M
Mike hunt
Guest
It was put to us pretty much the same way.....
Orion warning letters
- Thread starter Tough Guy
- Start date
Mugarolla
Light 'em up!
Like I said to Bug, the BA should have the grievants best interest in mind when settling the grievance.
But he doesn't have to and the grievant only has the recourse of labor charges against the BA and the local.
Most BA's try their best and are honest. Some are not and the threat of labor charges usually keeps them somewhat honest.
There are some that really don't care. Their local has an attorney on staff so there are really little legal expenses.
And then there is the possibility of, dare I say it, covert retaliation against the member for filing labor charges.
If the BA and local are not representing you fairly now, what will happen after you file labor charges?
BigUnionGuy
Got the T-Shirt
I am just offering suggestions, and proven methods.
Mug,
If that is the way your Local rolls.... have at it.
I was always taught to protect the Local, from frivolous expenditure of members dues money.
Previous administrations cost my Local north of 100k for failure of "Duty of Fair representation".
And really, a BA with a lackadaisical arrogant attitude....
Can have your Local, 1 case away from trusteeship. (and usually don't get re-elected)
That's my personal experience.
-Bug-
Mugarolla
Light 'em up!
My local does not run that way. Yes, at one time it did. We had BA's that came into hearings without a clue. They would sit there and twirl their pencil. Whatever Buster wanted, Buster got.
I have been to some locals still run that way. Like I said, the majority are there to protect the member and do the best job they can.
The whole point of this was that you disagreed with me that once a grievance was processed to the local, that it became the property of the local to hear and settle as they see fit. Whether or not the grievant agreed. It is no longer the grievants grievance. It is the locals grievance.
And I also noted that most locals settle it with the grievants best interest in mind, but there are always exceptions.
Overpaid Union Thug
Well-Known Member
What if the local isn't treating all the buildings in the local fairly? Or more specifically..... favoring one building over the others. How would we go about labor charges for that?
BigUnionGuy
Got the T-Shirt
We are going to have to "agree to disagree".
Like I said.... I was taught and instructed, never to settle a grievance or discharge case
without consulting the grievant and having a steward present. (as a witness)
If the grievant wants to ignore my advice, and run the case up the flag pole.... so be it.
It takes all liability off the Local.
Even with that said, I have still had Labor Board charges filed on a couple discharge cases.
They don't win (obviously), but my Local still incurs legal fees to answer the charge.
-Bug-
BigUnionGuy
Got the T-Shirt
The best thing to do for that, would be bring up the issue to your Local.
First, to the BA involved. Then the Principal Officer.
The next step, would be the Monthly meeting.... during new business.
Nobody likes being put on "front street". (try and keep it in house)
Labor board charges require a substantial amount of physical proof, and documentation.
-Bug-
PiedmontSteward
RTW-4-Less
The methodology you described is the best way to go about handling grievances. I've been "taught" similar things but (unfortunately) rarely see them in practice.
Having the grievant in the room can be a real eye opener as to how the process works, why it takes so long to pan out, and really can cut down on accusations of deal making and horse trading when things don't go their way. More importantly, it empowers the member and educates them. BA's and Stewards can't be everywhere and a knowledgeable rank and filer is worth his or her weight in gold.
BigUnionGuy
Got the T-Shirt
Bubblehead
My Senior Picture
Yea really, an eye opener and then a back turner.
It seems much of the time to be a finely honed process, by both company and union, designed to frustrate and discourage bargaining unit members from filing future grievances.
Then union officials can sit back, as the few active grievances are filibustered, do very little and chastise the members for not being involved.
The company loves it too, because they in turn do not have to abide the collective bargaining agreement that they entered into in "good faith".
It's quite a circle jerk.
Bubblehead
My Senior Picture
I'm assuming then you refrain from attending the annual winter Central Region JAC in Florida every year, a very "centralized" southern location for the Central Region meetings?
Mugarolla
Light 'em up!
I agree with most of what you said. But a BA does not have to consult the grievant and can settle the grievance without his approval. This should not happen, and usually does not, but if it does, the grievant has no recourse during the hearing process.
His only recourse is to file labor charges against his BA and the local.
My point was is that it is not your grievance. It is the locals grievance to settle with your best interest in mind.
And if you have a corrupt local, with the members too scared, or too unwilling to take on the local through labor charges, they can do what they want with each and every grievance. No matter what the grievant or steward wants.
I know for a fact that there are at least 2 locals run this way. And yes, one of them is facing some serious charges at the moment.
Mugarolla
Light 'em up!
Went to the National Panel during a January. Where? San Diego. It was where it was warm. A centralized location for everyone does not come into play. Comfort for the big shots come first.
Overpaid Union Thug
Well-Known Member
I've already did all that. I would need access to grievances from at least several buildings as well as the hub to get proof. If I had been recording the hub BA's reaction when I brought the issue up at the last meeting I went to I'd have quite the golden nugget for proof.
BigUnionGuy
Got the T-Shirt
That bothers me, to hear that.
The only times I have gone to St. Pete, was to actually hear cases.
Unlike some Locals....
(you should know who I mean)That (after) their cases have been deadlocked at the state, settle them beforehand....
Just to show up at the pre-panel and say (when the case is called) "settled and withdrawn".
Then they disappear, for the rest of the week. (with their wife or girlfriend)
My Local doesn't roll like that.
Yep.
Mission Bay.
Was there once, for a National.
The time before was Detroit.
Can't forget Chicago (downtown), not Rosemont.
-Bug-
Last edited:
Bubblehead
My Senior Picture
It bothers me as well.
It doesn't work on me, but we're all wired up different.
Where it makes me mad and just adds to my resolve and fortitude, others drop back and punt.
The only times I have gone to St. Pete, was to actually hear cases.
Unlike some Locals....
That (after) their cases have been deadlocked at the state, settle them beforehand....
Just to show up at the pre-panel and say (when the case is called) "settled and withdrawn".
Then they disappear, for the rest of the week. (with their wife or girlfriend)
My Local doesn't roll like that.
I know exactly what and who you're talking about.
It's sad that they cannot even bring themselves to attend what equates to half day hearings while they are there?
What I don't understand is how a "Big Union Guy" like yourself isn't at every JAC, chairing and/or sitting on the various panels for all of the "Big" cases?
5habits100
Well-Known Member
Please tell me you aren't including all BA's in this conversation. There are a vast majority that are there for the membership and they can't control where or when the hearings are. You also know the union isn't the only party that picks the locations. It appears you are lumping all into one category. The ones that make themselves available 7 days a week don't deserve that kind of pounding. The National Panel is in FL, CA and MN this year, all different conferences (Central, Southern and Western).
On another note I have been reading the back and forth with you and BUG. Just for the record the BA has the right to resolve any grievance, once it is filed, as he/she sees fit. It works well when you have an agent who knows what they are doing, knows the language in the CBA and doesn't play politics with the members. Most members appreciate honesty and an explanation as to why.
And free money too over 9.5 grievances filing
Bubblehead
My Senior Picture
I am only referring to the frame of reference that I am a privy to.
If you were a member of my local, which you aren't, you would understand.
As far as panel locations, I was only referring to the winter JAC's for the Central Region, which are always in Florida, not the National Panels.
I didn't include the summer panel in Traverse City, that is at least in the region, but hardly "centralized".
Can you honestly say that Florida, in their prime season, is a cost efficient option for the Central Region JAC?
I agree, it says so on the grievance form.
If only I had a BA "who knows what they are doing"?
Last edited:
Browntown2018
Member
The biggest issue for me and following Orion is that the program is usually setup to have you delivering stops out of your 5,6,7 and even 8000 sections in the morning. That's all fine and dandy on those nice (rare) days when you can see through your truck yet alone walk through but most times (at least on the route I've been running) I can't reach anything beyond my 1's and 2's.
Similar threads
