Feb / Mar 2013 IAM Fleet Service Discussions

[ograc]

I NEVER SAW IT OUTLINED EITHER IN THE 08 CONTRACT ORGAC BUT ITS JUST MIND BOGGLIN HOW MUCH TIME IS SPENT OR WASTED AS I SAY

robbedagain,
Just spoke with my grievant today. Frank contacted him last night. The company offered a settlement well short of the remedial action $$$$ requested and due the grievant. The grievant, through Frank, is now counter offering. We'll see how this plays out. Have you heard from him yet?

 

[robbedagain]

orgac as of 345pm no frank said he has not received any calls yet to my grievance after i was told i would hear by yesterday of course.. we shall see what next week brings good luck with your grievance

 

[ograc]

orgac as of 345pm no frank said he has not received any calls yet to my grievance after i was told i would hear by yesterday of course.. we shall see what next week brings good luck with your grievance

robbedagain,
Frank did tell my grievant there were 3-4 other cases awaiting arbitration/mediation. Would assume your's is one of those caught up in this practice of allowing the company and their lawyers to review prior to moving forward. In the meantime... more time is lost awaiting a response from the company. My grievant has forwarded a settlement counter proposal, through Frank (the district). Who knows how long we will wait for the company's response... weeks maybe months who knows. Again... this practice does not exist in the grievance procedure. IMO... it only allows the company the ability to further delay an already lengthy process to achieving a final resolution of any grievance. In the meantime...in the event I'm retired or dead prior to your day in court and final resolution, I wish you the best of luck with your grievance also.

 

[robbedagain]

orgac i think its safe to say that both our grievances are 2 of the 4 and thank you for the luck you need luck too and like you and i both say there nothin in the manual about the practices of delay delay delay best of luck and keep me posted as i will do the same pal

 

[pjirish317]

ograc,
Why is it so bad to have the Company Laywers review the grievance after step 3, prior to any mediation/arbitration to possibly get a solution? You and I both know that 99% of the time there will be no solution, but it still does not mean the union and the company can't try to save $$$$ on the mediation/arbitration process IF a solution can be agreed upon.

 

[ograc]

ograc,
Why is it so bad to have the Company Laywers review the grievance after step 3, prior to any mediation/arbitration to possibly get a solution? You and I both know that 99% of the time there will be no solution, but it still does not mean the union and the company can't try to save $$$$ on the mediation/arbitration process IF a solution can be agreed upon.

PJ,
I can appreciate the potential $$$ savings if a settlement is reached, however, it further delays a final decision. I believe it gives the company lawyers plenty of time and opportunity to review the case and strengthen their defense if they choose to arbitrate. Finally, the practice or strategy is not in the Grievance Procedure of our CBA. For these three reasons I don't support the strategy.

 

[Tim Nelson]

orgac i think its safe to say that both our grievances are 2 of the 4 and thank you for the luck you need luck too and like you and i both say there nothin in the manual about the practices of delay delay delay best of luck and keep me posted as i will do the same pal

I don't believe the District has arbitrated more than one handful of grievances since 2008. Usually when they say 'arbitrated' they mis-define the term and really mean they settled before a case was arbitrated. regards,

 

[Tim Nelson]

PJ,
I can appreciate the potential $$$ savings if a settlement is reached, however, it further delays a final decision. I believe it gives the company lawyers plenty of time and opportunity to review the case and strengthen their defense if they choose to arbitrate. Finally, the practice or strategy is not in the Grievance Procedure of our CBA. For these three reasons I don't support the strategy.

ograc, it isn't part of our contract as you said and it further delays by putting a unnecessary additional step. Makes no sense. regards, www.rampworker.com

 

[robbedagain]

tim ive always been told that there are only 4 arbitration hearings a year however when i asked, ive been told either they do not know or its bec of the time consuming in getting the right arbitrator a place dates etc etc

 

[Tim Nelson]

Southwest Harlem Shakehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnAyikHwuuU

 

[Tim Nelson]

tim ive always been told that there are only 4 arbitration hearings a year however when i asked, ive been told either they do not know or its bec of the time consuming in getting the right arbitrator a place dates etc etc

All BS. When I worked with those guys, they never wanted to cross management. Basically, I'm not sure what they have actually done, honestly, in 5 years. regards,

 

[robbedagain]

in 5 yrs sounds like nothing got changed from the old canry days then. but i think its ironic that there is only 4 arb cases a yr yet the courts hear multiple cases a day let alone a yr as for my case its one of 4 that suppose to be heard however frank is waiting to hear the company/their lawyers response.... from what I was told last thurs or wed from frank was that he put a strong case on my behalf... and that i was to get an answer.. however here it is sunday guess what nothin yet yet yet like the energizer bunny rabbit

 

[ograc]

in 5 yrs sounds like nothing got changed from the old canry days then. but i think its ironic that there is only 4 arb cases a yr yet the courts hear multiple cases a day let alone a yr as for my case its one of 4 that suppose to be heard however frank is waiting to hear the company/their lawyers response.... from what I was told last thurs or wed from frank was that he put a strong case on my behalf... and that i was to get an answer.. however here it is sunday guess what nothin yet yet yet like the energizer bunny rabbit

It seems to me more focus and energy is spent on avoiding arbitration then preparing for it. When this strategy is used and the district puts forth "a strong case" to the company and their lawyers our case has been comprimised. You've tipped your hand. The company is now positioned to effectively counter many points of your presentation in front of an arbitrator. This strategy of "let's make a deal" is not part of the grievance procedure. Not sure when this strategy was adopted by the district but IMO it does not serve the grievant's best interests. I do see, however, how it serves the district's best interests $$$. Maybe the district is not too confident with their ability to effectively represent in front of an arbitrator. Makes you wonder...

 

[robbedagain]

orgac what you said sure makes a lot of sense there it basically comes down to why grieve it when they will already give the company the ammunition to come up with and poof your own grievance is compromised.

 

[Tim Nelson]

in 5 yrs sounds like nothing got changed from the old canry days then. but i think its ironic that there is only 4 arb cases a yr yet the courts hear multiple cases a day let alone a yr as for my case its one of 4 that suppose to be heard however frank is waiting to hear the company/their lawyers response.... from what I was told last thurs or wed from frank was that he put a strong case on my behalf... and that i was to get an answer.. however here it is sunday guess what nothin yet yet yet like the energizer bunny rabbit

all BS. They think members are stupid. regards