Post Office (15 page)
I finally found them in one day. Fay was eating sunflower seeds with yogurt. She baked her own bread but it wasn’t very good.
“I met Andy, this truckdriver,” she told me. “He paints on the side. That’s one of his paintings.” Fay pointed to the wall.
I was playing with the girl. I looked at the painting. I didn’t say anything.
“He has a big cock,” said Fay. “He was over the other night and he asked me, ‘How would you like to be fucked with a big cock?’ and I told him, ‘I would rather be fucked with love!’”
“He sounds like a man of the world,” I told her.
I played with the girl a little more, then left. I had a scheme test coming up.
Soon after, I got a letter from Fay. She and the child were living in a hippie commune in New Mexico. It was a nice place, she said. Marina would be able to breathe there. She enclosed a little drawing the girl had made for me.
1
POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: Letter of Warning
TO: Mr. Henry Chinaski
Information has been received in this office indicating that you were arrested by the Los Angeles Police Department on March 12, 1969, on a drunk charge.
In this connection, your attention is invited to Section 744.12 of the Postal Manual, as follows:
“Postal employees are servants of the general public and their conduct, in many instances, must be subject to more restrictions and to higher standards than may be for certain private employments. Employees are expected to conduct themselves during and outside of working hours in a manner which will reflect favorably upon the Postal Service. Although it is not the policy of the Post Office Department to interfere with the private lives of employees, it does require that Postal personnel be honest, reliable, trustworthy, and of good character and reputation.”
While your arrest was on a relatively minor charge, it constitutes evidence of your failure to conduct yourself as required in a manner which will reflect favorably upon the Postal Service. You are hereby cautioned and warned that a repetition of this offense or other involvement with police authorities will leave this office no alternative but to consider disciplinary action.
You may submit your written explanation in this matter if you wish to do so.
POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: Notice of Proposed Adverse Action
TO: Mr. Henry Chinaski
This is advance notice that it is proposed to suspend you from duty without pay for three (3) days or to take such other disciplinary action as may be determined to be appropriate. The proposed action is considered to be for such cause as will promote the efficiency of the service and will be effected no sooner than 35 calendar days from the receipt of this letter.
The charge against you and the reasons supporting the charge are:
CHARGE NO
. 1
You are charged with being absent without leave on May 13, 1969, May 14, 1969, and May 15, 1969.
In addition to the above, the following element of your past record will be considered in determining the extent of disciplinary action should the current charge be sustained:
You were issued a letter of warning April 1, 1969, for being absent without leave.
You have a right to answer the charge in person or in writing, or both, and to be accompanied by a representative of your own choosing. Your reply is to be made within ten (10) calendar days of the receipt of this letter. You may also submit affidavits in support of your answer. Any written reply should be directed to the Postmaster, Los Angeles, California 90052. If additional time is needed within which to submit your reply, it will be considered upon written application showing the necessity.
If you wish to reply in person, you may make an appointment with Ellen Normell, Chief, Employment and Services Section, or K. T. Shamus, Employee Services Officer, by telephoning 289-2222.
After the expiration of the 10-day time limit for reply, all of the facts in your case, including any reply you may submit, will be given full consideration before a decision is rendered. A decision in writing will be issued to you. If the decision is adverse, the letter of decision will advise you of the reason, or reasons, relied upon in making the decision.
POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: Notice of Decision
TO: Henry Chinaski
This will refer to the letter addressed to you dated August 17, 1969, proposing your suspension without pay for three days or other disciplinary action, based on Charge No. 1 specified therein. To date no reply has been received to that letter. After careful consideration of the charge, it has been decided that Charge No. 1, which is supported by substantial evidence, is sustained and warrants your suspension. Accordingly, you will be suspended from duty without pay for a period of three (3) days.
Your first day of suspension will be November 17, 1969, and your last day of suspension will be November 19, 1969.
The element of your past record, as set forth in detail in the letter of proposed adverse action, was also considered in deciding upon the penalty to be imposed.
You have the right to appeal this decision either to the Post Office Department or to the U.S. Civil Service Commission, or first to the Post Office Department and then to the Civil Service Department and then to the Civil Service Commission, in accordance with the following:
If you appeal first to the Civil Service Commission, you will have no right to appeal to the Post Office Department. An appeal to the Civil Service Commission must be submitted to the Regional Director, San Francisco Region, U.S. Civil Service Commission, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36010, San Francisco, California 94102. Your appeal must (a) be in writing, (b) set forth your reasons for contesting the suspension, with such offer of proof and documents as you are able to submit, and (c) be submitted no later than 15 days after the effective date of your suspension. The Commission will upon proper appeal, review the action only to determine that proper procedures have been followed, unless you furnish an affidavit alleging that the action is for political reasons, except as may be required by law, or resulted from discrimination because of marital status or physical handicap. If you appeal to the Post Office Department, you will not be entitled to appeal to the Commission until after a first level decision has been made on your appeal by the Department. At that point, you will have a choice of continuing with your appeal through higher levels in the Post Office Department or appealing to the Commission. However, if no first level decision on the appeal has been made within 60 days after it is filed, you may elect to terminate your appeal to the Department by appealing to the Commission.
If you appeal to the Post Office Department within ten (10) calendar days of receiving this notice of decision, your suspension will not be put into effect until you have received a decision on your appeal from the Regional Director, Post Office Department. Further, if you appeal to the Department, you have the right to be accompanied, represented, and advised by a representative of your own choosing. You and your representative will have freedom from restraint, interference, coercion, discrimination, or reprisal. You and your representative will also be allowed a reasonable amount of official time to prepare your presentation.
An appeal to the Post Office Department may be submitted at any time after you receive this letter but not later than 15 calendar days after the effective date of the suspension. Your letter must include a request for a hearing or a statement that no hearing is desired. The appeal should be addressed to:
Regional Director
Post Office Department
631 Howard Street
San Francisco, California
94106
If you file an appeal with either the Regional Director or with the Civil Service Commission, furnish me with a signed copy of the appeal at the same time it is sent to the Region or Civil Service Commission.
If you have any questions about the appeals procedure, you may contact Richard N. Marth, Employee Services and Benefits Assistant, at the Employment and Services Section, Office of Personnel, Room 2205, Federal Building, 300 North Los Angeles Street, between 8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: Notice of Proposed Adverse Action
TO: Mr. Henry Chinaski
This is advance notice that it is proposed to remove you from the Postal Service or to take such other disciplinary action as may be determinted to be appropriate. The proposed action is considered to be for such cause as will promote the efficiency of the service and will be effective no sooner than 35 calendar days from the receipt of this letter.
The charge against you and the reasons supporting the charge are:
You are charged with being absent without leave on the following dates:
| September | 25, 1969 | 4 hrs |
| September | 28, 1969 | 8 hrs |
| September | 29, 1969 | 8 hrs |
| October | 5, 1969 | 8 hrs |
| October | 6, 1969 | 4 hrs |
| October | 7, 1969 | 4 hrs |
| October | 13, 1969 | 5 hrs |
| October | 15, 1969 | 4 hrs |
| October | 16, 1969 | 8 hrs |
| October | 19, 1969 | 8 hrs |
| October | 23, 1969 | 4 hrs |
| October | 29, 1969 | 4 hrs |
| November | 4, 1969 | 8 hrs |
| November | 6, 1969 | 4 hrs |
| November | 12, 1969 | 4 hrs |
| November | 13, 1969 | 8 hrs |
In addition to the above, the following elements of your past record will be considered in determining the extent of disciplinary action should the current charge be sustained:
You were issued a letter of warning April 1, 1969, for being absent without leave.
You were issued a notice of proposed adverse action August 17, 1969, for being absent without leave. As a result of that charge you were suspended from duty without pay for three (3) days from November 17, 1969 to November 19, 1969.
You have the right to answer the charge in person or in writing, or both, and to be accompanied by a representative of your own choosing. Your reply is to be made within ten (10) calendar days of the receipt of this letter. You may also submit affidavits in support of your letters. Any written reply should be directed to the Postmaster, Los Angeles, California 90052. If additional time is needed within which to submit your reply, it will be considered upon written application showing the necessity.
If you wish to reply in person, you may make an appointment with Ellen Normell, Chief, Employment and Services Section, or K. T. Shamus, Employee Services Officer, by telephoning 289-2222.
After the expiration of the 10-day limit for reply, all the facts in your case, including any reply you may submit, will be given full consideration before a decision is rendered. A decision in writing will be issued to you. If the decsion is adverse, the letter of decision will advise you of the reason, or reasons, relied upon in making the decision.
1
I was sitting next to a young girl who didn’t know her scheme very well.
“Where does 2900 Roteford go?” she asked me.
“Try throwing it to 33,” I told her.
The supervisor was talking to her.
“You say you’re from Kansas City? Both my parents were born in Kansas City.”
“Is that so?” said the girl.
Then she asked me:
“How about 8400 Meyers?”
“Give it to 18.”
She was a little on the plump side but she was ready. I passed. I’d had it with the ladies for a while. The supervisor was standing real close to her. “Do you live far from work?”
“No.”
“Do you like your job?”
“Oh, yes.”
She turned to me.
“How about 6200 Albany?”
“Sixteen.”
When I finished my tray, the supervisor spoke to me: “Chinaski, I timed you on that tray. It took you 28 minutes.”
I didn’t answer.
“Do you know what the standard is for that tray?”
“No, I don’t know.”
“How long have you been here?”
“Eleven years.”
“You’ve been here 11 years and you don’t know the standard?”
“That’s correct.”
“You stick mail as if you don’t care about it.” The girl still had a full tray in front of her. We had begun our trays together.
“And you’ve been talking to this lady next to you.” I lit a cigarette.
“Chinaski, come here a minute.”
He stood at the front of the tin cases and pointed. All the clerks were sticking very fast now. I watched them swinging their right arms frantically. Even the plump girl was jamming them home.
“See these numbers painted on the end of the case?”
“Yeh.”
“Those numbers indicate the number of pieces that must be stuck in a minute. A two-foot tray must be stuck in 23 minutes. You ran five minutes over.”
He pointed to the 23. “Twenty-three minutes is standard.”
“That 23 doesn’t mean anything,” I said.
“Whadda ya mean?”
“I mean a man came along and painted that 23 on there with a can of paint.”
“No, no, this is time-tested over the years and rechecked. “
What was the use? I didn’t answer.
“I’m going to have to write you up, Chinaski. You will be counseled on this.”
I went back and sat down. Eleven years! I didn’t have a dime more in my pocket than when I had first walked in. Eleven years. Although each night had been long, the years had gone fast. Perhaps it was the night work. Or doing the same thing over and over and over again. At least with The Stone I had never known what to expect. Here there weren’t any surprises.
