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
Pending Arbitration case-Really Insubordination?
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="PobreCarlos" data-source="post: 500105" data-attributes="member: 16651"><p>dilligaf;</p><p> </p><p>I must have missed that, because what I first saw was your reply to "rye's" post, in which he gave no indication of "questioning" occurring at all (go back and check the post); rather, he seemed to indicate that he was on the receiving end of instructions from his superior....an entirely different animal. And, believe me, if an employee chooses to "just walk away" under circumstances such as those (and/or on the basis of a steward not being made available), "Weingarten" would be of absolutely no protection at all.</p><p> </p><p>Then, on a later follow-up, you stated (again, without reference to the critical aspect of "interrogation"....</p><p> </p><p>"1. They <strong><u>cannot</u></strong> refuse you a steward. It is called Wiengarten Rights. It <strong><u>is </u></strong>federal law. If they try this you tell them, "I have asked for a steward. You are refusing me a steward. Your are in violation of federal law. Until I have a steward present this conversation is over." And you <strong><u>walk away</u></strong>. They may try disciplinary action but it will not hold up."</p><p> </p><p>...which is simply not true. Weingarten applies to situations in which QUESTIONING could reasonably assumed to elicit discipline; just a conversation, or being issued instructions, or whatever, doesn't cary with it the right to "representation". (and, again, local contract may involve other obligations)</p><p> </p><p>Now I see where you're coming from as well...but it seems to me that this is an area in which employees need to tread VERY carefully because, unlike you, I HAVE seen it "hold up".</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="PobreCarlos, post: 500105, member: 16651"] dilligaf; I must have missed that, because what I first saw was your reply to "rye's" post, in which he gave no indication of "questioning" occurring at all (go back and check the post); rather, he seemed to indicate that he was on the receiving end of instructions from his superior....an entirely different animal. And, believe me, if an employee chooses to "just walk away" under circumstances such as those (and/or on the basis of a steward not being made available), "Weingarten" would be of absolutely no protection at all. Then, on a later follow-up, you stated (again, without reference to the critical aspect of "interrogation".... "1. They [B][U]cannot[/U][/B] refuse you a steward. It is called Wiengarten Rights. It [B][U]is [/U][/B]federal law. If they try this you tell them, "I have asked for a steward. You are refusing me a steward. Your are in violation of federal law. Until I have a steward present this conversation is over." And you [B][U]walk away[/U][/B]. They may try disciplinary action but it will not hold up." ...which is simply not true. Weingarten applies to situations in which QUESTIONING could reasonably assumed to elicit discipline; just a conversation, or being issued instructions, or whatever, doesn't cary with it the right to "representation". (and, again, local contract may involve other obligations) Now I see where you're coming from as well...but it seems to me that this is an area in which employees need to tread VERY carefully because, unlike you, I HAVE seen it "hold up". [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Pending Arbitration case-Really Insubordination?
Top