|
|
|
OFFICE OF THE UMPIRE No. C-155 December 30, 1943
Promotion Under Paragraph 63
GRIEVANCE: Buick Motor—Case C-69 "I request that I be placed and tried on 3664 classification. I feel that Management has discriminated against me and violated the Agreement on Page 31, Paragraph 63."
Umpire’s Decision: While the complainant may well be able to perform the functions of a Utility Inspector if given the opportunity to do so, it is quite evident that his ability, merit and capacity to perform that work was far less than that of Employee M. who was assigned the functions of that job in May, 1943. Since the choice of M. for promotion was in full compliance with Paragraph 63 of the October 19, 1942 Agreement, Employee R.’s request must be denied. (Entire Decision should be read)
In the Matter of: United Automobile Workers of America—C.I.O.—Local 599 and General Motors Corporation—Buick Motor Division—Case C-69
On May 22, 1943, Employee B. presented a grievance that read as follows: "I request that I be placed and tried on 3664 Classification. I feel that management has discriminated against me and violated the Agreement on Page 31, Paragraph 63." A hearing on this matter was held in Flint on December 2, 1943.
Nature of Case and Claims of Parties In November, 1942, Employee M. (seniority date, 6-12-29) was advanced from the classification of "Inspector—Machining, Bench and Floor" to the classification of "Inspector—Utility". For a short time he did the work of the utility classification, but a reduction in the utility work caused him to be returned to bench work without a change in classification. In April, 1943, a new opening in utility work occurred and Employee M. was given the job. It was determined at that time that he was still classified as "Inspector—Utility", and Management found it necessary only to increase his rate to the top rate of the classification. In May, 1943, his duties were changed from bench work to utility work and other employees became aware of M.’s changed classification. Employee R. (seniority date 11-13-11) filed a grievance protesting this promotion and requesting that he be "placed and tried" in the utility classification. The Union contends that "R. is capable and in the past has been used by the Management to break in new employees." It submitted two statements by men who have worked with R. and who consider him "capable of all white metal jobs in this group". Because R. has the ability to do the job, and has much greater seniority than any other man in his department, the Union requests that R. be given the classification of "Inspector—Utility." Management contends that the ability, merit and capacity of Employee M. to fill the job of Utility Inspector is far greater than that of Employee R. It observes in particular that the physical condition of employees is of considerable significance in determining their capacity to fulfill the requirements of an available job. The considerable difference in the ages of the two men, together with the greater physical stamina possessed by M., are cited by Management as important elements in support of the conclusion that Employee M. stood "head and shoulders" above R. to fill the job of Utility Inspector.
Observations and Decision of the Umpire In effect, the Union’s request in R.’s behalf in this case is merely that he be given a chance to be tried on the utility classification to see if he can perform the work. No such request can correctly come to the Umpire inasmuch as Management retains the right of promotion under Paragraph 63 of the October 19, 1942 Agreement. There is no doubt in the Umpire’s mind but that the ability, merit and capacity of Employee M. to fill the job of Utility Inspector in May, 1943, was far greater than that of Employee R. Since Management made its selection on such a basis, it correctly applied the principles enunciated in Paragraph 63 of the National Agreement, and was in conformance with past decisions with respect to such promotions. Employee R.’s claim, therefore, is denied.
Decision While the complainant may well be able to perform the functions of a Utility Inspector if given the opportunity to do so, it is quite evident that his ability, merit and capacity to perform that work was far less than that of Employee M. who was assigned the functions of that job in May, 1943. Since the choice of M. for promotion was in full compliance with Paragraph 63 of the October 19, 1942 Agreement, Employee R.’s request must be denied. Signed G. ALLAN DASH, JR. UMPIRE December 30, 1943. |