other Work hour Costs

25 10,721 $494,5 $ -4, ; 2,240 $94,74 $( $17, ,801 $7,186,18 $ 6, $350,994 42,878 $2,226,84 $ -4, $149,0551 1,304 $32,94 $ u -$".210: 225,944 $10,035,26 $ -2, $34,245-2_ 'Y PIR Other Workhour Costs

26 Staffing -Craft Last Saved: February 6, 2013 PIR Type: Final PIR Craft Positions Data Extraction Date: 07/16/11 Craft Positions Data Extraction Date: 07/16/11 I ~ ~ ~ (23) I (24) I! Final PIR vs Pre AMP! Final PIR vs Proposed! Total Craft Position Loss: l J2 j ~~----J (Above numbers are carried forward to the Executive Summary) 25 PIR Staffing -Craft

27 Staffing - PCES/EAS Last Saved: February 6, 2013 PIR Type: Final PIR Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF Data Extraction Date: 7/16/2011 PCES/EAS Positions Finance# _1_17_2_60 26 PIR Staffing - PCES/EAS

28 Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC Finance# _1-'1'-74'-1'-'0 Data Extraction Date: 7/ PCES/EAS Positions {20) Level 27 r ~ r ,! Total PCES/EAS, ( 371, ( 381,! Position Loss! 2! 2! ~ J ' (Above numbers are carried forward to the Executive Summary) PIR Staffing- PCES/EAS

29 Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF Finance Number: _ :...0.: Transportation- PVS Last Saved: February 6, 2013 (4) I (5) Variance Variance Final PIR vs Final PIR vs PIR Type: ;_ Final PIR Date Range of Data: Jul to-- Jun Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC Finance Number: _1_1_7_4_1 O (7) (8) (9) I (10) Variance Variance PIR Final PIR vs Final PIR vs (11) Total Final PIR vs Pre AMP Transportation-PVS Savings: $17,207 (12) Total Final PIR vs Proposed Transportation-PVS Savings: $17,207 (This number added to the Executive Summary (This number added to the Executive Summary) (13) Notes: PIR Transportation- PVS

30 Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF Type of Distribution Consolidated: Originating Data of HCR Data File: 07/01/11 - (4) Final PIR Transportation - HCR Last Saved: February 6, 2013 (6) (7) Final PIR Annual Cost PIR Type: CT for Outbound Dock: Final PIR (10) Final PIR 29 PIR Transportation HCR- Losing

31 Change Analysis Final PIR vs 30 PIR Transportation HCR- Losing

32 Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC Type of Distribution Consolidated: Originating Date of HCR Data File: 07/01/11 (1) (:S) (4) Final PIR Route# Transportation - HCR Last Saved: February 6, 2013 CET for Inbound Dock: CET for Cancellations: (6) (7) Proposed I Final PIR Annual Annual Cost Cost PIR Type: Originating CETforOGP: CT for Outbound Dock: (9) (10) Final PIR Annual Cost/Mile PIR Transportation HCR- Gaining

33 Summary HCR Losing & Gaining Losing Gaining (13) 1 (14) Final PIR vs Pre AMP $214,684 Final PIR vs Proposed $ (13) Total Final PIR vs Pre AMP Transportation-HeR Savings: (from losing and gaining facilities) (14) Total Final PIR vs Proposed Transportation-HeR Savings: (from losing and gaining facilities) $393,178 (15) Final PIR vs Pre AMP Final PIR vs Proposed HCR PVS ~----~ ~- (15) Total Final PIR vs Pre AMP Transportation (PVS & HeR): $260,930 (This number carried forward to the Executive Summary) (16) Total Final PIR vs Proposed Transportation (PVS & HeR): (This number carried forward to the Executive Summary) $4Hl, PIR Transportation HCR- Gaining

34 Data Extraction Date: 01/11/11 MPE Inventory Last Saved: February 6, 2013 PIR Type: Final PIR Date Range of Data: Jul to-- Jun Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC (2) (3) Final PIR Costs (8) Final PIR Relocation Costs (9) Variance in Costs INDUSTRIAL VEHICLE $0 $0 $0 I so (10) Notes: AFCSs deactivated in place. Space Evaluation and Other Costs ':!':! PIR MPE Inventory

35 Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF Maintenance Last Saved February 6, 2013 PIR Type*:_F_in_a_I_P_IR Date Range of Data: Jul : Jun Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC (2) (3) (4) (5) Variance Variance Proposed Final PIR Final PIR to Final PIR to Costs Costs PreAMP Proposed 940,331 $ 962,544 (59,555) $ 22,213 I~ (7) (8) (9) (10) Variance Variance Workhour ActiviW Proposed Final PIR Final PIR to Final PIR to Costs Costs PreAMP Pre Proposed Mail Processing 2,020,370 $ 2,151, ,803 $ 130, ,332 $ 425,122 $ (27,210) II I LDC 37 Buildino Eouioment $ "'I''!I';~J~:\ $ 1,020,689 $ 1,564,087 ''$ 543,3$7 $ 543, ,674 $ 806, ,424 $ 739, ,743 $ 172, ,057 $ 296,043 '.$, 19,986 $ 19,986 36,122 $ 9,380 ;$: 100,453 $ 59,188 $l $ 2,579,202 $ 2,375,740 '$' 4,255,992 $ 4,810,448 t$ 554,456 $ 554, ,939 1,030, ,340 $ 199, Grand Total Grand Total 5,841, ,79 $ 753,700 (11) Final PIR vs Pre AMP Maintenance Savings: (12) Final PIR vs Proposed- Maintenance Savings: $464,412 $601,292 (These numbers carried forward to the Executive Summary) (These numbers carried forward to the Executive Summary) (13) oata in P!R columns is annualized for Ftrst PlR 34 PIR Maintenance

36 Distribution Changes Last Saved: February 6, 2013 Losing Facility : Panama City P&DF PIR Type: Final PIR Type of Distribution Consolidated: Originating Date Range of Data: Jul to-- Jun (1) Place a "X" next to the DMM labeling list(s) revised as result of the approved AMP. DMM L001 DMM L011 Identify the date of the Postal Bulletin that contained DMM labeling list revisions. (2) August 26, 2010 Postal Bulletin DMM L002 X DMM L201 DMM L003 DMM L004 DMM LOOS DMM L006 DMM L007 DMM L008 DMM L009 DMM L010 DMM L601 DMM L602 DMM L603 DMM L604 DMM L605 DMM L606 DMM L607 DMM L801 Was the Service Standard Directory updated for the approved AMP? ( 3 ) Yes. July 1, 2010 (4) Drop Shipments for Destination Entry Discounts FAST Appointment Summary Report NASS Total No-Show Late Arrival Open Facility Name Month Losing I Gaining Facility Code Schd Count % Count % Count % May '11 Losing Facility 324 Panama City P&DF % % % Closed Count % % Unschd Count 0 June'11 Losing Facility 324 Panama City P&DF % % % % 0 May '11 Gaining Facility 325 Pensacola P&DC % % % % 5 June '11 Gaining Facility 325 Pensacola P&DC % % % % 7 (SJNotes: -================== 35 PIR Distribution Changes

37 Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF 5-Digit ZIP Code: Data Extraction Date: -:OC::7::-:/1:':::6':-:/1;-; Customer Service Issues Last Saved: February 6, Collection Points Number picked up before 1 p.m. Number picked up between 1-5 p.m. Number picked up after 5 p.m. Total Number of Collection Points!'"'' ~" 2. How many collection boxes are currently designated for "local delivery"? 3. How many "local delivery" boxes were removed as a result of AMP? 4. Delivery Performance Report % Carriers returning before 5 p.m. 5. Retail Unit Inside Losing Facility (Window Service Times) 6. Business (Bulk) Mail Acceptance Hours 1. Can customers obtain a local postmark in accordance with applicable policies in the Postal Operations Manual? Yes 8. Notes: Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC 9. What postmark is printed on collection mail? F~E: -f'~.i1s;~~vc::.(') L..~\, f /~-...tr,,',;r:~. p 36 PIR Customer Service Issues

38 Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF Space Evaluation and Other Costs Last Saved February 6, 2013 Date: 1. Affected Facility 2. One-Time Costs Enter any one-time costs:..;::;so::..,. $0 $0 (These numbers shown below under One-Time Costs section.) 3. Savings Information Space Savings ($):..;$;,;;0 $0 $0 (These numbers earned forward to the Executive Summary) 4. Did you utilize the acquired space as planned? Explain. 5. Notes: Employee Relocation Costs Mail Processing Equipment Relocation Costs (from MPE Inventory) Facility Costs (from above) Total One-Time Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 PIR costs carried forward to Executive Summary) Losing Facility: Panama City P&DF Range of Report Gaining Facility: Pensacola P&DC FY PIR Space Evaluation and Other Costs