Local Panel

[burrheadd]

 

[ski or die]

I'm a retired steward. Had a grievance filed on seniority rights. They sit me in a hotel room with several other employees that were having grievances heard. The panel heard all their grievances, then left for lunch together while I continued to wait. After lunch, they heard my grievance, my BA sit on his hands and did not say a word. It was an open and shut seniority issue. So I went to the President of my local and explained how they intentional left me in the room until after lunch (lost a days pay as at the time they did not reimburse stewards). Went over the grievance with President of local. He was going to file charges on BA. He brought him into the office and we discussed the issue. I did not like to see anyone lose their jobs even though the BA was not doing his. So the BA went back to the company and they reversed the decision without me having to go. And all future hearings, my grievances were heard first. The BA ended up losing his job at a later date for pretty pulling the same thing on another employee who filed a complaint against him over a grievance.

 

[Bubblehead]

I guess I assumed he meant state panel. Local hearings aren't referred to as panels. And he mentioned arbitrators. Hell, I could be wrong.

Local 804 has a "Local Panel", where the decorum is very similar to a State Panel....and they also sit an arbitrator to break all ties.
Nothing is deadlocked there anymore and they aren't beholding to the National Master.
From what I hear, it isn't working out real well since the new group took over.

 

[Bubblehead]

I can't speak for every Panel....
But, as someone that has been a Union Panel member (and sgt-at-arms)
I've never seen that happen.

I think most of the "deals" that @Mugarolla was referring to are sealed with a "handshake" the night before at the Winking Lizard, or some other similar establishment?
I don't think he was implying that it was happening during an "executive session" or at the Panel itself.

Unfortunately, far too often, our elected Local officials are chosen on the same criteria that those who were chosen to ride on the float in the Homecoming Parade were back in High School.
Then when faced with actually having to do the job, reading, writing, researching, and forming lucid arguments on our behalf; they can't.

Their only recourse at this point is to "trade horses", or be exposed as incapable.
It can be really hard to watch.

Who sits on the Panel, is generally based on seniority. (in elected office)

"Generally" being the operative word and would seem to ring true in regards to those who the panel "chairman" is for the Union.

The other two seats,....I'm not sure that I have seen that same "rhyme or reason".
Not always, but more often than not, the other two seem to be there only to hold the chair down during the hearing.

What they do during "executive session", I can only speculate.

I'm not sure what you mean by "pre-hearings".
Again.... every case I have been involved with, was not biased.

I believe in your State, they call it "pre-panel"?

Not sure why you were not able to "connect those dots"???....but again, can only speculate.




~Bbbl~™

 

[Inthegame]

I'm a retired steward. Had a grievance filed on seniority rights. They sit me in a hotel room with several other employees that were having grievances heard. The panel heard all their grievances, then left for lunch together while I continued to wait. After lunch, they heard my grievance, my BA sit on his hands and did not say a word. It was an open and shut seniority issue. So I went to the President of my local and explained how they intentional left me in the room until after lunch (lost a days pay as at the time they did not reimburse stewards). Went over the grievance with President of local. He was going to file charges on BA. He brought him into the office and we discussed the issue. I did not like to see anyone lose their jobs even though the BA was not doing his. So the BA went back to the company and they reversed the decision without me having to go. And all future hearings, my grievances were heard first. The BA ended up losing his job at a later date for pretty pulling the same thing on another employee who filed a complaint against him over a grievance.

So you lost the case at a panel and the company later reversed their decision? That's rare.
At our panels, if grievants are present, we hear terminations first, then travel distance and start times usually determine the order of cases. We don't eat lunch until the cases are done, so often we don't eat lunch. Stewards aren't paid if appearing for their own grievances, only paid if appearing in a representational sense.

 

[Inthegame]

I think most of the "deals" that @Mugarolla was referring to are sealed with a "handshake" the night before at the Winking Lizard, or some other similar establishment?
I don't think he was implying that it was happening during an "executive session" or at the Panel itself.

Unfortunately, far too often, our elected Local officials are chosen on the same criteria that those who were chosen to ride on the float in the Homecoming Parade were back in High School.
Then when faced with actually having to do the job, reading, writing, researching, and forming lucid arguments on our behalf; they can't.

Their only recourse at this point is to "trade horses", or be exposed as incapable.
It can be really hard to watch.

"Generally" being the operative word and would seem to ring true in regards to those who the panel "chairman" is for the Union.

The other two seats,....I'm not sure that I have seen that same "rhyme or reason".
Not always, but more often than not, the other two seem to be there only to hold the chair down during the hearing.

What they do during "executive session", I can only speculate.


I believe in your State, they call it "pre-panel"?

Not sure why you were not able to "connect those dots"???....but again, can only speculate.




~Bbbl~™

BOFP, the claim of the poster is denied.

 

[ski or die]

So you lost the case at a panel and the company later reversed their decision? That's rare.
At our panels, if grievants are present, we hear terminations first, then travel distance and start times usually determine the order of cases. We don't eat lunch until the cases are done, so often we don't eat lunch. Stewards aren't paid if appearing for their own grievances, only paid if appearing in a representational sense.

Yes, it is rare. But it was a obvious seniority violation. That is why the President of Local was going to press charges. This BA had problems previously. The President knew I would take it further if it wasn't resolved properly. I was surprised they didn't include me in the discussion of changing the findings. But, probably another handshake agreement for further down the road. But, the BA was eventually removed. The information I was given for why was something we were suspicious of for sometime. Just took awhile for it to come out into the open.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

I think most of the "deals" that @Mugarolla was referring to are sealed with a "handshake" the night before at the Winking Lizard, or some other similar establishment?

You're implying, cases are resolved, at a bar ?

Unfortunately, far too often, our elected Local officials are chosen on the same criteria that those who were chosen to ride on the float in the Homecoming Parade were back in High School.
Then when faced with actually having to do the job, reading, writing, researching, and forming lucid arguments on our behalf; they can't.

You say potato, I say tomato.

The members vote.... and elect experience.

Their only recourse at this point is to "trade horses", or be exposed as incapable. It can be really hard to watch.

Be careful, of whom, you point the "all knowing" finger at.

Some of us.... might be on your side.

Just say'n.



-Bug-

 

[Mugarolla]

Don't I pay the union to go to bat for me all the time?

And they usually do. Understand, some of these cases are open and shut. The union will never win it unless the company gets something in return.

I've never seen that happen.

I have. You must not get around very much.

Local 804 has a "Local Panel", where the decorum is very similar to a State Panel....and they also sit an arbitrator to break all ties.

I know about 804. That is why I said with a few exceptions. I just gave the basic idea of what the inside of a State Panel grievance hearing may look like for the majority of us.

I think most of the "deals" that @Mugarolla was referring to are sealed with a "handshake" the night before at the Winking Lizard, or some other similar establishment?

Usually at dinner the night before. I will call you a liar if you do not agree that they review the cases the night before. And yes, some are decided the night before. But like I said, the majority of these cases are open and shut. Seniority violation, 9.5 grievance, avoidable accident, signing customers names, etc, and the panel members usually have all the facts while making their decision the night before.

Most times, what is presented during the panel makes no difference, or is nothing new, to the panel members.

I don't think he was implying that it was happening during an "executive session" or at the Panel itself.

No I wasn't.

Their only recourse at this point is to "trade horses", or be exposed as incapable.

No. But they know they cannot win every case, so they may trade a few minor ones to win an important one. Granted, the cases they trade rarely include a discharge.

You're implying, cases are resolved, at a bar ?

Dinner, with maybe a few drinks....

Some of us.... might be on your side.

You are not saying that you are one of those incapable ones, are you?

 

[BigUnionGuy]

You must not get around very much.

Keep telling yourself that.



-Bug-

 

[Bubblehead]

You're implying, cases are resolved, at a bar ?
You say potato, I say tomato.
The members vote.... and elect experience.
Be careful, of whom, you point the "all knowing" finger at.
Some of us.... might be on your side.
Just say'n.
-Bug-

I was only speculating on what was implied by another poster,....for the sport of it.
I enjoy the joust and genuinely appreciate opposing view points.

After all, this is an anonymous Internet site, isn't it?

I have no first hand knowledge of anything from outside the "circled wagons", just referencing what could be termed as a "preponderance of evidence" over an extended period of time.



~Bbbl~™

 

[Bubblehead]

Understand, some of these cases are open and shut. The union will never win it unless the company gets something in return.

In those instances, who really wins, and who really loses?
It's this mindset that I just can't get my head around.

How is it fair or "reasonable" for unrelated grievances to bleed into one another, unless the grievances being traded belong to the same member?

Then in the next breath we hear, "what can the Union do if the members won't step up and file".

 

[navigator]

At panel I used these words
"I have a right to my Job" Instead of Termination I received two week Suspension.
I turned a lot of heads at panel.

 

[Mugarolla]

In those instances, who really wins, and who really loses?
It's this mindset that I just can't get my head around.

How is it fair or "reasonable" for unrelated grievances to bleed into one another, unless the grievances being traded belong to the same member?

Then in the next breath we hear, "what can the Union do if the members won't step up and file".

I totally agree.

The same mentality is present in Congress. Imagine that.

 

[haller]

Good luck. Hopefully you just lied about a sick day and nothing major.

 

[BigUnionGuy]

In those instances, who really wins, and who really loses?
It's this mindset that I just can't get my head around.

How is it fair or "reasonable" for unrelated grievances to bleed into one another, unless the grievances being traded belong to the same member?

Then in the next breath we hear, "what can the Union do if the members won't step up and file".

I did preface my previous comments, stating I don't know what all Panels do....

Just my particular experience. Mug says he has seen it, and I don't doubt that.

He makes a valid point in saying some cases are open and shut. Not all.


My opinion is any elected official that is horse trading, shouldn't be in the job.

The Local President that mentored me, sternly warned against it. And he was the "boss".

Point being, once you open that door.... it can't be closed.

(and you are forever known for it)


Besides, I just like arguing for the member and against the company.



-Bug-

 

[Mugarolla]

My opinion is any elected official that is horse trading, shouldn't be in the job.

I agree.

And I did not say that it happens all over the country. I say that if it happens here, it might happen over there, but I do not know for sure.

Also, the one person most known for doing it over here is no longer here. He got into trouble doing other questionable things and is facing possible charge at this time.

But, to his defense, he thought he was doing it for the members.

Two cases at the panel. One is a $5000 penalty pay grievance. The other is a discharge for a father with 3 kids that did something stupid. Yes, he may win this case on it's own merits, but UPS has him dead to rights and would have to give in. Yes, it could happen, but here is how it goes.

UPS tells Bill that they do not want to pay this $5000. Bill tells UPS that this father needs to keep his job and take care of his family. Nothing more is said.

The outcome? The father is put back with time off, time served and UPS did not pay the penalty pay grievance.

So, in all fairness, I cannot say that this practice of horse trading is still going on to this date. But past practice is indicative of future behavior.

 

[Bubblehead]

Two cases at the panel. One is a $5000 penalty pay grievance. The other is a discharge for a father with 3 kids that did something stupid. Yes, he may win this case on it's own merits, but UPS has him dead to rights and would have to give in. Yes, it could happen, but here is how it goes.

UPS tells Bill that they do not want to pay this $5000. Bill tells UPS that this father needs to keep his job and take care of his family. Nothing more is said.

The outcome? The father is put back with time off, time served and UPS did not pay the penalty pay grievance.

By definition, shouldn't the "martyr" make that decision?

 

[Mugarolla]

By definition, shouldn't the "martyr" make that decision?

That should never have been a decision to make. But Bill felt he did the right thing by getting the father his job back at the cost of what he said was "free" money to the other guy.

He always said that he could sleep well at night.

 

[Faceplanted]

If it was a stupid mistake why is the union not going to bat for the father of 3.

Why is the other guy not getting his penalty pay that he deserves. If it's 9-5 penalties, that pay was at the expense of his own family when it comes to family time

I will never understand how the union thinks it's ok to wheel and deal in this manor.

If I'm owed 5k and somebody is fired for something very serious I would consider helping them to make a deal if the union comes to ME. If the guy is fired for something petty though... the union should be fighting for him

Wtf is going on with the teamsters