Section 7: Minor Adjustments & What Carriers Should Watch For

🛠️ 7.1 What Are Minor Adjustments?

• Defined in M-39 §141.1 as limited changes made without a full six-day inspection.
• Typically involve minor street time or delivery point transfers to balance routes.
• Must be based on documented data like volume, PS Form 3999, or recent performance.
• Should not alter the fundamental structure or balance of a route.
• Cannot be used to bypass or substitute for a full inspection where one is required.

Reference: M-39 §141.1, Route Protection Program Ch. 3

✅ 7.2 Legitimate Reasons for Minor Adjustments

• Uneven mail volume among neighboring routes over an extended period.
• Significant long-term changes to delivery points due to new construction or closures.
• Rebalancing travel time between routes sharing a common path or territory.
• Adjusting for consistent service issues like missed businesses or blocked delivery.
• Consolidation of light delivery sections for efficiency without burdening the carrier.

Reference: M-39 §141.16, Route Protection Program Ch. 3

🚫 7.3 What Minor Adjustments Cannot Be Used For

• Fixing overburdened routes without providing supporting data.
• Shifting work to carriers to avoid paying overtime.
• Eliminating or reassigning parts of routes without a consultation.
• Punishing carriers by altering workload or delivery area unfairly.
• Reducing route time in COR without detailed justification on PS Form 1840 Reverse.

Reference: Route Protection Ch. 3, M-01766 COR Guide Ch. 11

📄 7.4 The Role of PS Form 1840 and 1840 Reverse

• The PS Form 1840 summarizes proposed route changes and adjustments.
• The reverse side must clearly explain any increase or reduction in time.
• Carriers have the right to review, comment on, and question these forms.
• If the reverse is blank or vague, the adjustment may violate policy.
• COR-generated changes must still include full documentation on the 1840 Reverse.

Reference: M-01766 Ch. 11, Route Protection Ch. 3

💻 7.5 Using COR for Minor Adjustments

• COR (Computerized On-site Route) proposes changes based on PS Form 3999 mapping.
• Any time removed by COR must be fully justified and not arbitrary.
• Line of travel, walking distances, and vehicle paths must reflect real-world accuracy.
• Carriers and union reps must be given the opportunity to review COR proposals.
• Improper COR usage is grievable under M-01661 settlement.

Reference: M-01766, Chapters 5–7, 11

🗣️ 7.6 Carrier Consultation Rights

• Carriers must be consulted before a final adjustment is implemented.
• Management must explain what data was used to justify changes.
• Carriers may raise objections and add written comments to official forms.
• A steward should be present or made aware of any route modification meeting.
• No change should be made without the carrier's input and opportunity to respond.

Reference: M-39 §242.3, Route Protection Ch. 2–3

🚩 7.7 Red Flags Carriers Should Watch For

• No explanation or vague entries on PS Form 1840 Reverse.
• Route time is reduced without corresponding mail volume or travel data changes.
• Adjustments made shortly after inspection without proper consultation.
• Sudden pivoting or "swapping" of delivery areas without written notice.
• Supervisors claiming "it's just a minor change" without documentation.

Reference: Route Protection Ch. 3, NALC 2018 Inspection Guide

🔍 7.8 What to Do If You Suspect an Improper Adjustment

• Contact your NALC steward immediately and explain the situation.
• Document everything—forms, notes, delivery changes, and supervisor instructions.
• Request to see the PS Forms 3999, 1840, and 1840 Reverse for your route.
• File a grievance if route time was reduced without proper justification or discussion.
• Track your workload closely using the NALC Daily Log to identify any increases.

Reference: M-39 §141.1–141.16, NALC Grievance Procedure Guide