This episode of From A to Arbitration is a passionate discussion on Corey's concerns about the NALC's current leadership and management's tactics, particularly concerning a new tool called CDPOM (City Delivery Pivoting Opportunity Model). Corey begins by acknowledging a technical issue and previews upcoming episodes on emergency placement cases.

The episode centers on Corey's critique of management's use of CDPOM, which he claims is a tool designed to create undertime situations for carriers and bypass contractual obligations. He contends that the tool is based on historical data, and management's use of it is a tactic to manipulate carriers' workload without proper consideration for the actual conditions of each route.

Corey explicitly argues that the union's current approach is inadequate in countering management's tactics and lacks the necessary proactive measures to defend letter carriers. He stresses that the union leadership has failed to adequately educate the members on how to fight back against this new tool.

He analyzes several precedents from past arbitration cases (particularly episode 52, which is highlighted as a crucial resource) to illustrate how similar issues were resolved. The episode showcases his knowledge of relevant contract provisions and arbitration precedents, demonstrating his strategy for how to challenge management's use of CDPOM. He highlights the lack of provisions in the contract protecting carriers from manipulation and pressure, and that the union's failure to address these systemic issues has resulted in carriers being vulnerable.

The episode's theme is a call for a stronger, more militant, and educated union. Corey urges the audience to educate themselves on their rights and the relevant contract provisions (such as Article 41 and M-01769) to be able to counter management's aggressive actions. He emphasizes that the union leadership needs to step up and advocate for its members proactively. Corey concludes by emphasizing his commitment to educating and empowering letter carriers, offering to share resources for challenging management's tactics.

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This episode of From A to Arbitration focuses on the nuances of grieving a decision letter versus a notice of proposed removal in NALC cases, emphasizing the importance of procedural knowledge. Corey starts by acknowledging technical difficulties and previews upcoming episodes on emergency placement and time-record falsification issues.

The core of the episode is a detailed analysis of the timeliness of grievances, examining the difference between a "notice of proposed removal" (a preliminary action) and a "letter of decision" (the final action). Corey meticulously dissects contract provisions (especially Article 15 and related sections of the JCAM) to argue that a grievance on a decision letter is considered timely, even if a notice of proposed removal wasn't grieved within the 14-day window.

He contrasts this with the union's and management's positions on this issue, citing specific examples of past arbitration decisions that support his position, particularly those in contrast to the APWU's precedent-setting agreement. He emphasizes that this approach is critical because management will frequently argue for untimeliness of grievances if a proposed notice, rather than a decision letter, is grieved.

The episode highlights the importance of understanding due process and Corey's insistence on challenging management's procedural arguments at every level. Corey advocates for a more aggressive approach to grievance processing, urging members to demand detailed charges and a thorough investigation before disciplinary action takes place.

He concludes by emphasizing the critical importance of union members knowing their rights and the union representatives' need to protect these rights at every level. Corey predicts future challenges and emphasizes the need for proactive, informed members, and promises to continue this type of advocacy in future episodes. The overall message is a strong call to action emphasizing the need for a proactive and knowledgeable union membership to combat management's potential abuse of power.

M-00939

M-01137

Britton C-12205

Reeves C-24356

Duda C-20825

'In dubio pro reo' Doubts must go in favor of the accused

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This episode of From A to Arbitration centers on Corey's critique of management's use of data-driven tools to monitor and manage letter carriers, particularly concerning a new system called CDPOM (City Delivery Pivoting Opportunity Model). Corey begins by acknowledging recent listener feedback and previews future episodes on emergency placement cases.

The episode's core focus is Corey's contention that management is using tools like CDPOM, which relies on historical data from DOIS (Delivery Operations Information System) and PET (Performance Enhancement Tool) to project and manage carrier workloads, in an overly aggressive manner that disregards carriers' rights. Corey emphasizes the perceived double standard: while carriers face discipline for deviations from projected times, management isn't held accountable for potential errors or inconsistencies in those projections. He argues that these practices create a hostile work environment.

The episode provides a deep dive into several arbitration precedents. Corey meticulously dissects contractual provisions (specifically Article 41 and relevant sections of the JCAM and the M-39 handbook) to emphasize how these tools violate established contract language regarding workload, leaving carriers with little recourse but to grieve such actions.

He also discusses how management is using existing systems (like 1838C mail counts) as a means of intimidation and control, rather than for fair evaluation. This highlights Corey's concern that the union is allowing these practices to go unchecked. He further decries the union leadership's perceived lack of engagement and education regarding these issues, and Corey's dissatisfaction with the current leadership's response in proactively defending letter carriers.

The discussion extends to the general issue of the NALC's handling of grievances and the broader need for stronger advocacy at every level of the union. Corey emphasizes the importance of proactive grievance filing and challenges members to be more vigilant about their rights and to demand a more assertive leadership position. He concludes by highlighting the need for a more assertive and aggressive stance within the union and previews upcoming episodes on this subject and others.

Clarke C-28556 a&b

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This episode of From A to Arbitration is a passionate critique of the NALC's leadership and management tactics, focusing on Corey's frustration with the perceived lack of support for letter carriers. Corey begins by acknowledging technical difficulties and previews upcoming episodes on emergency placement cases and time-record falsification.

The episode is centered around Corey's criticism of current union leadership for perceived inaction and failure to adequately address grievances and protect letter carriers. He dissects specific recent arbitration cases and the union's responses, highlighting instances where management successfully circumvented the grievance process and the lack of proactive, aggressive support from union leadership.

Corey analyzes the handling of disciplinary actions, arguing that the current procedures favor management by allowing them to issue proposed removals and then mitigate them without substantial repercussions. He presents examples where similar situations were successfully challenged, but the current leadership doesn't seem to support such action, emphasizing the lack of protection for letter carriers who are not adequately educated or supported in the grievance process.

The episode also examines the issue of a lack of proactive education from the union regarding current management strategies, emphasizing the union's failures to inform or instruct members on how to counter management tactics.

Corey concludes by urging listeners to maintain vigilance and seek education to overcome these challenges, predicting a future of ongoing struggles if the current leadership doesn't change. He also emphasizes the importance of a more militant union leadership. He reiterates his commitment to the city letter carrier, outlining his plans to continue advocating for their rights and to provide resources, like grievance templates and arbitration precedents, to support their efforts. The overall message is a call to action for the letter carriers to be informed and assertive and for the union leadership to actively support their members.

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This episode features John Poskin discussing Article 29 limitations on the replication of driving privileges. Poskin begins by outlining the relevant contract language from the JCAM, emphasizing that an employee's driving privileges can be revoked or suspended only when the on-duty record shows the employee is an unsafe driver. He explains that a "Safe Driver Award Committee" cannot revoke privileges; only the employee's on-duty record matters. Crucially, Poskin notes that management must make every reasonable effort to reassign a carrier with suspended driving privileges to non-driving duties within their craft or other crafts, stressing the responsibility falls on management. He explains situations where a temporary suspension of driving privileges is warranted and how an employee's record is assessed. Crucially, he clarifies that suspension or revocation of driving privileges is not automatic based solely on an accident but requires evidence of unsafe driving practices in the employee's on-duty record.

Poskin then delves into a case study (C-18159), where Arbitrator Snow determined that management must make every reasonable effort to accommodate a carrier with a suspended license. This includes offering non-driving duties within the employee's craft or in other crafts, and if no such work is available, the carrier is entitled to leave with pay.

Furthermore, Poskin details a case out of Chattanooga, Tennessee (C-32696), where a carrier with a medically related license suspension was not offered sufficient non-driving work. The arbitrator in this case ruled that management's failure to provide reasonable accommodation constituted a violation of Article 29, ordering reinstatement with back pay.

Poskin also discusses a recent notice of removal case he worked on, highlighting issues in the case file and emphasizing the importance of clarity in charges, particularly when management fails to provide full information to union representatives. He states that in this case, the arbitrator sided with the union, ruling the removal unjustified due to management's failure to clearly demonstrate misconduct and failure to provide necessary information for the union to defend the carrier. Poskin stresses the importance of a clear articulation of the charges and the union's role in advocating for the carrier's rights. He underscores the responsibility of both the union and management to fulfill their contractual obligations in situations like these. The overall message from these cases is that the union has a clear responsibility to ensure carriers are fairly treated during any license suspension or potential removal, and management must prove their actions are justified in the carrier's record and follow proper grievance procedures.

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This episode details the "anatomy of a removal," focusing on a specific arbitration case where Corey and JB successfully defended a carrier against a wrongful termination. Corey begins by discussing a commitment to send funds raised from podcast merchandise sales to aid letter carriers affected by the recent devastation in Hawaii. He challenges the union to match these donations.

The core of the episode centers on the arbitration case, detailing the procedural steps, arguments, and evidence presented by both sides. The carrier, Mr. Tyler Jones, was removed for alleged misconduct, primarily claiming false FMLA leave. Corey and JB successfully defended Jones, highlighting critical procedural flaws in management's case:

Insufficient Investigation: Corey emphasized the importance of a thorough and objective investigative interview. He pointed out that management's questioning was leading and accusatory, and crucial information (like text messages) was not presented during the interview but added later, casting doubt on its objectivity. This is a key point about maintaining the proper procedures.

Lack of Concurrence: Corey noted management's failure to obtain the required concurrence on the disciplinary action before issuing the removal. He highlights that management presented the same document without proper concurrence at the formal step A meeting as was presented at the informal step, arguing that this was a sign of dishonesty and procedural violation.

False Charges: The removal document contained false charges, claiming Jones had requested FMLA protection under false pretenses when, in reality, he had not knowingly obtained those protections. This point stressed the necessity of carefully verifying and supporting all claims in the documents.

Inadequate Evidence: Corey emphasized management's failure to provide sufficient evidence to support the charges against Jones, particularly regarding the FMLA request and the dates of his absence.

Misuse of Criminal Statutes: Corey's closing argument was critical of management's attempts to incorporate criminal statutes into the disciplinary case. He argued that these statutes were not applicable and inappropriately broadened the scope of the charges against the carrier.

The arbitrator's decision ultimately sided with the union, reducing the removal to a suspension without back pay but with no loss of seniority. Corey provides a detailed overview of the arbitrator's reasoning and the specific points the arbitrator addressed, providing listeners with valuable insights into how to approach similar cases. He concludes by reiterating his commitment to defending letter carriers, advocating for ethical and just practices within the union, and encouraging a stronger union to better represent its members. He concludes with calls to action urging listeners to purchase merchandise to support the Hawaii relief efforts, to become more engaged in union affairs, and to demand accountability from their union leadership.

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This episode of From A to Arbitration features a discussion on letters of demand, focusing on Corey's perspective on how to effectively challenge management actions and the importance of strong grievance procedures. Corey begins by acknowledging a technical difficulty with the recording and previews future episodes on emergency placement and time record falsification.

The episode's central theme is a critique of management practices and the union's response. Corey dissects the structure and language of letters of demand, emphasizing the need for precision in grievance filing. He highlights several instances where management has not properly explained the reasons behind a letter of demand, and argues that this constitutes a violation of the contract and a lack of due process.

The episode delves into specific arbitration case precedents, demonstrating that arbitrators have ruled against management's use of letters of demand when insufficient justification was provided. This highlights Corey's emphasis on the need for specific, actionable grievances and precise language in the union's arguments to challenge management. Corey stresses that these cases are examples of how to effectively challenge management's actions within the framework of the contract.

Corey discusses the importance of thorough preparation, citing examples of case files from previous episodes and highlighting the critical role of well-prepared union representatives in winning cases.

Corey emphasizes a crucial point – the union's responsibility to protect its members from abuses of power by management. He criticizes the union leadership and business agents for not proactively educating carriers on their rights and how to effectively challenge management's tactics. He concludes with a call for a more assertive union stance, advocating for a new regime focused on proactive education and protection of letter carriers. Corey provides specific advice on how to handle such cases in the future and a preview of topics for upcoming episodes, including additional grievances and the need for a stronger union leadership and representation.

Barrett C-33427

Bahakel C- 34086

Snow C-00511

Eaton C-20126

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This episode, while largely personal and emotional, focuses on the crucial need for union leadership to address the escalating issues concerning carrier working conditions, particularly in the context of heat-related illnesses and safety. Corey begins by acknowledging a recent criticism of his previous episode, which touched upon the topic of strikes and the union's no-strike clause. He clarifies his stance, stressing that while collective bargaining agreements prohibit strikes, he still believes that union leadership needs to take more active measures to address worsening conditions.

He contends that the current leadership has been slow to address issues like inadequate heat protection for carriers, leading to potential health risks and fatalities. He contrasts this with the successful organizing tactics of other regions, particularly those who have begun organizing rallies to draw public attention to the issue. He urges a nationwide response, emphasizing that a collective, public display of concern is critical in pressuring management and influencing policy changes.

Corey stresses the importance of actively defending carrier rights. He repeatedly criticizes the union's current leadership style, contrasting it with the aggressive, proactive approach he believes is necessary for gaining leverage and change. He urges listeners to contact their representatives, including Congress, about the specific problems with the falsification of training, the lack of resources, and safety concerns.

He also directly addresses and rejects the perspective that the responsibility for carrier safety lies solely on the individual carriers themselves, arguing it is a contractual obligation of management. He underscores the idea that management and the union both have responsibilities for the working conditions and safety of carriers.

Importantly, the episode highlights the fact that management appears to be retaliating against carriers for filing grievances related to these issues, further demonstrating Corey's contention that there is a need for more assertive action from the union. The episode concludes with a call to action, urging listeners to join in the effort to bring about change by demanding a response from union leadership on these issues. He advocates for a national rally and provides detailed instructions for checking HIPP training records, enabling carriers to identify instances of falsification.

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This episode centers on Article 18, the no-strike clause of the postal contract. Corey strongly cautions against any social media or informal discussions about work stoppages or strikes. He emphasizes that such actions are a violation of the contract and can lead to termination. He supports this by citing four arbitration decisions from the same post office, where carriers were terminated for engaging in a concerted work stoppage.

Corey details the legal ramifications of a no-strike clause, stressing that engaging in such discussions, even on social media, is evidence that can be used against employees. He argues that it's not necessary to engage in a strike since the grievance procedure already exists, and that collective bargaining, not unilateral actions, should be the path for addressing concerns.

Furthermore, the episode returns to the recurring theme of management's behavior and actions. Corey discusses the importance of thorough investigation from the union's perspective in responding to grievances, noting the critical role of thorough information gathering, and challenging management's attempts to dismiss these concerns or argue that such action isn't efficient. He stresses that demanding documentation and evidence, particularly related to past practices, is crucial in defending against management's arguments and grievances.

A significant portion of the episode focuses on a current case where a carrier was removed for falsifying medical documentation. Corey's approach in this situation involves meticulous information gathering, particularly related to the carrier's heat-related leave request and any potential management falsification of training records. He stresses the need for procedural fairness and emphasizes that management's alleged misconduct in one case warrants investigation into possible similar violations in other cases. He suggests that any union's failure to aggressively confront falsification could set a dangerous precedent for future cases.

Corey repeats his commitment to supporting carriers, regardless of potential criticism. He emphasizes the importance of education, detailed grievance procedures, thoroughness in preparation, and the importance of demanding full transparency and accountability from both management and the union. He repeats a call to arms encouraging union members to become more involved and assertive, particularly regarding issues concerning carrier safety and fair treatment, while strongly condemning the use of social media to organize or plan for actions outside the contract.

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This episode discusses several hot topics, including Corey's recent experience with online criticism and the passionate defense he received from listeners. Corey emphasizes that he's committed to educating and advocating for letter carriers, regardless of listener reaction. He notes that some listeners criticized the podcast's tone, shifting from informative to overly emotional, although he argues the podcast is ultimately about protecting letter carriers.

The episode pivots to the central issue of the falsification of heat-related training (HIPP) records, which Corey considers a serious and widespread violation of the contract. He applauds the efforts of two business agents, Mike Caref and Eddie Davidson, who have been actively fighting these issues. He underscores the critical role of education and union advocacy in combating these issues. Corey argues the falsification directly relates to management's pressure to reduce office time, noting that the training, a twenty-minute video, is intentionally not completed, so carriers are not given the time or are being dishonest to make it look like they've done their training, instead of giving them adequate breaks, which are protected under the contract.

Corey delves into two arbitration case studies from previous episodes, focusing on past practice violations. In these cases, management attempted to unilaterally change established practices regarding union hall use. The cases demonstrate the importance of establishing a valid past practice to protect the union's right to utilize the union hall for work on the clock. A core point is that management argues that such practices are inefficient or unsafe, but fails to provide evidence to back up these claims and fails to engage in good-faith negotiations. Corey repeatedly emphasizes the importance of demanding evidence and documentation from management to support their claims, highlighting the potential for these arguments to be used in any past practice case.

Corey provides clear instructions to determine if a carrier's HIPP training was falsified. This includes navigating the carrier's liteblue online portal to view training records and details. He stresses the importance of documenting any issues and using this information in grievance filings. He concludes with a call for unity and action among carriers and union members to address the issues presented, as well as a declaration of his continued commitment to fighting for their rights and safety.

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/