AFGE
Menu
  • External link opens in new tab or window
  • External link opens in new tab or window
  • External link opens in new tab or window
  • External link opens in new tab or window
    • External link opens in new tab or window
    • External link opens in new tab or window
    • External link opens in new tab or window
    • External link opens in new tab or window
    • External link opens in new tab or window
    • External link opens in new tab or window
    • External link opens in new tab or window
  • External link opens in new tab or window
  • External link opens in new tab or window
    • External link opens in new tab or window
    • External link opens in new tab or window
    • External link opens in new tab or window
  • External link opens in new tab or window
    • External link opens in new tab or window
    • External link opens in new tab or window
  • External link opens in new tab or window
  • External link opens in new tab or window
  • External link opens in new tab or window

February Stewards Meeting

Thank you!

Thank you for attending today’s meeting. I appreciate all of you taking the time to gather as a unified office and in the cause of protecting worker rights, and establishing a fair and productive work environment. There was a lot of great conversation and contributions from everyone.


Recapping and expanding on some of what we touched upon today:

 

Weingarten Rights (Ref. Article 18, Section 7a)

Among the rights protected by Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act is the right of union-represented employees to have their representative present during an interview that the employee reasonably believes could lead to discipline.  A representative can be a union steward or union officer. The employee’s representative has the right to advise, counsel, and actively assistance members during investigatory interviews.  Management violates an employee’s right when they proceed with an investigatory interview while refusing an employee’s request or retaliate against them for making the request.  The employee must assert their right and should make the request for a representative prior to or at the very beginning of the investigatory meeting. Management has no obligation to offer or remind the employee of this right.


Employees are not granted Weingarten Rights when the employer meets to discussion business operations, gather information where the employee is not the subject of the investigation, or issue discipline after an investigation has concluded. However, if the tone of the meeting changes, the employee should immediately request to have a representative from the union. The employer has the right to remove the employee’s representative should they display hostile or disruptive conduct. Also, if management does not comply with the employee’s request, the employee should not simply walk out of the meeting but simple reassert the request.

 

Related Training Resources

External link opens in new tab or windowDiscipline and Discharge—Best Practices for Representing Workers 

External link opens in new tab or windowWeingarten Rights: What You Need to Know 

 

Quick Reference on Meeting with Employees and Management

Build your file—Ask for all information that management references in the discussion. (e.g., witness statements, letters, records of discipline, notes of previous discussions with the employee, emails, etc.)

Be calm but insistent—in this meeting, you are equal to anyone in management but you still need to be respectful. Don’t let others push your buttons.

Ask Questions—You are an active participant. Do some investigative work during meeting and ask any clarifying questions. It is extremely important to take great notes. Don’t be pushed, take your time.

Counsel the member—if the member starts to get frustrated, defensive or angry, ask for a moment to speak private to the member. That is right and obligation. Assure them that their best defense is to remain sincere and respectful.

 

Seven Elements of Just Cause (Ref. Article 18, Section 1)

The elements of Just Cause lay the foundation for grievance proceedings follow the investigatory interviews and findings.

Notice

Did the employer give the employee warning of the potential consequences of his or her actions?”

How was the notice made and is there proof the employee knew?

Reasonableness

Was the Employer’s rule reasonably related to business operations or would any reasonable person have expected the action.

Why is the rule important to the business function?

Investigation

Did the Employer make an effort to discover whether the employee did in fact violate or disobey a rule or order?

What policy was broken? Ow was it broken? Are there other witnesses or is this “he said, she said”?

Objectivity

Was the investigation carried out without prejudice or bias—telling all sides of the story?

Was there truly an attempt to view the situation through the employee’s eyes?

Proof

Did the employer find substantial evidence that a violation of a rule or policy actually occurred?  

Do the facts correlate to written policy?

Equity

Has the Employer applied its rules even-handedly to all employees?

Have all divisions of the USMA enforced to rules and in the same way?

Penalty

Does the penalty fit the crime?

Would a reasonable person say that the corrective or disciplinary action is in equal measure to effect of the violation of policy?

 

Next Meeting: 1 March 2022, 8:15 AM, 40 minutes

Here is our draft agenda for the next meeting: I encourage folks to join early for informal discussion and information exchange. Please let me know if you have topics that you feel the group should discuss.


Steps to Writing on Effective Grievance—Restate the narrative, look for issues related to “just cause elements”, state the reference in the collective bargaining agreement, state what you believe should be the outcome based on the facts you have uncovered.

Round the Table—Sharing issues of importance to all meeting attendees.



Copyright 2017 AFGE Local 2367

Updated August 20, 2022


close lightbox