ERRs vs MPP

[Gle88]

Current cpc holding a tol to N90.

Was selected under recent ncept to another facility (we’ll call it Facility B).

Now getting word that I have to forfeit Facility B because I held a tol during the ncept. And that my ERR’s were supposed to have been deleted.

I haven’t found this scenario anywhere in the ncept procedures or mou’s. Mostly because, they’re two complete different entities. Usa Jobs bid vs a employee relocation request. Nothing states that just because I hold a tol from an MPP means I have to delete err in the system. It does state if I was selected by err to n90 then I’d have the rest of err in system deleted.

I’ve heard there’s others in the region in the same boat. Which means I’m sure there are others nationally. Anyone have insight on this? Seems like Natca is just trying to make a case on something that they don’t have a case for.

 

[breakaway2000]

You don't have a case, you should've never been in consideration for Facility B. It's a shame an HR error more than likely blocked someone else from your facility from getting selected. HR should've removed all of your TOL's after receiving your acceptance of your N90 TOL.

Per the ERR MOU...

Section 5 of the ERR MOU states...

"Once an employee accepts a Tentative Offer Letter (TOL) to a specific facility, all other requests made under this Section, by that employee will be deleted. An employee who declines a TOL for a particular facility, will have to resubmit a request under this Section for future consideration for that facility."

While an MPP bid TOL can come after an ERR TOL, if you accept an MPP TOL, your ERR's will no longer be considered, regardless of when you submit.

Per the FAQ...
Q7. If an employee accepts a TOL, all other ERR's are deleted. But let's say circumstances require a 12-month release date; can that employee be considered for other positions during the 12-month waiting period?
A7. Once an employee accepts a TOL for a particular facility, all other ERRs from the original losing facility will be deleted and any future requests from that same facility will be invalidated. If an employee subsequently chooses to decline the TOL, they would need to resubmit any ERRs.

The MOU and the FAQ are intentionally all encompassing. They simply state a TOL, not a TOL from section 5 or something along that nature.

You wanted N90, you applied for it. If you're second guessing your decision, you'll need to turn down your TOL and resubmit ERR's to be considered.

 

[Gle88]

See question and answer 20 from FAQ.

Nothing precludes employee from being eligible to accept an offer from either. Employee must simply choose. These are dilenieated in the contract in two different areas. MPP. And ERR.

 

[breakaway2000]

See question and answer 20 from FAQ.

Nothing precludes employee from being eligible to accept an offer from either. Employee must simply choose. These are dilenieated in the contract in two different areas. MPP. And ERR.

Yes, everything I stated above precludes someone from receiving an ERR TOL after accepting an MPP TOL. Again, an MPP bid can come after an ERR TOL, not vice versa. This is what Q20 is referring to. MPP bids are an "advertised vacancy announcement", ERR's are not. ERR's are a voluntary application and are labeled as such on the 3330-42.

 

[Stinger]

Q7. If an employee accepts a TOL, all other ERR's are deleted. But let's say circumstances require a 12-month release date; can that employee be considered for other positions during the 12-month waiting period?
A7. Once an employee accepts a TOL for a particular facility, all other ERRs from the original losing facility will be deleted and any future requests from that same facility will be invalidated. If an employee subsequently chooses to decline the TOL, they would need to resubmit any ERRs.

All other ERRs....almost implies that you had to have been selected off an ERR in the first place doesn't it? The MPP TOL wasn't an ERR.

 

[breakaway2000]

All other ERRs....almost implies that you had to have been selected off an ERR in the first place doesn't it? The MPP TOL wasn't an ERR.

While I can't speak on their intent of adding the word 'other', I can only speak on their overall intent and how it's been implemented and enforced previously. The OP has no chance. All the figure heads of the NCEPT (Robicheau, LeBovidge, and Iacopelli) are in complete agreement on this point. No matter how he tries to counter with, he'll be denied.

Given the time line for the OP, I'm going to assume he's from a 7 or below facility. I can understand his dilemma, feeling trapped at a small level facility, no end in sight, you put in for N90 because it's your only chance at leaving. You accept it, more people are sent to your facility and are certifying, your facility is now eligible and you're left with the realization that your odds of success at N90 are minuscule and with N90 only having return rights (no nest), it's highly likely you'll be back at your old facility in the same spot having watched X amount of people more forward with their career while you're away. I get it, but if he's having 2nd thoughts with N90, the only chance he'll ever have of getting selected through the NCEPT is if he turns down his N90 TOL prior to an NCEPT panel and resubmits his ERR's (which, by now, have all been removed).

 

[Gle88]

While I can't speak on their intent of adding the word 'other', I can only speak on their overall intent and how it's been implemented and enforced previously. The OP has no chance. All the figure heads of the NCEPT (Robicheau, LeBovidge, and Iacopelli) are in complete agreement on this point. No matter how he tries to counter with, he'll be denied.

Actually; she*

Thanks the input and all

 

[breakaway2000]

Actually; she*

Thanks the input and all

I'm missing the old male and female cone holders from the original layout @MJ hook me up!