705red
Browncafe Steward
Again you are qouting language that applies to the normal operation of employee and management relationships, which does not pertain to the role of a steward management relationships. two seperate issues.
Is telematics over supervison?
- Thread starter thelus
- Start date
Again you are qouting language that applies to the normal operation of employee and management relationships, which does not pertain to the role of a steward management relationships. two seperate issues.
brownIEman
Well-Known Member
Not sure I agree. Article 4 does seem to lay out certain clear rights of stewards (although much of that seems to be superfluous as it is law under the NLRA anyway), however, I still do not see anything under article 4 which countermands article 37.
I have looked for NLRA or NLRB rulings which relieves you when acting as a steward from compliance with constraints under the contract. I cannot find it. The best I could do is from another union's site, the UE which is a training site for their stewards spelling out rights and such. the link is http://unitas.wordpress.com/2008/05/02/stewards-rights/
They seem to have the opposite opinion that you hold, an excerpt -
"The Equality Rule
Probably the most important protection is called “The Equality Rule.” This rule acknowledges that your job is likely to involve confrontations with management—confrontations that could lead to discipline under the normal rules of employer-employee relations.
You can openly disagree and argue vigorously with management during grievance meetings; question management’s authority; and, demand certain actions of management, all without risking disciplinary action.
The “Equality Rule” makes you a “legal equal” to the boss. But, it’s in effect only when you are doing your job as a steward, not when you’re acting as an individual employee. You’re acting officially when you investigate and argue grievances, request information and otherwise defend UE members.
There are limits to what you can do, though. Threats of violence and actual violence are prohibited, as are extreme profanity, name calling, and personal attacks. Actions barred by your contract are not protected, either. To prevent supervisors from claiming you “exceeded the limit,” it’s wise to have another steward or UE member with you during meetings with management."
I acknowledge that the NLRB and courts have ruled that profanity are protected for a steward performing union business. However, I still hold that you are not relieved of your responsibility to treat others with respect under the contract. I believe you are miss-interpreting the contract and/or NLRB case law when you state that you are relieved of those responsibilities. Can you site any specific NLRB rulings or case law that would correct my impression?
+1 Neither party should engage in that.
Sounds as though your describing yourself.
-1, I believe Red is right where he should be. To be on the otherside may mean more money but what selling of ones soul that seems to be the cost of getting thier isnt worth it to some. As to where he can make great differences in peoples lives for the good and still make a good living. I have great respect for RED
Selling ones soul....... what are you talking about, i think we were all at ups to make a living and take care of your families(if you have any), and some progress in the company further than others, and those that do reap financial gain..... its a business not personal
Typically bad management are the ones that treat employees like this, especially when they have every intention on firing a driver and after they [resent tehir case and its ripped apart by myself and or the grievant they get defensive and result to intimidation.[/QUOTE]
Bad management, you are full of yourself, you do not pay the management person or persons, so you have no say in whether they are good or bad, some drivers and inside employees do not deserve to work for the company, this fact you seem to overlook all the time, you talk like all union people are so great and ups proves you wrong time after time with upheld discharges and suspensions. Why don't you start a company and hire all the people you think are so great and ups terminated, see how far that company would get. By the way you should be looking at the 705 pension fund, i think its about 46% funded, focus some of your time on that and we would not have to read how great you think you are. if ups ran its company like the union handles the pension fund it would be out of business.
Bad management, you are full of yourself, you do not pay the management person or persons, so you have no say in whether they are good or bad, some drivers and inside employees do not deserve to work for the company, this fact you seem to overlook all the time, you talk like all union people are so great and ups proves you wrong time after time with upheld discharges and suspensions. Why don't you start a company and hire all the people you think are so great and ups terminated, see how far that company would get. By the way you should be looking at the 705 pension fund, i think its about 46% funded, focus some of your time on that and we would not have to read how great you think you are. if ups ran its company like the union handles the pension fund it would be out of business.
Actually it does:
The requirement that stewards act professionally in a meeting presuposes that management is acting professionally towards them to begin with. The Contract doesn't say how a steward should react if management's actions before or during the meeting are outrageous to begin with.
Also, Labor Law always trumps Contract Law if there is ever a conflict between the two.
Finally, if management is found to be wrong in bringing an employee into the office, disciplining him, or even firing him, usually the matter is just dropped. Nothing significant happens to management, except a little embarassment.
Good comeback, only thing is fedex is not union and they are doing ok, i do not think their pension funds are underfunded....
I don't follow Fedex pension funds, but if Fedex has any single-employer funds, by law they must be fully funded or nearly so. The company has no choice.
Didn't Fedex freeze its defined benefit plan and make other changes? Maybe a Fedex employee can bring us up to date?
In your office I can cuss if I feel the need to... you may not like it but it's legal... get over it.
I was NOT referring to Article 37... but rather the NLRA and NLRB rulings... I've mentioned it before management needs an EDUCATION.
Seriously, you need to check out NLRB rulings and you will find out that a steward is awarded protection to "vigorously" defend the contract and they are given latitude as to what they are allowed to do.
Google it brother the information is out there.
brownIEman
Well-Known Member
I disagree, I believe the contract states exactly what a steward or any other employee should do if treated with outrageous or disrespectful behavior, it says they should treat each other and the employer (ie, management) with respect, period. You seem to be implying that employees must treat management with respect only if they are treated that way in the first place. Further, you seem to base this in part on the fact that the contracts obligation for management to treat employees with respect comes prior to the employee's own obligation. But if you are going to argue that the one relies on the other, then I would argue that the obligation begins on management, and if management is not then given the professional behavior in return then as you say, the contract no longer spells out any obligations for him either. Down that road lies chaos.
I have spoken to employees in my work area, and instructed them in respectful terms to do things they did not want to do, and been met with, shall we say way less than respectful or professional responses. I do not believe that that in any way lifted my obligation to continue to be respectful and professional.
I agree. However, I was able to find nothing in my searches on labor law that would lead me to believe that a steward is free of all obligations of a labor contract while acting as a steward, and in fact found one item from another union's site that seems to indicate otherwise. I have asked for any such reference and have not been answered.
Nothing happens that you are aware of. I have been in meetings where such things are discussed, I can assure you the discussions are uncomfortable. The level of discomfort is directly proportional to the level to which the particular case has gone. I stand by my statement that a management person who by their actions begins a process of events that ultimately brings a sanction against UPS from the NLRB would likely find their career path limited.
With any contract, if the other side violates the rules, you are no longer required to obey the contract rules as if nothing happened. Every American has the legal right of self-defense. A steward has additional rights as recognized by the NLRB and the UPS Contract.
If a manager is going to invoke the argument that the meeting is in his office, therefore he won't tollerate any disrespect from the steward, then this is why the meetings should have been held elsewhere all along. A neutral room should have been chosen. Managers should never have had the home turf advantage in the first place. Do you think UPS would agree to hold the meetings at the Union Hall where the Union would hold all the cards?
Read Robert M. Schwartz' "The Legal Rights of Union Stewards."
http://www.workrightspress.com/lrus.html
Usually case law of any kind is not freely available on the Internet. If cases are online, you might have to pay to access the database.
If a manager is going to invoke the argument that the meeting is in his office, therefore he won't tollerate any disrespect from the steward, then this is why the meetings should have been held elsewhere all along. A neutral room should have been chosen. Managers should never have had the home turf advantage in the first place. Do you think UPS would agree to hold the meetings at the Union Hall where the Union would hold all the cards?
Read Robert M. Schwartz' "The Legal Rights of Union Stewards."
http://www.workrightspress.com/lrus.html
Usually case law of any kind is not freely available on the Internet. If cases are online, you might have to pay to access the database.
Not according to most of the people that are fired on this site, they would rather get fired than switch
