Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Local 243
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BigUnionGuy" data-source="post: 3944925" data-attributes="member: 4992"><p>As minor as they may seem, RA wasn't smart enough to realize the company was</p><p></p><p>building a case against him for "overall job performance".</p><p></p><p></p><p>The panel he went before.... agreed.</p><p></p><p></p><p>After the Western Pennsylvania grievance panel conducted a hearing on January 14, 2015, concerning Atkinson’s grievances of his October 28 discharge, the grievance panel upheld UPS’s decision to discharge Atkinson. The grievance panel’s decision stated (in its entirety) as follows:</p><p></p><p><em>"Based on the facts presented <u>and the grievant’s own testimony</u> the committee finds no violations of any contract articles therefore the grievances (#22310 and #22311) are denied."</em></p><p><em></em></p><p><em></em></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If he was current on his dues, he could have.</p><p></p><p>Or, his alternate Steward could have.... <u>the one that he opposed being appointed</u></p><p><u></u></p><p><u>to the position</u>. Then they became friends.</p><p></p><p></p><p>The whole case reads like a soap opera.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I would give him a pass on that, for being frustrated.</p><p></p><p>But, the judge didn't see it that way.</p><p></p><p></p><p>And why would a 27 year employee (Steward) think it was appropriate to rant on social</p><p></p><p>media about it ? That was his death knell.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>As with most threads and topics.... they never stay on point.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I really want to hear from [USER=8105]@browned out[/USER] about the Local 243 case.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>-Bug-</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BigUnionGuy, post: 3944925, member: 4992"] As minor as they may seem, RA wasn't smart enough to realize the company was building a case against him for "overall job performance". The panel he went before.... agreed. After the Western Pennsylvania grievance panel conducted a hearing on January 14, 2015, concerning Atkinson’s grievances of his October 28 discharge, the grievance panel upheld UPS’s decision to discharge Atkinson. The grievance panel’s decision stated (in its entirety) as follows: [I]"Based on the facts presented [U]and the grievant’s own testimony[/U] the committee finds no violations of any contract articles therefore the grievances (#22310 and #22311) are denied." [/I] If he was current on his dues, he could have. Or, his alternate Steward could have.... [U]the one that he opposed being appointed to the position[/U]. Then they became friends. The whole case reads like a soap opera. I would give him a pass on that, for being frustrated. But, the judge didn't see it that way. And why would a 27 year employee (Steward) think it was appropriate to rant on social media about it ? That was his death knell. As with most threads and topics.... they never stay on point. I really want to hear from [USER=8105]@browned out[/USER] about the Local 243 case. -Bug- [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Local 243
Top