This podcast episode focuses on the Joint Statement on Violence and Behavior in the Workplace, and the importance of knowing the right arguments and remedies to utilize in grievance cases related to this statement.

Corey is discussing with his listeners how to build a strong case file and be prepared when dealing with management who might be violating the Joint Statement. He emphasizes that management often tries to avoid responsibility, making the same arguments, regardless of the specific case.

Corey advises stewards to gather specific information, including previous arbitration decisions related to the Joint Statement, such as those from Arbitrator Bjork and Arbitrator Britain, to support their arguments. He also emphasizes the need for stewards to be assertive and to not back down when faced with management's attempts to downplay the seriousness of the situation.

Overall, Corey aims to empower his listeners with the knowledge and confidence needed to effectively advocate for their members in grievance cases, ensuring that workers are treated with respect and dignity in the workplace.

J. Jacobs C-33993 Rule of Evidence #406

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This podcast episode focuses on the Joint Statement on Violence and Behavior in the Workplace. Corey is explaining to shop stewards how to build a strong case file for grievances related to this statement, specifically in instances where management exhibits bullying or harassing behavior.

He emphasizes the importance of understanding the Joint Statement and utilizing relevant arbitration decisions to support arguments. Corey highlights a case from Arbitrator Bjork, which establishes that the Joint Statement is a legally binding agreement, and that management's failure to comply constitutes a violation.

Corey encourages stewards to take an assertive approach and to be thorough in documenting everything. He provides guidance on finding relevant information, including previous arbitration decisions, workplace climate surveys, and threat assessments.

Ultimately, Corey emphasizes the need for stewards to be proactive and prepared, building a strong foundation for their case from the start. He encourages them to be thorough in their research and to seek help if needed.

He also advises that stewards should not be afraid to stand up to bullying management and that they should always strive to build a strong case that protects their members.

August Hattiesburg C-33831

August Clinton C- 35122

August Relevancy letter decision C-35441

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This podcast episode focuses on the Joint Statement on Violence and Behavior in the Workplace, a crucial document for stewards handling grievance cases involving harassment, intimidation, or bullying by management.

Corey emphasizes the importance of understanding the Joint Statement, noting that management often tries to avoid its implications. He recommends that stewards gather specific information, including previous arbitration decisions related to the Joint Statement, such as those from Arbitrators Snow and Britain.

He encourages stewards to be proactive and assertive, using the Joint Statement as a tool to hold management accountable for their behavior. He stresses the importance of building a strong case file and utilizing the information to highlight management's patterns of misconduct.

The episode serves as a pep rally for stewards, urging them to be prepared and knowledgeable to effectively represent their members and fight against inappropriate behavior by management.

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

JSOV m-1242

JSOV II m-1243

Arbitrator Snow C-15697

Both parties post hearing briefs for Snow decision

Article 15 language

ELM 665.24

Section 115.4 M-39 Handbook

Article 14

District workplace violence/zero tolerance policy

Postal service policy on workplace harrasment

Arbitrator Bajork C-20643

6th Circuit appeals decision m-1488

District court decision (in transcript section)

4th circuit appeals m-1518

all grievance settlements

informal a

formal a

b-team

arbitration

any surveys

workplace climate surveys

threat assesments

joint intervention

any discipline or adverse action against the manager/supervisor

statements

Arbitrator August decisions C-33831 C-35122

Arbitrator Maier C-32076

This podcast episode is a follow-up to a previous episode on opting, a process within a union contract that allows eligible employees to take on a vacant assignment. Corey expresses his gratitude to Jason Leeth for creating a comprehensive episode on opting.

Corey acknowledges the complexity of the subject, explaining how it affects various aspects of a worker's life, including their livelihood and personal well-being. He also emphasizes the importance of a joint statement, a document that outlines the union's position in a grievance case, and highlights how management often tries to avoid committing to it.

The core message of the episode is that stewards must be prepared and proactive when handling grievances related to opting. They should understand the contract provisions, document all requests for information, and be assertive in challenging management's attempts to manipulate the process.

Corey shares an example of a successful arbitration case where a manager's bullying tactics were exposed, and the arbitrator ruled in favor of the union. He emphasizes the need for unions to be persistent in advocating for their members' rights.

The episode concludes with a reminder that the union is there to support its members and that stewards should be prepared to take a firm stand against any attempts by management to violate the contract.

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This episode focuses on the topic of opting in a union contract, specifically on how to navigate the process and avoid common pitfalls. Corey and Jason discuss the intricacies of opting, a process that allows eligible employees to take on a vacant assignment.

Eligibility for Opting: Only full-time reserve letter carriers, full-time flexible letter carriers, unassigned regular letter carriers, and city carrier assistants (CCAs) are eligible to opt. Probationary employees and light duty employees cannot opt.

The "Hold-Down" Concept: When an individual opts on an assignment, they effectively become the carrier for the duration of the vacancy, even if the original carrier returns early.

The Role of Seniority: Seniority plays a crucial role in determining who gets an opt, with full-time employees taking priority over part-time employees and CCAs.

The Importance of Documentation: JB stresses the need for stewards to document all opting requests and to ensure that management follows proper procedures.

The Concept of "Last Resort": JB highlights that bumping an employee from a hold-down assignment should be a last resort, as it can be a violation of the contract.

Key Documents for Opting: JB recommends that stewards familiarize themselves with the JCAM, the Local Memorandum of Understanding (LMOU), and the Vacation Calendar.

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This episode focuses on the importance of the informal step A meeting in grievance cases. Corey argues that this initial meeting is crucial, as it's often the first time management reveals their position in writing.

He emphasizes the need for shop stewards to be prepared and aggressive in this meeting, encouraging stewards to develop detailed contentions, document everything, and ask for all relevant information. He also stresses the importance of having a core group of trusted colleagues to review information and provide support.

Corey provides an example of a recent arbitration case where he successfully challenged management's failure to provide requested information during the informal step A meeting.

He highlights how management's lack of preparation and their tendency to change their position at the formal step A meeting demonstrates the importance of being prepared and thorough at the informal level.

Corey encourages listeners to embrace the informal step A meeting as an opportunity to be "devastating" in their defense of grievances. By being prepared, assertive, and meticulous in documenting everything, stewards can effectively lay the groundwork for a successful outcome in the grievance process.

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This episode focuses on Article 31 of the National Agreement, which governs information requests during grievance cases. Corey explains that this article is closely linked to Article 17, which deals with the right of stewards to access information for grievance processing.

Corey emphasizes that when a shop steward encounters a situation where management fails to provide requested information, they should always include a violation of Article 31 and Article 17 in their issue statement.

Corey further explains that management is obligated to provide "all relevant information" necessary for the union to process grievances. This includes information outside of the bargaining unit, and the union has the right to determine what information is relevant.

Corey then provides an example of a relevancy letter, a document used by management to challenge the union's request for information. He reiterates that the union has the right to determine what information is relevant and that management cannot dictate what information is needed. He also provides a successful case from Arbitrator Mittenthal C-10363, which supports the union's right to information.

Finally, he encourages listeners to document all information requests and to be persistent in obtaining the information they need, emphasizing that a violation of Articles 17 and 31 can be a powerful argument in a grievance case.

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This episode discusses the importance of information requests in grievance cases. Corey argues that failure to provide requested information constitutes a serious violation of the collective bargaining agreement, potentially leading to the dismissal of the grievance.

Corey emphasizes that stewards have a right to investigate, adjust, and process grievances, including reviewing relevant documents, files, and records, as well as interviewing employees, supervisors, and witnesses. They also have the right to request time on the clock to conduct these activities. Corey encourages listeners to be assertive and request all necessary information, even if it requires going to higher levels of management or even the Office of Inspector General (OIG). He provides examples of relevant documents and the importance of maintaining copies of information requests. He also highlights instances where management has denied information requests and the consequences that followed.

Corey ultimately concludes that failure to provide information is a major due process violation and that stewards should be prepared to fight for their right to access it. He encourages listeners to document all requests and to be persistent in their pursuit of the information they need.

Mittenthal C-10363

August C-33968

August C-34816

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This episode focuses on the principle of "corrective rather than punitive" discipline. Corey argues that while arbitrators often interpret "corrective discipline" as synonymous with "progressive discipline," true corrective action requires management to actively help employees improve their performance rather than simply issuing escalating punishments. Corey emphasizes management's obligation to manage, using examples like an employee disciplined for incorrectly filling out a form without being given proper instruction and another punished for unauthorized overtime without management investigating the root cause. He advocates for union stewards to hold management accountable to the higher standard of corrective discipline and provides specific contractual provisions and arbitration precedent to support this argument.

Cohen C-00557

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/

This episode is about defending City Carrier Assistants (CCAs) facing disciplinary action by the United States Postal Service. Corey emphasizes that CCAs are particularly vulnerable to discipline because they lack the protections of tenure and a "bank of goodwill." He highlights the principle of "corrective rather than punitive" discipline that applies to CCAs, emphasizing that management is obligated to attempt to correct an employee's behavior before resorting to punishment. He cites several arbitration cases, emphasizing specific contractual language and arbitrator's decisions that support this principle, and encourages listeners to build strong cases by meticulously documenting violations of the principle of corrective discipline.

Cohen C-00557

Jacobs C-34761

Jacobs C-34218

Jacobs C-33500

http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/