Question regarding Weingarten Rights

[zubenelgenubi]

Don’t mind him he’s a dick

Takes one to know one, amiright?

 

[Bubblehead]

Lol, That's literally nothing different It's an written statement that both the company and the union acknowledge Weingarten rights.

Well, I knew why you disagreed, because you are wrong.


I also like how you think what the NRLB says about it is creative. Please, please never represent me.

Read it again, but a little more closely this time.

Weingarten only requires the employer to provide a steward if the employee contemplates discipline and more importantly asks for one.

This Central Region language requires that the Company not only to stop the interview, but also to provide a steward when the Company themselves "reasonably contemplate discipline".

It is for sure enhanced rights in regards Weingarten.

Stay in your lane Junior.

 

[Bubblehead]

Takes one to know one, amiright?

If you are correct, you are certainly qualified to know one.

 

[BadIdeaGuy]

That was directed at the aptly named bubblehead, who claims to be his local's president or something. He is giving you bad information. He disagreed with what I posted because he is wrong.

You’re coming off as really aggressive in this thread Zubenelgenubi.

Regardless of whether or not you think @Bubblehead has the wrong position, please just stick to the topic, and don’t make it personal.

 

[542thruNthru]

That's not an investigation, they already decided to discipline. As far as I know, the steward doesn't have to be there. Only thing to do at that point is grieve the discipline. If I were a steward in that situation I would be asking about the investigation that was done, and upon what evidence the company decided to issue discipline when they never even questioned the employee.

I was once written up for "harassing" a safety manager, who was, in fact, harassing and intimidating me for my choices to be the person most responsible for my own safety. No one bothered to get my side. This place is run by petty, vindictive children.

Article 4 of the NMA gives us the right to a shop steward during discipline not just Investigatory meetings.

 

[Bubblehead]

You’re coming off as really aggressive in this thread Zubenelgenubi.

Regardless of whether or not you think @Bubblehead has the wrong position, please just stick to the topic, and don’t make it personal.

We have a bit of a history in another thread where I used to poke him a bit.

I never had a little brother growing up.

 

[Commercial Inside Release]

we work for petty, vindictive children

Vindictive children that have all week to orchestrate such maneuvers from a comfy office.
Even if they have to manipulate schedule, or assign other work in a different area to make sure their pet steward is the only one available.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

You’re coming off as really aggressive in this thread Zubenelgenubi.

Regardless of whether or not you think @Bubblehead has the wrong position, please just stick to the topic, and don’t make it personal.

Ban me.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

We have a bit of a history in another thread where I used to poke him a bit.

I never had a little brother growing up.

The history where everything you said was wrong, and you continue to pretend to maintain an ounce of dignity. Not what I would call poking.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

Article 4 of the NMA gives us the right to a shop steward during discipline not just Investigatory meetings.

The question by the op was about Weingarten rights. Article 4 says upon request a steward shall be present, but doesn't give the steward any rights in those situations outside of what is covered by Weingarten.

 

[Bubblehead]

Also how about you give the same warning to the OP, Bubblehead and butthead for actually violating TOS? I don't really appreciate being attacked and being told I'm the problem.

I only stated you were qualified to assess by virtue of the criteria you stated?

...."takes one to know one".

Btw, questioning a Moderator's decision on an open forum is also a TOS violation....so you just stepped in it again.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

I only stated you were qualified to assess by virtue of the criteria you stated?

...."takes one to know one".

Uh huh, and I called you your user name. But who got the talking to?

 

[Bubblehead]

Uh huh, and I.called you your user name. But who got the talking to?

You got the talking to, but not for that....and still aren't listening.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

You got the talking to, but not for that....and still aren't listening.

Yes it was for that. Read badideaguy's post again, more slowly.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

Read it again, but a little more closely this time.

Weingarten only requires the employer to provide a steward if the employee contemplates discipline and more importantly asks for one.

This Central Region language requires that the Company not only to stop the interview, but also to provide a steward when the Company themselves "reasonably contemplate discipline".

It is for sure enhanced rights in regards Weingarten.

Stay in your lane Junior.

I'll admit that can be seen as an enhancement. What I'd like to know is when any situation has arisen that the company and the employee didn't contemplate discipline going into the interview, then, somehow in the middle that changed.

More importantly, this provision has nothing to do with the OP's question or situation, and wouldn't have even if his supplement had the same language. I offer my congratulations on being right about something that's irrelevant to the issue at hand.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

Btw, questioning a Moderator's decision on an open forum is also a TOS violation....so you just stepped in it again.

Nice edit after the fact. I did not question moderator action. Another lie. I pointed out why a post that happened to be made by a moderator was hypocritical and incorrect. Making half-baked, incorrect posts isn't a moderator action.

 

[no_map_needed]

Too much wisdom in this thread

 

[clean hairy]

Here is what I have.

 

[qdg2]

My experience: Some event happens. It could be literally anything from un-professional conduct to killing someone.

You can receive a verbal warning to being fired. I've watched stewards sit there mum. To actually doing something like asking questions.

I've never seen a warning letter withdrawn.....(personally). The union's response was ALWAYS-file a protest....with "don't do it again in 9 months" or whatever...

Depending on Mgt., some(lately) have just fired folks and see what happens later.

 

[BadIdeaGuy]

You can receive a verbal warning to being fired. I've watched stewards sit there mum. To actually doing something like asking questions.

So quick question.

How were you in the office when the discipline was happening?

Because one of two things is true here. Either you were on the receiving end of the discipline.
Or you are lying.

You wouldn't be in the office while an employee was being disciplined unless no steward was available, and the disciplinee chose you as their hourly witness.

But you've already said the steward was there, so I ask. Were you getting written up, or are you lying?