Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Postal Employees

Post your thoughts and opinions here about current Postal employee topics.

2 Pages12>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Postal Steve  
#1 Posted : Wednesday, February 08, 2012 10:33:17 AM(UTC)
Postal Steve

Rank: Rookie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/6/2012(UTC)
Posts: 30

My PM is either unable or unwilling to answer my schedule question before I attend orientation. I will be a PSE clerk (SSDA) working in an office that has other offices bringing mail to it before it goes to the P&DC. My question is rather simple, but remains unanswered: What is the latest time I should expect to get out of work in the evening? I'll be working the standard few in the AM and few in the PM. I'd like to take a class that starts at 6pm two nights a week and I'm wondering if that's do-able. Thanks in advance!
NECArrier  
#2 Posted : Wednesday, February 08, 2012 10:42:25 AM(UTC)
NECArrier

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 11/27/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,783



You could easily work til 7 or 8 pm in the evening, whenever they need you. Take the class next semester after you see more of what the job is like.
PSE2  
#3 Posted : Wednesday, February 08, 2012 10:50:37 AM(UTC)
PSE2

Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/11/2012(UTC)
Posts: 7

If you work in the evening, they'll have you loading the truck and the last truck leave around 7 p.m.PSE22012-02-08 18:56:29
CDC1981  
#4 Posted : Friday, February 10, 2012 10:50:37 AM(UTC)
CDC1981

Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/14/2012(UTC)
Posts: 1



I am a PSE and have been working at an office that you are describing.  They can only work you up to 56 hours a week.  THe hours will vary, because they don't have to have a set schedual as long as at the end of the week you are under 56.  For me I start around 6 in the morning get an hour lunch as early as 8 to as late as 2.  Then on most nights I don't get off until 5 or 5:30.  I am also a window clerk so they use me as much as possible.  My office is severly understaffed and with the amount of hours I put in work still doesn't get done, because they have me at the window all the time.  All our PM cares about is making sure we get 100s on our mystery shopper.  During the Christmas season I was working over 60 hours a week with only a half hour lunch at times. 
MidwestTE  
#5 Posted : Friday, February 10, 2012 12:06:00 PM(UTC)
MidwestTE

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/2/2011(UTC)
Posts: 481

Don't know if there is a difference between hours they can work you between TE's and PSE's but I had 64 hours two weeks ago... never heard of the 56 hour deal... did I want to work 64 hours??? no... did I complain??? not too much... did I like the 9 hours of V time accumulated from working that much??? you betchaStar

The times they are a-changin' - Bob Dylan
Melerkat  
#6 Posted : Friday, February 10, 2012 1:15:52 PM(UTC)
Melerkat

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/13/2011(UTC)
Posts: 2,648

Well, I'm getting real tired after an hour of trying to read AND UNDERSTAND this incredible document. (It just became available a couple of days ago, which is REALLY DISTURBING. They VOTED ON THIS, AND PASSED IT, BUT NOBODY SAW IT. Not the whole thing, until a couple of days ago).
I'm not a clerk. So although I would be pissed at the PRECEDENTS included in this idiocy, could a clerk kindly tell me where the limits of weekly work hours  are spelled out in this rubbish heap?

http://www.apwu.org/dept/ind-rel/sc/APWU%20Contract%202010-2015.pdf





Melerkat2012-02-10 21:22:54
“Soldiers can sometimes make decisions that are smarter than the orders they've been given.”<br />― Orson Scott Card, Ender's Game
Melerkat  
#7 Posted : Friday, February 10, 2012 1:20:17 PM(UTC)
Melerkat

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/13/2011(UTC)
Posts: 2,648

Contract Now Available
The official 2010-2015 Collective Bargaining Agreement [PDF] between the USPS and the APWU is being printed
and will be ready for shipping shortly, Director of Industrial
Relations Mike Morris has announced.

In the meantime, copies can be viewed and downloaded
from the APWU Web site. Orders for printed copies will be accepted online at the APWU Store, by phone at 800-789-0072, or
by mailing an order form to APWU Store, PO Box 221494, Chantilly VA 20153.

The contract will be available in two formats: The
spiral bound edition may be purchased for $4 per copy,
and a traditional paperback version may be purchased for $3 per copy.


HOW NICE OF THEM TO BE SO PROMPT! And "just" 3bucks to see it if you don't have a "pooter?" 


WELL DONE!



“Soldiers can sometimes make decisions that are smarter than the orders they've been given.”<br />― Orson Scott Card, Ender's Game
delovibrio  
#8 Posted : Friday, February 10, 2012 1:49:55 PM(UTC)
delovibrio

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/12/2011(UTC)
Posts: 1,355

MidwestTE wrote:
Don't know if there is a difference between hours they can work you between TE's and PSE's but I had 64 hours two weeks ago... never heard of the 56 hour deal... did I want to work 64 hours??? no... did I complain??? not too much... did I like the 9 hours of V time accumulated from working that much??? you betchaStar

 
me neither,
 
we work 65 hours sometimes..
Guts  
#9 Posted : Friday, February 10, 2012 10:22:22 PM(UTC)
Guts

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 5/19/2002(UTC)
Posts: 817

Melerkat wrote:
Contract Now Available
The official 2010-2015 Collective Bargaining Agreement [PDF] between the USPS and the APWU is being printed
and will be ready for shipping shortly, Director of Industrial
Relations Mike Morris has announced.

In the meantime, copies can be viewed and downloaded
from the APWU Web site. Orders for printed copies will be accepted online at the APWU Store, by phone at 800-789-0072, or
by mailing an order form to APWU Store, PO Box 221494, Chantilly VA 20153.

The contract will be available in two formats: The
spiral bound edition may be purchased for $4 per copy,
and a traditional paperback version may be purchased for $3 per copy.


HOW NICE OF THEM TO BE SO PROMPT! And "just" 3bucks to see it if you don't have a "pooter?" 


WELL DONE!





About f'n time!

BTW, members do receive a free copy!

A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody." --Thomas Paine<br /><br />
postalvet  
#10 Posted : Saturday, February 11, 2012 5:35:13 AM(UTC)
postalvet

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 9/29/2009(UTC)
Posts: 5,352
Location: southern calif

Thanks: 6 times
Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 7 post(s)

Melerkat wrote:
Well, I'm getting real tired after an hour of trying to read AND UNDERSTAND this incredible document. (It just became available a couple of days ago, which is REALLY DISTURBING. They VOTED ON THIS, AND PASSED IT, BUT NOBODY SAW IT. Not the whole thing, until a couple of days ago).
I'm not a clerk. So although I would be pissed at the PRECEDENTS included in this idiocy, could a clerk kindly tell me where the limits of weekly work hours  are spelled out in this rubbish heap?

http://www.apwu.org/dept/ind-rel/sc/APWU%20Contract%202010-2015.pdf





 
the contract was always there it just did not have a signature page or any memos that were carried over.
 
"could a clerk kindly tell me where the limits of weekly work hours are..."  are you asking about just clersk or PSE's?  I ask because this thread is about PSE's.
 
for clerks and other APWU crafts it is article 8.5.G 2 "...

excluding December, shall be limited to no more than twelve (12) hours of work in a day and no more than sixty (60) hours of work in a service week."

 But you also have to read the memos.     that has been arbitrated to mean that is the maxumn APWU employees can work.

Retired postal worker of 38 years who is willing to help even though some do not want to hear the truth.
Melerkat  
#11 Posted : Saturday, February 11, 2012 5:49:22 AM(UTC)
Melerkat

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/13/2011(UTC)
Posts: 2,648

PSE's. I believe a PSE posted that he worked 64 hours in one week, "two weeks ago."

More than 10 hours a day, for SIX DAYS?

I just don't see that allowable.
I've heard some incredible stories about mail handler hours worked (due to no double-time) but 64 hours in a week seems a bit excessive to me.

So can someone point out in the APWU contract any limits on PSE weekly hours worked (or daily)? Thanks.

Because as I understand the situation with T.E.'s, they can't even get OT if PTF's aren't getting 40 a week.

So is this guy saying that A) All the clerks (NTFT) don't have to work more than say, 30-hours (if it's their job position), B) clerks on the ODL get passed over by these PSE's or C) EVERY CLERK IS ALREADY MAXED OUT and that's why the PSE IS BEING FORCED TO WORK an incredible 64-hours in one week?

Something here doesn't make sense. Not that I doubt this idiotic APWU contract wouldn't allow that kind of insanity.

But I can sure tell you that if I were a "regular" (if you want to call it that) being held to 30-hours a week while a PSE was making 64 (MORE THAN TWICE!!!!) hours a week and I would just sit there and take then you're kidding yourself.


“Soldiers can sometimes make decisions that are smarter than the orders they've been given.”<br />― Orson Scott Card, Ender's Game
postalvet  
#12 Posted : Saturday, February 11, 2012 12:41:35 PM(UTC)
postalvet

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 9/29/2009(UTC)
Posts: 5,352
Location: southern calif

Thanks: 6 times
Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 7 post(s)

I just did a search of "PSE" in the pdf version of the apwu contract and Nothing came up about how many hours they can work.  this is a another blunder that guffey did.  do you know that management is hiring pse's to work in maintenance other then custodians.  totally screwed up.  there might be some where in that contract that PTF should get more hours then a pse, but I don't believe so.  this was guffeys first contact to negotiate by himself and he turned down help from burrus.  if you want to read about some of the things burrus thinks of that contract his web site is;  http://burrusjournal.org/  also check out; http://www.21cpw.com/general.html   they have some good conversations about that contract.
Retired postal worker of 38 years who is willing to help even though some do not want to hear the truth.
Getting in  
#13 Posted : Saturday, February 11, 2012 6:40:51 PM(UTC)
Getting in

Rank: Groupie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/25/2011(UTC)
Posts: 98

Pse hours vary greatly based on location. At my PD&C I average 35-38 hours a week. Only having gone over 40 twice and I am a very hard worker. All of the PSE at my location on tour 1 work about the same. There were some people on tour 3 that were getting 6 x 12 hour days for 72 hours for probably a good 5 months until the union grieved it. Needless to say not only were the career people unhappy but the other PSE were not happy about it either.
 
I used to take home more as a casual mail handler becasue of OT, work better hours and work closer to home. I honestly wish I didnt become a PSE. My plant is run beyond horrible. Here are the questions everynights mystery.
 
1) Will I work 5, 7. or 10 hours
2) Will I get enough hours this week to pay my bills
3) I need permission everynight to go to break, lunch and to leave
 
It's very hard to support a family let alone make any plans with this setup. I watch the regulars everynight (the slower ones) walk out after their 8 and leave their mess on the DBCS machines for the PSE because frankly they have to incentive to get the work done. They get their 8 hours and go home. Management loves the PSE role because regardless of paying my union dues I have NO rights..ZERO.
Melerkat  
#14 Posted : Saturday, February 11, 2012 10:23:54 PM(UTC)
Melerkat

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/13/2011(UTC)
Posts: 2,648



postalvet wrote:

I just did a search of "PSE" in the pdf version of the apwu contract and Nothing came up about how many hours they can work.  this is a another blunder that guffey did.  do you know that management is hiring pse's to work in maintenance other then custodians.  totally screwed up.  there might be some where in that contract that PTF should get more hours then a pse, but I don't believe so.  this was guffeys first contact to negotiate by himself and he turned down help from burrus.  if you want to read about some of the things burrus thinks of that contract his web site is;  http://burrusjournal.org/  also check out; http://www.21cpw.com/general.html   they have some good conversations about that contract.


That's what I thought. I couldn't find anything either. Thanks Postalvet for taking the time to check.

I believe that there are only PTF clerks now in very small offices only. So I don't see that comparison of hours worked as a 'huge' problem. (PTF clerk vs PSE clerk).

I was saying though that our contract (NALC) has protections for PTF hours vs T.E.'s.
PTF's should be getting their hours before T.E.'s are used. If PTF's aren't getting their hours then the T.E. should be reassigned to a nearby office with staffing shortages.

But this APWU Agreement just get's more bizarre as I read it.

I still can't believe it was agreed to by the union and ratified by the rank and file.
I can only assume few people actually read it before voting to approve it.

Melerkat2012-02-12 06:29:52
“Soldiers can sometimes make decisions that are smarter than the orders they've been given.”<br />― Orson Scott Card, Ender's Game
Window Clerk  
#15 Posted : Saturday, February 11, 2012 11:01:25 PM(UTC)
Window Clerk

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/31/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,014


Melerkat wrote:


I still can't believe it was agreed to by the union and ratified by the rank and file.
I can only assume few people actually read it before voting to approve it.


Here's the sad part about that vote.

Only 91,802 members voted but ballots were mailed to 176,611 union members.

They were so determined to get enough votes ballots were mailed to 35,668 non-members, who were invited to vote, provided
they completed union sign-up cards that were enclosed in their ratification packets. Of that 35,668 I haven't a clue how many signed up with the Union so that they could vote.

After the votes were counted the final tally was 69,451 to 22,351.

Using just the actual Union membership for simplicity sake that means only 39% of the total membership voted YES.

Close to 85,000 members were too apathetic to even vote at all.

Those are the ones that I'll never understand.


binthair  
#16 Posted : Saturday, February 11, 2012 11:15:43 PM(UTC)
binthair

Rank: Advisor

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/19/2011(UTC)
Posts: 168

Merlerkat... I can't say I'm surprised that it passed.  I will say though, that I'm surprised that it passed by  approximately 3 to 1.  As to reading the contract, again it wouldn't surprise me that a huge contingent of our members didn't.  I believe that this goes along with these same members listening to what their locals were telling them and then just falling in line with which way our local officers were steering them.  BTW, kudos to the minority of locals who saw through Guffey et al, and made their members informed of the serious ramifications of agreeing to this contract.  Unfortunately, it came down to a numbers game (informed/uninformed) and we're left with this result.
 
3 major reasons contract was ratified by membership:
 
1) Stated above
2) Fear of layoffs if not ratified
3) PTF's in small offices all across the country (which I underestimated their numbers to be although I can't
     give you exact figures) who were getting well less than 30 hours/week and were going to be guaranteed
     at least that upon ratification (hard to chastize them)
 
Still, SHAME ON our national, SHAME ON the locals who fell in line with national (snake-oil salesmen in my book), and SHAME ON our members who were either too lazy to vote or too stupid to know how to draw an 'X' on a piece of paper.
MidwestTE  
#17 Posted : Saturday, February 11, 2012 11:24:15 PM(UTC)
MidwestTE

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 6/2/2011(UTC)
Posts: 481

Melerkat wrote:
PSE's. I believe a PSE posted that he worked 64 hours in one week, "two weeks ago."

More than 10 hours a day, for SIX DAYS?

I just don't see that allowable.
I've heard some incredible stories about mail handler hours worked (due to no double-time) but 64 hours in a week seems a bit excessive to me.

So can someone point out in the APWU contract any limits on PSE weekly hours worked (or daily)? Thanks.

Because as I understand the situation with T.E.'s, they can't even get OT if PTF's aren't getting 40 a week.

So is this guy saying that A) All the clerks (NTFT) don't have to work more than say, 30-hours (if it's their job position), B) clerks on the ODL get passed over by these PSE's or C) EVERY CLERK IS ALREADY MAXED OUT and that's why the PSE IS BEING FORCED TO WORK an incredible 64-hours in one week?

Something here doesn't make sense. Not that I doubt this idiotic APWU contract wouldn't allow that kind of insanity.

But I can sure tell you that if I were a "regular" (if you want to call it that) being held to 30-hours a week while a PSE was making 64 (MORE THAN TWICE!!!!) hours a week and I would just sit there and take then you're kidding yourself.



Melerkat...

In reference to my previous post in regards to 64 hours, I am a TE (hence the name)... we no longer have any PTF's at our office (at least as carriers... all were converted... not sure on how the clerks are staffed), so management works us like dogs... to get 64 hours I worked one 13 hr day... (don't even ask)... 3 - 11's one 9.5 and one 8.5. I was inquiring as to if PSE's could be forced to work OT like TE's... it's the simple truth in our office that the clerks are barely getting their 40 but most carriers are pushing 60 week and and week out...
The times they are a-changin' - Bob Dylan
Melerkat  
#18 Posted : Saturday, February 11, 2012 11:44:43 PM(UTC)
Melerkat

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/13/2011(UTC)
Posts: 2,648

Well, for the 2006 NALC contract The vote for ratification was 104,346 to 11,895.

There were 224,400 NALC members in 2006.
So half of those Bozo's didn't bother to vote either, and that is very disappointing.

However, IT WAS approved by 9-to-1, and nobody really thought that it wouldn't pass.
The main issues were all addressed in the last minute agreement. (Contracting, FSS stuff and T.E.'s covered by the union and paid a higher wage--same as a new PTF, no casuals, ect.).
If you recall, we were headed toward arbitration in mere days before an agreement on these issues was achieved.

But I think that I can say confidently that - had our agreement included language THAT EXISTING CAREER CARRIERS COULD SEE A REDUCTION IN HOURS AND BENEFITS, and that all new hires may not be traditional full-time positions - I seriously doubt such an agreement would be supported by a 3-1 majority.

I don't know what these people were thinking.
The NALC tried, at the National Level, to try and talk the APWU out of agreeing to "NTFT."
That having failed, our NBA's ordered our local branch presidents to "talk" to the APWU branch presidents. Failed.
So then local stewards in many offices tried convincing their APWU counterparts and employees to reconsider. This actually worked in some branches. I know that the APWU agreement was not approved in my area. 

I think #2 in your list probably was the deciding factor. I know they have better no-layoff protection but management was pushing the reassignment of clerks to carriers.

READ: (I know the contract was agreed to in April, and this is from July, but they were pushing this baloney much earlier. I just don't feel like researching it now).

USPS Detailing Postal Clerks to Letter Carrier Craft


July 26, 2011 by postal
Filed under: APWU, letter carriers, postal, postal clerks, postal news, usps 

USPS Is Taking No Prisoners in Effort to Save Service?

Sam Wood,  APWU President, Southwest Florida Area Local via 21st Century Postal Worker:

During a meeting this evening with Clerks at the Fort Myers P&DC
(concerning detailing Clerks to the Carrier Craft) which ended at about
6:40pm eastern time, USPS Labor Representative Joe Homolash from the
Suncoast District informed employees that tomorrow the USPS Postmaster
General will be announcing major changes (review of approximately 3,700 Post Offices, stations and branches).

In this meeting, it was made fully clear that the USPS will not be
standing still and will begin “TAKING DRASTIC MEASURES” to save the
Postal Service. In no way was he specific but it was made clear that the changes will go beyond the 3,700 Post Offices in other ways.

Reading into more of what Homolash stated in this meeting such as
many more changes will be coming and they will be fast tracked, It is my
opinion that management has no intention to follow any Postal Union’s
Collective Bargaining Agreement and will do whatever they want. As
Homolash also stated, “They will deal with the ramifications later.” It
is also my belief that Plants could eventually be affected by potential closings or tour changes.

CLERKS BEING MOVED TO THE CARRIER CRAFT

Management stated that the details to the Carrier Craft would be on
“30″ day details. After pressing management on the issue, management
stated that if they needed to detail these employees for a longer period
then 30 days, they wouldn’t have an option to come back. Management
stated that the Suncoast District would not train more clerks to do this
work, so they would force the employees to stay in the Carrier Craft.
The Detailed Clerks would also be subject to discipline (including
termination) if any Carrier Violations occurs. Essentially, these Clerk
volunteers could in fact be stuck in the Carrier Craft and be constantly
moved from station to station and be subjected to hours and days off changes.

Mandatory Stand-Up Talk – July 25, 2011 [pdf]

Ft. Myers P&DC DIRECT LINE – July 25, 2011 [pdf]




“Soldiers can sometimes make decisions that are smarter than the orders they've been given.”<br />― Orson Scott Card, Ender's Game
Melerkat  
#19 Posted : Saturday, February 11, 2012 11:53:56 PM(UTC)
Melerkat

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/13/2011(UTC)
Posts: 2,648



MidwestTE wrote:
Melerkat wrote:
PSE's. I believe a PSE posted that he worked 64 hours in one week, "two weeks ago."

More than 10 hours a day, for SIX DAYS?

I just don't see that allowable.
I've heard some incredible stories about mail handler hours worked (due to no double-time) but 64 hours in a week seems a bit excessive to me.

So can someone point out in the APWU contract any limits on PSE weekly hours worked (or daily)? Thanks.

Because as I understand the situation with T.E.'s, they can't even get OT if PTF's aren't getting 40 a week.

So is this guy saying that A) All the clerks (NTFT) don't have to work more than say, 30-hours (if it's their job position), B) clerks on the ODL get passed over by these PSE's or C) EVERY CLERK IS ALREADY MAXED OUT and that's why the PSE IS BEING FORCED TO WORK an incredible 64-hours in one week?

Something here doesn't make sense. Not that I doubt this idiotic APWU contract wouldn't allow that kind of insanity.

But I can sure tell you that if I were a "regular" (if you want to call it that) being held to 30-hours a week while a PSE was making 64 (MORE THAN TWICE!!!!) hours a week and I would just sit there and take then you're kidding yourself.



Melerkat...

In reference to my previous post in regards to 64 hours, I am a TE (hence the name)... we no longer have any PTF's at our office (at least as carriers... all were converted... not sure on how the clerks are staffed), so management works us like dogs... to get 64 hours I worked one 13 hr day... (don't even ask)... 3 - 11's one 9.5 and one 8.5. I was inquiring as to if PSE's could be forced to work OT like TE's... it's the simple truth in our office that the clerks are barely getting their 40 but most carriers are pushing 60 week and and week out...


Yes, I understand that. I was just wondering if there is language in the APWU contract that protects against this type of abuse.
I can find none.

One thing that works in the favor of carriers is the fact that we can only work so long into the night before something has to give. Routes need to be cut or more help is needed.
But clerks can basically work any hours of the day or night (depending on their job. Obviously Reg Room or Window clerks are similarly restricted like carriers are).
There's something seriously wrong in your office if management is working carriers well into the night, in the middle of winter. We see carriers out there until 6:30PM at times, but not everyday.
And we recently received another T.E. and are scheduled to receive a regular carrier excessed from a FSS office in about a month.

So unless there is language in the APWU contract (like NTFT's getting "overtime" before PSE's are forced to work OT) then this could prove to be a very long 4-years. Literally.

Melerkat2012-02-12 08:02:25
“Soldiers can sometimes make decisions that are smarter than the orders they've been given.”<br />― Orson Scott Card, Ender's Game
RudieCantFail  
#20 Posted : Sunday, February 12, 2012 4:40:49 AM(UTC)
RudieCantFail

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 1/18/2012(UTC)
Posts: 191

The PTFs in the small offices shouldn't have voted for it because they were not converted to NTFTs, only PTFs in level 20 and above I believe.  I think the layoff clause, "raise", apathy, and conviction on the part of the old timers that they would not be affected are participated to the passing of the contract. 

binthair wrote:
1) Stated above
2) Fear of layoffs if not ratified
3) PTF's in small offices all across the country (which I underestimated their numbers to be although I can't
     give you exact figures) who were getting well less than 30 hours/week and were going to be guaranteed
     at least that upon ratification (hard to chastize them)
 
Still, SHAME ON our national, SHAME ON the locals who fell in line with national (snake-oil salesmen in my book), and SHAME ON our members who were either too lazy to vote or too stupid to know how to draw an 'X' on a piece of paper.
The soul and substance of what customarily ranks as patriotism is moral cowardice -- and always has been. Mark Twain
Rss Feed  Atom Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.


This page was generated in 1.826 seconds.