|
Free Mars!
Location: I dunno, there's white people around me saying "eh" all the time
|
USPS Supervisor using Kazza
Sorry guys for posting a previous thread that was vague and of course, for some reason, locked guest out of the article. So, here is it again.
Linky
Quote:
17 Postal Service employee Social Security numbers end up on Internet
By RON INGRAM - H&R Staff Writer
DECATUR - The U.S. Postal Service inspector general is investigating how personal information about 16 current employees and one retired employee from the Decatur Post Office got onto the World Wide Web.
Postal officials are saying little about the situation, but the employees are contacting attorneys and considering the possibility of filing a lawsuit.
Albert J. Wood, officer in charge of the Decatur Post Office, declined comment on the situation. He referred inquiries to Sue Litterly, Postal Service customer relations coordinator in Springfield.
"We believe this was the result of an accident," Litterly said Friday. "How (it happened) we don't know. We regret this occurred. We don't know anything else and won't until the investigation is done."
But the employees involved are certain they know how the situation developed, and they are angry about the circumstances and frustrated at the Postal Service's response.
"A postal supervisor had been downloading a file sharing program, Kazaa, onto a post office computer," said Ted Born, the retired letter carrier and spokesman for the affected employees. "It's against postal regulations to have that program on there.
"While the program was running, somebody downloaded 21 files on the 17 people that included their names, Social Security numbers and addresses. A postal employee in California found them online and notified us."
Born said despite Postal Service efforts to remove the information from the Web, "I'd bet somebody, someplace has those 17 names. How many times could they sell that information? Once something is on the Internet, it's there forever."
Though postal inspectors and the inspector general's office are supposed to be looking into the situation, the workers are not confident anything will be done about the supervisor who initiated the problem or that person's immediate superiors, Born said.
The National Association of Letter Carriers Local 317 filed a grievance with the Postal Service on behalf of the 17 affected people. Born said the Postal Service response was to offer each employee $10 to settle the problem.
"The Decatur Post Office will not police its own supervisors," Born said. "We want some people fired. We want justice done."
Born said the Postal Service told the workers if they didn't like the way the problem was being handled, they could sue.
"We're looking into that," he said.
|
This was posted on Fark.com on what was actually on kazza. Just some of them though.
Quote:
A few months ago, a friend of mine did a search for "The Postal Service" on Kazaa, attempting to aquire their songs. However, he didn't specify audio files only, and so when Kazaa returned the results, several of the files were not MP3s. But what were they? They were disciplinary write-ups from a U. S. post office computer in Decatur, IL. Someone had installed Kazaa on the post office computer and shared the C drive with the world.
The files, 21 in total, each contain the full letters of discipline given to postal service employees, including their full name and social security number. These USPS letters, depending on the seriousness of the infraction, either a Letter of Warning, a 7 Day Suspension, or a 14 Day Suspension. None of the letters were termination notices.
For privacy reasons, I'm not going to distribute the files themselves. But I am going to give all the juicy details--just not the employee names or social security numbers. The format of each file begins with the header:
USPS wrote:
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
LABOR RELATIONS
DECATUR IL 62523-9998
followed by the date, title, and employee identification information. The letters then go on to describe the "charge" (what rule the employee broke), followed by a detailed write-up of exactly what the reason for the letter is. Next is the citation of the rulebook that governs the USPS, usually taken from section 666, the "Behavior & Personal Habits" part of the rules. The letters then usually conclude with the paragraph
USPS wrote:
It is hoped that this Letter of Warning will serve to impress upon you the seriousness of your actions and that future discipline will not be necessary. If you are having difficulties which I may not be aware of or if you need additional assistance or instructions for improving your performance, please call on me, or you may consult with your other supervisors, and we will assist you where possible. However, I must warn you that future deficiencies will result in more severe disciplinary action being taken against you. Such action may include suspension or removal from the Postal Service.
You have the right to file a grievance under the Grievance/Arbitration procedures set forth in Article 15 of the National Agreement within 14 days of your receipt of this letter.
followed by the supervisor's name, and an area for the recipient to acknowledge the receipt of the letter.
But now, for the interesting part. Here are the infractions that these employees committed, in all their (frequently ridiculous) glory.
Letters of Warning:
CHARGE - BEHAVIOR UNBECOMING TO A POSTAL EMPLOYEE wrote:
On 04/02/98 around 3:30 pm you came into the supervisors office and strated to fill out a 3971 for leave. Another female carrier came in and started talking. You turned to her and told her to shut up. After several comments were made between you and her, you said to her Lets take it outside. This conversation was hear by myself and Supervisor [-----].
Your remarks about your fellow employee will not be tolerated. Employees who act in this manner show a lack of respect for their supervisors, fellow employees and themselves. Behavior of this sort is detrimental to the efficiency of the Postal Service.
CHARGE: FAILURE TO FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS / DELAY OF MAIL & UNAUTHORIZED EXTENDED LUNCH PERIOD wrote:
On Wednesday, December 17, 1997, you requested and were granted 1 hr auxiliary assistance with your street delivery in addition to the .62 hr auxiliary assistance you had already received in the office. That same day I observed you extending your lunch break by 19 minutes at Arbys on the corner of Pershing Rd and N Woodford St.
At 4PM, you brought back 10 minutes of undelivered mail to the office, thus delaying that mail until the following day. This is contrary to the Standard Operating Procedure which states carriers are to call the office by 2PM if unable to complete their delivery.
CHARGE - FAILURE TO FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS wrote:
On Nov. 5,1998 you were given a direct order to cut yards on your route. On Nov. 10,1998 I observed you not crossing yards at 33,35,37,39 South Dr. When asked why you did not cross the yards you stated it was a Safety hazard. I stated it was not a hazard.
On Nov. 17,1998 Examiner [----- -----] stated you did not cross 10 and 12 East Dr. She asked if they were on your list back at Post Office and you stated No, but theyre on my list
At the pre-disciplinary hearing on Nov. 13,1998 you agreed that I had given you a direct order to cut yards on Nov. 5,1998. You also stated that if it was snow and or Ice covered that you would cut those yards instead of using sidewalk because it would be safer.
CHARGE: FAILURE TO FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS / DELAY OF MAIL wrote:
On Aug. 25, 1998 you were assigned Collection 143 in the evening. On Aug. 26
you checked your vehicle in the morning and found a Registered outgoing letter that you had signed for from one of the Stations on your Collection the night before. You brought it to me and admitted you left it in the truck all night.
Your lack of concern for ensuring all the accountable mail you picked up on collection 143 was turned over to clerk can not be tolerated. This delayed that registered mail from being sent in a timely manor. Also the Security of this mail was at stake overnight in your vehicle even though it was locked.
CHARGE: FAILURE TO FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS / SAFETY wrote:
On 11/10/98 you reported to me in my office that you received an injury to your lower back in the parking lot at 1801 N. Water. You stated you were hit in the back by a 4x8 ft sign which knocked you to the ground. Then you picked up the sign and put it in your LLV. It was very windy this day so picking up the sign could have injured your back more severely . You state you tried to call in but phone was busy. You did not try to call Main Office but drove back to Post Office. This could have caused more damage to your back. You are on limited duty from a previous back injury yet you choose to pick up 4x8 ft flimsy sign on a very windy day and drive back to Office.
CHARGE - FAILURE TO FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS / EXTENSION OF BREAK PERIOD AND LUNCH PERIODS wrote:
Saturday, January 24, 1998 at 2:00PM, I observed your LLV parked in front of the Decatur Coin and Auction Store at 717 W Pershing Rd. You exited the building at 3:10PM and approached your LLV. At that time I asked you how much mail you had left to carry. You stated, about an hour. I then asked you how long you had been in the Coin Shop. You said, Look- I took all my breaks and lunch together today. I didnt gig you guys for any overtime, and I asked if anyone needed help today and she (Ms. [-----]) said, no so do what you want.
Upon talking with Ms. [-----], 204B, I discovered you had phoned the office and spoke with her at approximately 10AM. At that time she asked you where you were. You indicated you were at the Coin Shop on your break.
CHARGE: FAILURE TO FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS /FAILURE TO WORK SAFELY wrote:
On 12/08/98 you were observed by Delivery Improvement Team member, Kim Haney . You were not carrying your dog spray or your scanner. When you started delivery on Portage Place you started carrying the scanner on your mail satchel. On 11/13/98 you were at a safety /service talk where I stated that you should your scanner and dog spray at all times.
CHARGE: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH USPS SAFETY RULES wrote:
On 12/8/98 at 10:37 you parked at 625 W. McKinley Ave. You pulled into the parking space, made your delivery, then backed out into lane to exit parking lot. Although this was approved backing location, standard practice is to back in first then make delivery.
CHARGE: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH USPS SAFETY RULES wrote:
On Saturday 08/21/99 you were driving Veh. # 6511058 to collection boxes at 2900 N. Monroe. As you pulled up past boxes to stop you caught your vent cover on last box chute. Vent cover must be replaced due to damage.
CHARGE - CONDUCT UNBECOMING TO A POSTAL EMPLOYEE /TIME WASTING PRACTICES wrote:
Office Notes from 11/30/98 show that you stopped casing mail three times between 07:38 and 07:45. Then from 07:45 till 08:00 you were in a conversation with T-6 who was on 2638 about how things would get back to normal once the Delivery Improvement Team left. On 12/03/98 I asked you to lower your voice early in morning. Office Notes show that at 09:45 you stopped casing and commented loudly ( speaking back to the area of 2631 & 2645 ) about managements lack of common sense.
CHARGE - FAILURE TO WORK IN A SAFE MANNER wrote:
On Mar. 24, 1999 you were delivering mail to 1526 E. Division Decatur IL 62526
A dog ran out the front door and bit you on your hand. You stated that you were aware of a vicious dog at that residence, yet said you had not propped your foot against the door while making the mail delivery, as per safety procedures.
In the pre-discipline hearing you stated to me that you had not been asked whether or not your foot was placed against the door, or if you had been asked you did not hear or answer. You indicated, however, that you were aware of the dog and the need for caution because an adult at that resident had told the children not to open the door an release the dog.
Seven Day Suspensions:
CHARGE: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH USPS SAFETY RULES & REGULATIONS wrote:
On Friday, November 28, 1997, at approximately 12 noon, you drove into a driveway at 210 S Redwood Lane to deliver a parcel. After making the delivery, you backed out of the driveway, striking the side of a car which was parked in front of 157 S Redwood Lane.
In discussing the accident with your immediate Supervisor, [----- -----], you indicated you were well aware of Districts No Backing Policy. You also said you remembered attending Service Talks about the No Backing Policy.
CHARGE - BEHAVIOR UNBECOMING TO A POSTAL EMPLOYEE wrote:
While delivering mail to Check Advance Loan, 2605 N Water St, one of their employees, [----- -----], asked you if you knew [----- -----]. You replied, Yeah, I know her, I wouldnt give that biatch the sweat off my jock. This conversation was witnessed by another employee, [----- -----].
Your outburst of profanity and derogatory remarks about your fellow employees will not be tolerated. Employees who act in this obnoxious manner show a lack of respect for their supervisors, fellow employees and themselves. Behavior of this sort is detrimental to the efficiency of the Postal Service.
CHARGE: CONDUCT UNBECOMING A POSTAL EMPLOYEE wrote:
On Nov. 2, 1998 in the morning you stated to me that you needed one hour of overtime to finish your assignment. I approved that request.
When I saw you return around 2:50 p.m. I started to go find 204-B [-----] to find out what was the problem. [----- -----] who is here on the delivery team stated to me that he had overheard you at approximately 8:10 am talking on a cell phone. During the course of the conversation you stated Ill be off by 3:00pm
I then went to 204-B [-----] and he stated you called in around 2:30 and stated there was an emergency and you had to be off at 3:00.
You stated to me around 9:10 am that with one hour of overtime you could complete your route by 5:00pm. I approved that hour. You returned with about 2.5 hours of mail to carry. If you knew at 8:10 that you would be off by three why did you tell me that with one hour overtime you could be done at 5:00pm?
CHARGE: DEVIATION FROM LINE OF TRAVEL TO ROUTE wrote:
On Sat. Feb. 27 1999 you were assigned route 2695. Postmaster [-----] started following you on Pershing westbound. Instead of turning on Oakland to the start of route you continued on to W. Glenn. You live near the corner of Taylor and Glenn. Instead of stopping you turned on Taylor and drove back to Oakland.
At the pre-discipline hearing on Mar. 10 1999 you stated that you were driving home for medicine that you thought was in your blue bag but then realized it was with you in red bag so you did not stop at home but went back to route.
CHARGE: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH USPS SAFETY RULES & REGULATIONS wrote:
On April 20th 1998 you were involved in a vehicle accident at Morgan and Grand st. You exited the lot at 760 E. Grand driving west in right hand lane. You were attempting to maneuver into the left lane in order to turn south on Morgan st. As you made the move into left lane you struck a vehicle already in the left lane. Police cited you for improper lane usage.
CHARGE - UNSCHEDULED ABSENCES wrote:
You are charged with unsatisfactory attendance in that you have unscheduled absences. A review of your attendance record from APRIL 9 1998 to present indicates that you have been absent from your official duties in an unscheduled status on the following occasions:
[five instances listed over a period of four months, all attributed to sick leave]
CHARGE - UNSCHEDULED ABSENCES wrote:
You are charged with unsatisfactory attendance in that you have unscheduled absences. A review of your attendance record from March 8,1998 to present indicates that you have been absent from your official duties in an unscheduled status on the following occasions:
[six incidents listed over a period of six months, all attributed to sick leave]
Six incidents of the unscheduled absences are in conjunction with non - scheduled days, which total all six incidents.
CHARGE: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH USPS SAFETY RULES & REGULATIONS wrote:
On May 4, 1998 you were involved in a vehicle accident. You were driving LLV # 2206520 south bound on Jackson st. As you entered the intersection of Cleveland st you struck a private vehicle that had the right of way. There was a Yield sign on your side of the street on Jackson that you failed to obey. You received a citation from city police.
CHARGE: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH USPS SAFETY RULES & REGULATIONS wrote:
On July 7, 1998 you were observed by [----- -----], Manager Postal Operations You were driving vehicle # 0217033 headed towards Baltimore Ave. You did not have the shoulder strap of your seat belt fastened and you made a lane change without using turn signal.
CHARGE: DEVIATION FROM LINE OF TRAVEL ON ROUTE wrote:
On Mon. Jun. 21, 1999 you were assigned route 2693. Postmaster [-----] observed you at your residence at 3125 N. Taylor. At the pre-discipline hearing on Jun. 22, 1999 you stated that you that you noted that the Doctors offices on the front part of the route were closing for lunch so you drove home to eat lunch. This is at least 1.7 miles deviation from line of travel. You did not ask permission to eat lunch at your home.
The USPS also has some 'interesting' regulations that it's employees must conform to, which are frequently quoted in the discipline letters:
EMPLOYEE & LABOR RELATIONS MANUAL wrote:
661 Code of Ethical Conduct
661.3 Standards of Conduct
Employees must avoid any action, whether or not specifically prohibited by this Code, which might result in or create the appearance of:
f. Affecting adversely the confidence of the public in the integrity of the Postal Service.
666.2 Behavior and Personal Habits
Employees are expected to conduct themselves during and outside of working hours in a manner which reflect favorably upon the Postal Service. Although it is not the policy of the Postal Service to interfere with the private lives of employees, it does require that postal personnel be honest, reliable, trustworthy, courteous, and of good character and reputation.
666.3 Loyalty
Employees are expected to be loyal to the government and uphold the policies of the Postal Service.
666.51 Protests. Employees must obey the instructions of their supervisors. If an employee has reason to question the propriety of a supervisors order, the individual will nevertheless carry out the order and immediately file a protest in writing to the official in charge of the installation or appeal through official channels.
814.2e. Drive defensively and professionally; extend courtesy in all situations, and obey all state, local and postal regulations when driving a vehicle owned, leased or contracted for by the Postal Service.
M-41, City Delivery Carriers wrote:
112.25 Be prompt, courteous, and obliging in the performance of duties. Attend quietly and diligently to work and refrain from loud talking and the use of profane language.
131.31 Do not deviate from your route for meals or for other purposes unless authorized by a manager.
160 Carriers may expect to be supervised at all times while in performance of their daily duties.
HANDBOOK EL-814 POSTAL EMPLOYEES GUIDE TO SAFETY wrote:
Section X, E, 3 - Backing Up
Avoid backing up whenever possible. If you can, park where you will not have to back up to pull away from a parking place. If you must back up, first walk around your vehicle to make sure there are no pedestrians, children, obstructions, etc. in your way.
|
After reading some of the "charges" I can see how the term "people going postal" was coined...
__________________
Looking out the window, that's an act of war. Staring at my shoes, that's an act of war. Committing an act of war? Oh you better believe that's an act of war
|
09-09-2004, 11:28 AM
