Home| Postal News | Know Your Rights | Editorials | Postal Resources|   Postal Links |  About  | Postalblog |  Sitemap | Letters

Specifically, in March 2005, the Postal Service informed the APWU that the responsibility for investigating certain types of employee misconduct (internal crimes) is being shifted from the Postal Service Inspection Service to the Office of Inspector General (OIG).

The APWU was also informed that this transition would not restrict, eliminate, or otherwise adversely affect any rights, privileges, or benefits of either employees, or the union, under the National Labor Relations Act, any handbook or manual affecting employee labor relations, or any collective bargaining agreement. However, the APWU has several concerns regarding this unilateral change in light of the potential impact on employees and the union. The following information is being provided to give you more detail regarding the issues being pursued at the national level in regard to this transition.

The March 22 letter informed the APWU that pursuant to an attached Feb. 7, 2005, USPS internal Memorandum, effective immediately, “allegations of employee embezzlement, record falsification by employees, workers’ compensation fraud by postal employees, contract fraud, on-duty employee narcotics violations, and miscellaneous employee misconduct (application falsification, theft of property or services, non-postal crimes, etc.) will be referred to [the] local Office of Inspector General (OIG) Special Agent in Charge, who will coordinate with the Inspection Service to determine appropriate investigative action.”

The February 7, 2005, memorandum makes references to the “Postmaster General’s September 9, 2004, memorandum which announced that changes would be made in the responsibility for investigating certain internal crimes.”

This correspondence represents the Postal Service response to questions and information requests. Please note that in response to a series of questions that was submitted, the Postal Service stated that agents of the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) “will comply with Article 17.3 as it relates to an employee request for a steward or Union representative during the course of an interrogation.” In addition, we have been told that the OIG will comply with the Memorandum of Understanding between the parties entitled “Role of Inspection Service in Labor Relations Matters.”

However, their response to our questions does not satisfy’ all of our concerns. For example, we question whether this change is proper because it has been the past practice consistent with applicable regulations, collective bargaining agreements, and settlements that Postal Inspection Service agents are the law enforcement officers who conduct interrogations of bargaining unit employees regarding an internal crime investigation. In addition, the Inspector General has oversight responsibilities for all activities of the Postal Inspection Service. Moreover, the Chief Postal Inspector reports directly to and is under the general supervision of the Postmaster General (PMG). Whereas, the Inspector General reports directly to the Board of Governors, and does not report, nor is under the PMG supervision. Our contractual relationship is with the PMG, not with the Board of Governors.

We are suspicious of the purpose of the transition and question whether part of its purpose may be to manipulate and intimidate employees into answering questions during an interrogation. This is nothing new. However, this transition may represent a different approach. In addition, we question the forms that OIG agents are trying to get employees to sign during an interrogation. For example, the PS Form 1067 is the Postal Inspection Warning and Waiver of Rights. It is commonly referred to as the Miranda warning.

However, it appears that the Postal Service takes the position OIG agents have the authority to use their own (OIG) non-postal forms (no identifying PS form number) including two new forms referred to as either the Kalkines or Garrity warnings.

I have written an article for the next edition of the APWU magazine addressing the transition of work from the Inspection Service to the Office of the Inspector General, including the following advice to members:

“The APWU advises employees to request the presence of your APWU representative if questioned by a U.S. Postal Inspector or OIG agent, even if you believe you are not guilty of any wrong doing. Keep in mind that they are law enforcement officers who are investigating an internal criminal matter. You should remain silent until you have consulted with your APWU representative or attorney, as appropriate. It is important to ask that you be advised whether or not you are a suspect in a criminal matter. Even if you are told that whatever you say will not be used against you in a criminal proceeding, if it is a criminal matter that is being investigated you should advise the agent that you wish to contact your attorney. Under no circumstances should you sign any forms or make any statement until you have consulted with your attorney. The fact of the matter is that even if a statement you make is not used, it does not necessarily mean you may not be charged in a criminal proceeding.

“Although the APWU is still pursuing these and other issues regarding the transition of responsibilities for certain work place investigations of employee misconduct from Inspectors to OIG agents, employees should be vigilant in understanding their rights and obligations when confronted by law enforcement agents.”

In preparation for pursuing this matter further, it is requested that my office be provided information regarding any incidents that may have occurred at your office involving investigations or interrogations by OIG officers. Should you have any questions, please contact me at (202) 842-4273.