March 10, 1980
Greetings:
Over the span of many years the day to day administration of the National Agreement with the General Motors Corporation has resulted in many interpretations of its provisions. The GM Department, as a matter of standard operating procedure, has attempted to acquaint the leadership of the local unions with these developments and, in addition, to advise as to ways and means to more effectively handle employe grievances. Information covering correct administrative procedures has also been furnished.
Many of the contract interpretations and advice as to how to better implement the agreement have resulted in changes in the National Agreement in subsequent negotiations. On the other hand, many of these letters, etc., contain information which continues to be valid. However, all too frequently the local union representatives are unaware of the existence of this important material because of intervening changes in leadership.
This booklet, properly utilized, is a valuable tool to ensure correct administrative procedures are followed and that the provisions of the contract are properly applied for the benefit of the workers we are privileged to serve.
With best wishes
Fraternally,
|
Irving Bluestone, Vice President
Director ‑ General Motors Department
IB:ics
opeiu494
TABLE OF CONTENTS
REPRESENTATION
Page
Index ................................................................................................................................................ 7
Committeemen Recording Grievance Time .................................................................................. 8
Paragraph (21 c) ........................................................................................................................... 10
Paragraph (23) .............................................................................................................................. 16
Paragraph (16c) Footnote (5)........................................................................................................ 19
Local Union Presidents ................................................................................................................. 23
Appendix I‑Special Skilled Trades Representation ....................................................................... 26
GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
Index .............................................................................................................................................. 27
Policy Grievances ......................................................................................................................... 28
Include Fringe Benefits In Settlement of Grievance...................................................................... 30
Writing The Grievance .................................................................................................................. 31
Umpire Appeals ............................................................................................................................ 32
Investigation of Grievance.............................................................................................................. 32
PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES
HANDLING GRIEVANCES‑GENERAL
Index............................................................................................................................................... 36
Past Practice‑Principles of Application ........................................................................................ 37
PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES
HANDLING GRIEVANCES‑BY SUBJECT MATTER
Index .............................................................................................................................................. 39
Paragraph (48)............................................................................................................................... 41
Paragraph (50)............................................................................................................................... 43
Paragraph (56)............................................................................................................................... 45
Paragraph (59) ‑ Elimination of Jobs............................................................................................. 46
Paragraph (64)(e).......................................................................................................................... 47
Paragraph (69)‑Supervision‑Return of Salaried Non‑Supervisory Employes .............................. 49
Paragraph (71)‑Equalization of Overtime...................................................................................... 51
Paragraph (74)‑Change of Address ............................................................................................. 52
Paragraph (75)‑Shift Preference-‑Skilled Trades Seniority .......................................................... 54
Disciplinary Action Cases.............................................................................................................. 54
Handling Disciplinary Action Cases......................................................................................... 54
Suggested Claims for Relief in Discipline Cases................................................................... 55
Example of Successful Use of Suggested Procedure............................................................ 55
Checking the Records in Disciplinary Action Cases............................................................... 55
Interviews and Discussions with Management Representatives ........................................... 55
Checking Record of Past Discipline ....................................................................................... 55
Management's Burden of Proof in Disciplinary Action Cases ................................................ 56
Charge of Multiple Shop Rule Violations ................................................................................. 56
Umpire Decision on Charge of Multiple Rule Violations ......................................................... 56
Paragraph (76) Notice for Probationary Employes ...................................................................... 57
Paragraph (76a)............................................................................................................................. 60
Paragraph (77)............................................................................................................................... 62
Threats and Violence Involving Guns and Knives......................................................................... 64
Insurance Continuation‑Terminated or Disciplined Employes...................................................... 66
Paragraph (78b)............................................................................................................................. 68
Paragraph (78c)............................................................................................................................. 70
Paragraphs (101)(a) and (101)(b) ................................................................................................ 21
Paragraph (102)‑New Jobs........................................................................................................... 72
Subcontracting .............................................................................................................................. 73
Vacation Pay Allowance................................................................................................................ 75
Night Shift Premium ................................................................................................................ 76
Paid Personal Holidays ................................................................................................................. 77
Absence for Union Business .................................................................................................. 77
Voluntary Overtime and Paid Personal Holidays..................................................................... 78
Jury Duty Pay ................................................................................................................................ 80
Bereavement Pay.......................................................................................................................... 81
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES
Index .............................................................................................................................................. 83
Procedure for and Ratification of Local Agreements.................................................................... 84
Model Ratification Clause for Local Agreements ......................................................................... 84
Notice to GM of Ratification of Local Agreements ........................................................................ 85
Ratification Requirement Approved by GM Council ..................................................................... 85
Double Billing ................................................................................................................................ 86
Procedure for Handling Paragraph 102 and Violations of Local Wage Agreement ..................... 88
WORK CENTERS
Index .............................................................................................................................................. 89
Action by GM National Council ...................................................................................................... 90
Utilization of Work Centers ........................................................................................................... 92
Corporation Instructions‑Work Centers........................................................................................ 93
Memorandum of Understanding on Work Centers ...................................................................... 96
HEALTH AND SAFETY
Index............................................................................................................................................... 97
Weekly Health and Safety Inspection by District Committeeman................................................. 98
District Committeeman’s Guide for Safety Inspection.................................................................. 99
ELECTRONIC DEVICES
Index............................................................................................................................................. 101
Wearing of Electronic Devices.................................................................................................... 102
IN PLANT ELECTIONS
Index............................................................................................................................................. 105
In Plant Elections......................................................................................................................... 105
REPRESENTATION
Page
Committeemen Recording Grievance Time .................................................................................. 8
Paragraph (21 c)............................................................................................................................ 10
Letter of March 31, 1965 ................................................................................................... 10
Letter of April 3, 1974 ........................................................................................................ 12
Paragraph (21c)‑Committeeman Rights Versus Journeyman
Rights Under Paragraph (178)................................................................................................ 13
Copy of Letter to Louis Seaton, April 17, 1961.................................................................. 14
Copy of Letter to Leonard Woodcock,
April 18, 1961 .................................................................................................................... 15
Paragraph (23) .............................................................................................................................. 16
Copy of Letter to Irving Bluestone, February 11, 1974 ................................................................. 18
Paragraph (16c) Footnote (5) ....................................................................................................... 19
Local Union Presidents ..................................................................................................... 23
Appendix I‑Special Skilled Trades Representative............................................................ 26
REPRESENTATION
MAY, 1953 Newsletter
Committeemen Recording Grievance Time
In each GM plant certain local practices have developed and have been in existence for a long period of time concerning Paragraph 16 of the National Agreement. The first sentence of this clause states:
"Committeemen will be permitted to leave their work after reporting to their respective foremen and recording their time according to local practice, for the purpose of adjusting grievances in accordance with the Grievance Procedure. "
Established Practices May Be Binding
The practices for committeemen reporting to their respective foremen and recording their time varies from plant to plant. Once a specific practice is developed, however, the procedure may not be changed by the unilateral action of either party. Any changes in the practice can be accomplished only by mutual agreement and not by unilateral action.
It is important that if management attempts to change the local practice regarding Paragraph 16, the union, if it disagrees with the change, should lodge a formal protest immediately and be sure that this protest is recorded. Failure to raise objection may be held as indication that the union is in agreement with the change in procedures.
Prompt Challenges of Unilateral Change in Practice Necessary
If, however, an immediate and proper protest is recorded by the union, there is no compulsion for committeemen to follow the new procedure but they may insist on adhering to the old established practice.
In recent Umpire Decision G114, management wished to change the type of form to be used by committeemen in recording time spent on grievances. They discussed this change with the union but the union "indicated no opposition at that time" to the change proposed. Later, the chairman of the shop committee refused to comply with the new procedure and left to handle a grievance without recording his time. He was disciplined. The Umpire upheld the discipline and stated:
"The question then arises as to whether the change made by management was valid. The union claims it was not, because it was made unilaterally. We do not think that is an accurate characterization of management's action. It gave advance notice of the change to the shop committee and allowed it an opportunity to make protest. Having indicated no opposition at that
time the union is in a weak position to protest now. We hold then that on October 1, the proper local practice to be followed under Paragraph 16 was to record time on Form M‑187. Grievant refused to do so.
"Supervision thereupon was entitled to refuse him permission to leave his work. The penalty was for cause. "
Note: Subsequently in Decisions G137and H11 the Umpire held that Management could not unilaterally change the local practice in face of a timely challenge by the union.
In the light of these decisions a timely formal protest of a unilateral change in practice under Paragraph 16 must be lodged if the union does not wish to comply with the change.
March 31, 1965
Local 438 ‑ UAW
2504 W. Mitchell
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Dear Sir and Brother:
I am in receipt of your letter of March 17, 1965, with your inquiry concerning Paragraph 21(c). As I read your letter, and your Seniority Agreement, the principal question which exists is whether Management would be in violation of Paragraph 21 (c) by halting the Committeeman's slide down the seniority pole at the level of "Inspector Product Special Machining." It is my opinion that an answer to this question will also dispose of the question you raise concerning the legitimacy of a settlement which does, in fact, stop the Committeeman's slide at the Inspection level.
Paragraph 21 (c) was first placed into the National Agreement as a result of a War Labor Board Directive shortly after the conversion of plants to defense work shortly before our involvement in World War II. Prior to that time the National Agreement contained no provisions providing for the retention of Committeemen unless ten or more employes were working in the district or zone. Paragraph 21 (c) was therefore formulated for the purpose of retaining the Committee body as intact as possible during periods of reduction in force.
The responsibility for applying Paragraph 21 (c) in the first instance resides with Management since it is the one that reduces the force and makes job assignments. Under Paragraph 21 (c) it is obligated to place the Committeeman on a job he can do in his district (or zone as the case may be) in a situation where there is a reduction in force and his own job is not operating. It has been held by the Umpire that a Committeeman's job ceases to operate in a reduction in force situation when his seniority date is such that it would no longer hold him in his occupational group.
When a Committeeman does not have sufficient seniority to be retained in his occupational group in a reduction in force, Management is required to place him on another job in the district that he can do. Once this is done Paragraph 21 (c) technically has been complied with.
The normal operation of 21 (c) is for the Committeeman to follow the normal flow provided for in the Seniority Agreement until such time as he would be transferred out of the district. At that point Paragraph 21 (c) operates to retain him in the district. The job on which he is retained, however, need not necessarily be the last job or classification his seniority entitled him to.
All of the foregoing is, in effect, the technical interpretation of Paragraph 21 (c) and it is the one upon which the Umpire would consider in any given set of circumstances.
Applying this to the circumstances of your case, it was entirely proper for the Committeeman to follow the normal flow of the Seniority Agreement until he reached the inspection group. He could not be compelled to file an application for the clearing group, thus on the sheer mechanics of the Seniority Agreement he would not be entitled to a job in the clearing group if he were not a Committeeman. But he is a Committeeman. Therefore, Management could have placed him in the clearing group if it elected to and we could not have successfully challenged this before the Umpire, as long as the clearing group job was within his district.
As matters developed the Committeeman was retained in the inspection group. This is entirely proper under Paragraph 21(c).
Under these circumstances I do not believe there could be any successful objection by other employes to the retention of the Committeeman in the inspection group.
Trusting that this answers the questions you posed, I am
Fraternally,
|
William V. Colbath
General Motors Department
WVC:ad
oeiu‑42aflcio
cc: Robert Vicars
William Horner
April 3, 1974
Mr. Harold Bahrenburg, Chairman
Local 31, UAW
1019 Waterway Drive
Kansas City, Kansas 66102
Dear Harold:
This will confirm our telephone conversation of Monday, April 1, 1974, regarding your inquiry concerning the application of Paragraph 21 (c) of the National Agreement.
As I understand the fact situation, there is to be a reduction in force and the question arises as to the respective rights of the Alternate Committeeman and the District Committeeman in such an eventuality.
Umpire Decision E‑146, E‑231 and E‑273, read together, establish the proposition that if a Committeeman, including an Alternate, does not have sufficient seniority to hold in his seniority group, then his job is not considered to be operating and it is entirely permissible for him to be reduced from that group. When such a reduction occurs, the Committeeman follows the normal flow of the Seniority Agreement until he reaches the point that one more transfer would transfer him out of his district. At that point, he should hold by virtue of his committeeman's status pursuant to Paragraph 21(c).
I trust the foregoing answers your inquiry, I remain,
Fraternally,
|
William V . Colbath
Administrative Assistant to
Irving Bluestone, Vice President
Director‑General Motors Department
WVC:is
opeiu 42
cc: J. Pratt
Letter No. 381
Re: Committeeman Rights Under
Paragraph 21 (c) versus Journeyman
Rights Under Paragraph 178
TO ALL GENERAL MOTORS LOCAL UNIONS
Greetings:
Since 1947 it has been the policy of the International Executive Board that a committeeman's employment rights under Paragraph 21(c) were secondary to the rights of a journeyman continuing at work under Paragraph 178.
Recently the International Executive Board reviewed this policy and directed the General Motors Department to the effect that Paragraph 21(c) of the October 2, 1958 National Agreement shall be held to override the provision of Paragraph 178 of the same agreement. The policy shall prevail in a specific plant only on and after any future election of committeemen and alternate committeemen.
Notice of this change in policy was submitted to the General Motors Corporation by letter dated April 17, 1961, copy of which is attached, together with the Corporation's reply.
It has been agreed that it will be effective beginning April 24, 1961. Employes‑in‑training or other non‑journeyman individuals elected on or after April 24, 1961 in a district which includes skilled trades will have employment rights even though it may mean that a journeyman will be laid off.
In other words, committeemen in those circumstances will have the same rights as any other committeeman. subject, of course, to the applicable "capable of doing" requirements that prevail with all committeemen.
LW:pk
oeiu42aflcio
COPY
April 17, 1961
Mr. Louis G. Seaton, Vice President
General Motors Corporation
General Motors Building
Detroit 2, Michigan
Dear Sir:
For many years, it has been understood by and between General Motors Corporation and the International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, UAW, that an employe ‑in‑training, holding that office of committeeman or alternate committeeman, could not be retained at work if such retention would cause the layoff of a journeyman. The Union's position in this matter was based on a 1947 policy decision of the International Executive Board.
Recently the International Executive Board reviewed this policy and directed the General Motors Department to the effect that Paragraph 21 (c) of the October 2, 1958 National Agreement shall be held to override the requirements of Paragraph 178 of the same Agreement, with the provision that such change of policy shall prevail in a specific plant only on and after any future election of committeemen and alternate committeeman.
We seek your early agreement to this change of policy so that we may notify all General Motors local unions as promptly as possible.
COPY
GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION
3044 West Grand Boulevard
Detroit 2, Michigan
April 18, 1961
Mr. Leonard Woodcock, Vice President
Director ‑ General Motors Department
International Union, UAW ‑AFL‑CIO
8000 East Jefferson Avenue
Detroit 14, Michigan
Dear Sir:
In reply to your letter of April 17, 1961, please be advised that we are agreeable in applying the terms of Paragraph 21 (c) of the Agreement of October 2, 1958 to employes‑in‑training who are committeemen or alternate committeemen to consider that the provisions of Paragraph 21 (c) override the provisions of Paragraph 178.
Pursuant to our discussions, this application will apply only to committeemen and alternate committeemen elected on and after April 24, 1961. Employes‑in‑training elected as committeemen or alternate committeemen before April 24, 1961 will be governed by the former application of the Agreement under which the provisions of Paragraph 178 were considered to override the provisions of Paragraph 21 (c).
Yours very truly,
|
Louis G. Seaton
Vice President
February 13, 1974
To Shop Chairmen and Presidents of
All UAW‑GM Local Unions
Re: Application of Paragraph (23)
Greetings:
As a result of the layoffs caused by the continuing sharp decline in automobile sales a number of problems surfaced in the application of Paragraph (23) of the November 19, 1973 Agreement.
Paragraph (23) reads as follows:
"The President, one Vice‑President, the Financial Secretary, the Treasurer, if any, three Trustees, the Recording Secretary of the Local Union, the two members of the local Supplemental Unemployment Benefit Committee, the member of the local Pension Committee, the local Insurance Representative(s), the Local Union Benefit Representative, the Local Union Health and Safety Representative (s) and the two Union Local Apprentice Committee members shall at the point where they would be subject to layoff from the plant in a reduction in force, be retained at work in the plant regardless of their seniority, provided they can do a job that is operating. This will not apply in cases of temporary layoffs for model change, inventory, material shortages, machine breakdowns, etc. "I
Many of these problems concerned entitlement to a job that is operating. In some cases management interpreted this to mean any job management could find, such as sweeping, etc., despite the provisions of the local seniority agreement. Some managements took the position a skilled employe governed by Paragraph (23) would have to accept a
(Letter of February 13, 1974, Continued)
non‑skilled job, even though normally the employe would have an option under the provisions of the local seniority agreement and could go on layoff directly from skilled trades.
In order to avoid continuing disputes in these areas we have arrived at a satisfactory interpretation of Paragraph (23) with the General Motors Corporation.
Officers or representatives covered by Paragraph (23) will follow their normal seniority flow as set forth in the local seniority agreement. They will then hold on the job to which seniority entitles them. Failing that, they will hold on the last job in the seniority flow before having to be laid off.
In the case of skilled journeymen or EITS employes who are either laid off directly to the street under the seniority agreement, or who have an option to accept such layoff, they will follow their normal skilled seniority flow to that point. They will then be retained in the last skilled classification to which they are entitled prior to being laid off.
If the local seniority agreement provides that such skilled employes, journeymen and EITS, clear through specified non‑skilled classifications they would continue to do so. This interpretation does not affect those employes.
Attached you will find a copy of a letter dated February 11, 1974 setting forth this interpretation signed by Robert W. Clark, Director of Labor Relations, General Motors Corporation, and countersigned by myself.
Fraternally,
Irving Bluestone, Vice President
Director ‑ General Motors Department
IB:sjw
opeiu42
cc: Regional Directors
Regional Representatives
Attach.
(Letter of February 13, 1974, Continued)
GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION
February 11, 1974
Mr. Irving Bluestone, Vice President
Director‑General Motors Department
International Union, United Automobile,
Aerospace and Agricultural Implement
Workers of America
8000 East Jefferson Avenue
Detroit, Michigan 48214
Dear Mr. Bluestone,
This will confirm our understanding of this date regarding the interpretation of Paragraph 23 of the GM‑UAW National Agreement and the application of the Paragraph 23 provisions to Local Union Officials who are employes affected by a layoff in a reduction in force.
For both non‑skilled trades employes and skilled trades employes who are Local Union Officials, as outlined in Paragraph 23 of the 1973 GMUAW National Agreement, the provisions of the Local Seniority Agreement will be followed in determining the point at which an affected Local Union Official will be retained at work regardless of seniority on a job he can do that is operating in the plant. In the event a particular Local Seniority Agreement provides a skilled trades Journeyman or EITS employe with an option to be laid off from the plant rather than work on a non‑skilled trades job, a Local Union Official, who is such an employe, will be retained, regardless of seniority, in the skilled trades classification from which he would have been laid off.
Please indicate your acceptance of the foregoing by signing and returning to us the attached copy of this letter.
Very truly yours,
Letter No. 641
June 21, 1977
Re: Paragraph (16c) Footnote (5)
Paragraphs (101)(a) and (101)(b)
To All UAW-General Motors Local Unions
Greetings:
Several contacts have been made with the General Motors Department regarding proper implementation of Paragraph (16c)(5) of the 1976 National Agreement. Instances have surfaced in which some local managements refuse to include shift premium in a shop committeeman's pay when he attends a shop committee meeting which starts earlier than the time specified in Paragraph (89) for 5% or 10% shift premium as the case may be.
Other instances reported involve the circumstances under which the alternate committeeman to a district shop committeeman may function, and how such alternate is paid, when the shop committeeman receives pay for time spent in a shop committee meeting pursuant to Footnote (5).
From the Unions point of view, the overriding consideration in all of the discussions which resulted in this provision was that the committeeman would not suffer a loss of earnings as a result of attending each a meeting.
The Corporation expressed its concern that such a provision would not increase the cost of representation to General Motors.
There was mutual agreement on these objectives in national negotiations involving this new provision of the contract.
Accordingly, local implementation of Footnote (5) should include the following features:
Pay Optional to Local Union
Any local union that desires to continue the pre‑1976 Agreement practice of handling internally the matter of pay for shop committeemen attending a management‑shop committee meeting earlier than their regular shift starting time is free to do so. In that event, Footnote (5) is of little interest, unless of course, the local union wishes to implement it.
Shift Premium
A shop committeeman from the second or third shift who attends a shop committee‑management meeting starting before 11:00 a. m. (or 7:00 p. m. in the case of third shift) is entitled to receive the shift premium that attaches to the hours of his regularly scheduled shift for that day. Conversely, albeit a rare situation, a day shift shop committeeman would not be entitled to shift premium even though the meeting starts during hours which would otherwise be shift premium hours.
Hours for Which Paid
When a shop committee member is paid for attending such a meeting he can be paid for up to the same number of hours he was regularly scheduled to work on that day, provided of course that the committeeman is in the meeting or in the plant for that number of hours.
Example #1 Scheduled for: 10 hours
Early meeting: 4 hours (before shift start)
Remains in plant: 6 hours (after shift starts)
Total Pay 10 hours
Example #2 Scheduled for: 10 hours
Early meeting: 4 hours (before shift starts)
Remains in plant: 4 hours (after shift starts)
Total Pay 8 hours
Alternates Functioning
When a shop committeeman who is also a district committeeman attends an early meeting and is paid by the company and then leaves the plant before his shift ends, the alternate is entitled to function as a district committeeman at the point the shop committeeman leaves the plant. Whether the alternate is paid by the company depends on the number of hours for which the district‑shop committeeman has been paid.
Example #3 District Shop Committeeman Schedule 10 hours
Alternate same schedule
Early meeting 4 hours (before shift starts)
Shop Committeeman remains in plant 2 hours (after shift starts)
Alternate Committeeman entitled to function and be paid for 4 hours
Total pay: 10 hours
Example #4 Same Schedule as Example #3
Early meeting 4 hours (before shift starts)
Shop Committeeman
remains in plant 6 hours (after shift starts)
Alternate entitled to function for the balance of the shift
However, the company will not pay him for functioning as a District Committeeman.
(If paid, the local union must do it.)
In any variations of these situations the rule to follow is that the shop committeeman suffers no loss of wages and the cost to the company is not greater than it would be if Footnote (5) were not in the Agreement.
Paragraphs (101)(a) and (101)(b)
The General Motors Department has recently discovered an instance where the provisions of Paragraphs (101)(a) and (101)(b) have not been properly applied. The problem results from the following circumstances:
· A Local Wage Agreement contains a wage rule that sets the rate of a classification at so many cents per hour above the classification serviced.
For example: Utility 10 cents per hour above the rate of Assembler.
· There are times when the General Wage Increase provided in Paragraph (101)(a) and the Annual Improvement Factor increase provided in Paragraph (101)(b) will produce 1 cent per hour more for a wage rule type classification such as Utility than it does for the Assembler type classification.
· Over a period of years the spread between the Utility type and the Assembler type classification has increased to more than 10 cents per hour even though the local wage rule itself has remained intact.
This situation was contemplated and provisions were first placed in the 1958 National Agreement to cover it. It has been continued in all subsequent National Agreements and appears as a Note in both Paragraphs (101)(a) and (101)(b) as follows:
"In the case of a classification, the rate for which is determined by a wage rule in the Local Wage Agreement relating the rate for the classification to the rate for another classification or classifications, the above table will determine the rate for the classification where there is a conflict with such wage rule. "
In the instance brought to our attention, the spread had increased to as mach as 5 cents per hour. Notwithstanding the Note in Paragraphs (101) (a) and (101)(b), local management started newly transferred employes in the Utility type classification at the 10¢ rate even though the correct spread was as much as 15¢. The upshot was that two employes could be working side by side in the same classification and be receiving different rates.
When this situation was brought to the Corporation's attention in the plant involved, the matter was immediately corrected. The wage rate of 248 employes was adjusted upwards by from l¢ to 5¢ per hour.
Local unions with this type of a wage rule in the Local Wage Agreement are urged to check the rates paid to employes classified and paid under such rule to insure that they are receiving the proper rate.
Instances of improper application of Paragraph (16c) Footnote (5) or of Paragraphs (101)(a) or (101)(b) which are not resolved locally should be brought to the attention of the Regional Office or the General Motors Department.
Fraternally,
|
Irving Bluestone, Vice President
Director‑General Motors Department
IB:ics opeiu494
cc: Regional Directors
Regional Representatives
December 16, 1976
Re: Local Union Presidents
Greetings:
Local Union Presidents who work in General Motors plants of 600 or more employes now have a reservoir of twelve (12) hours each week to conduct the duties of their office within the plant.
This twelve (12) hour reservoir is over and above time spent in management‑shop committee meetings as provided in Paragraph 26.
Local Presidents should follow the same procedures in effect for district committeemen in their respective plants when leaving their jobs or departments.
The President should give the foreman his reasons for leaving and his destination in accordance with the established practice governing district committeemen in that plant.
For instance:
· "I am going to Department 93 to contact the Chairman of the Apprentice Committee.''
· "I am going to post the Union Bulletin Boards."
· "I am going to Department 22 to contact the Chairman of the Election Committee. "
· "I am going to place material in the Union Information Racks."
· "I am going to Labor Relations to deliver some letters to the Labor Relations Supervisor."
The President should clearly indicate destination and reason but does not have to engage in any long question and answer session. Any abuse by supervision should be reported to the Regional Office and General Motors Department.
Upon entering a department other than his own the President shall follow the procedures set forth in Paragraph 20 and report his presence and purpose.
Presidents will be permitted to use in‑plant company telephones to make calls to the local union office.
However, Presidents are not authorized to spend their time in either the Union Work Center or the Benefit Plans Business Office.
Listed below are several examples of the type of union business for which Presidents may use the twelve (12) hour reservoir:
· Posting Union Bulletin Boards
· United Fund Drives
· Blood Banks
· Setting up Union Elections on plant property
· New member orientation programs
· Apprentice Committee; i.e. , interviewing candidates for appointment, etc.
· Benefit Plans; i.e. , interviewing candidates for appointment, etc.
· Health and Safety Representatives; i.e. candidates for appointment, etc.
· FEPC matters as provided for and interviewing candidates for appointment, etc.
· Substance Abuse; i.e., interviewing candidates for appointment, etc.
· Filling Union Information Racks and removing obsolete material
· Quality of Worklife Programs
· Dues, initiation fees and transfer of membership problems
· Polling local union executive board members on internal union matters
· Delivering union mail to standing committee members and appointed representatives
· Going to Labor Relations on union business he may have with the Labor Relations Staff
· Contacting the editor of the local union paper
· Accompanying International Union Officers and Regional Directors during plant tours
· Foreign trade union delegations during plant tours
· Conducting surveys, investigations or interviews as directed by UAW International Officers or the Regional Directors
· Phone calls to local union on company in‑plant phones
· Handle matters such as selection, leaves of absence, expenses, housing and transportation costs of delegates to conventions, conferences and educational programs such as Regional Summer Schools, Black Lake scholarship program, etc. The contact would involve selection, schedule and how reimbursement will be made by the union to the individual.
The above are some examples of the type of activity in which eligible Presidents may operate.
In those few plants where the cafeteria employes are members of the plant bargaining unit the President may utilize the reservoir for cafeteria matters. A large number of cafeterias are run by independent caterers and in those instances the President will not be paid by General Motors when engaged in cafeteria business.
Since this is a new program there will he many questions which will arise during initial implementation. We recommend that, instead of engaging in confrontation arguments over differences of interpretation, such matters he relayed immediately to the International Union Regional Office and General Motors Department for clarification and, where necessary, discussion with the Corporation.
Fraternally,
|
Irving Bluestone, Vice President
Director‑General Motors Department
IB: s jw
opeiu494
April 27, 1977
To All UAW‑GM Local Union Presidents and Chairmen
Greetings:
Appendix I of the 1976 UAW‑GM National Agreement provides for the designation of a special skilled trades representative to assist in the handling of grievances involving skilled trades. These special representatives fall into one of two categories.
a. A district committeeman from another district who is a skilled tradesman who serves as special skilled trades representatives for a district in which the district committeeman is not himself a skilled trades classified employe.
b. Where there is no district committeeman classified as a skilled trades employe, a special skilled trades representative is selected to assist in the handling of skilled trades grievances.
From time to time, it may become necessary for the General Motors Department to communicate skilled trades information to the special skilled trades representative as provided in Appendix I.
Please advise the General Motors Department as soon as possible of the name and address of these special skilled trades representatives. Your prompt response will be greatly appreciated
Fraternally,
|
Irving Bluestone, Vice President
Director‑General Motors Department
IB:ics opeiu494
cc: Regional Directors
Regional Representatives
Page
Policy Grievances ......................................................................................................................... 28
Include Fringe Benefits in Settlement of Grievances ................................................................... 30
Writing the Grievance ................................................................................................................... 31
Back Pay Request .................................................................................................................. 31
Amending the Grievance ........................................................................................................ 31
Umpire Appeals............................................................................................................................. 32
Investigation of Grievance.............................................................................................................. 32
Written Statements‑Testimony Given to Management ................................................................ 33
Challenging Management's Facts and Arguments....................................................................... 34
Handling New Facts Submitted Late in the Procedure ................................................................ 34
|
July 6, 1979
To All General Motors Local Unions
Greetings:
From time-to-time our office has been made aware of situations in which local unions are successful in satisfactorily resolving discharge cases and having the member returned to his job. There are instances, of course, in which this is the result of a "knee‑pad" job in which no back pay or only partial back pay is negotiated. Problems have arisen in some such instances concerning the loss of pension credits, as well as other fringe benefits, simply because in the resolution of the grievance these matters were overlooked.
It is important that when writing a grievance, especially with regard to loss of seniority cases and discharge cases, that a demand be included to protect all employe benefits. It is important as well to make certain that efforts are made in negotiating to a conclusion to protect pension credits whenever possible, as well as other fringe benefits.
Please bring this matter promptly to the attention of all shop committeemen, committeemen and alternate committeemen.
Fraternally,
|
Irving Bluestone, Vice President
Director ‑ General Motors Department
IB:pb opeiu494
MAY, 1957 Newsletter
On several occasions the GM Department Newsletter has cautioned all GM committeemen to make certain that grievances contain proper request for back pay and all other benefits.
We are again alerting all committeemen, especially the shop committee and specified representatives that grievances which do not contain proper request for full back pay and all other benefits be amended in order to protect the individual. The requests should be to the effect that back pay and all benefits are requested. In other words, the request for back pay should be all inclusive so that it will cover insurance participation credits, pension credits, and payments towards the SUB Plan.
These items are extremely important. Some individuals are laid off and suddenly find they are without SUB Plan credits, or others, who are about to retire, find that their pension credits are short or the time of insurance participation is reduced.
Proper amendment of grievances by both the shop committee and specified representatives will assure maximum benefits to our members.
NOVEMBER, 1952 Newsletter
For many years it has been established in Umpire Decisions that a grievance may be amended at any time through the second step of the grievance procedure, but not thereafter.
This means that a grievance improperly written or incomplete may be changed or added to by amendment.
Despite this, grievances still pass the second step without a claim for back pay being added or with the wrong charge of agreement violation. Thus a discharge case was appealed to Umpire without a claim for back pay and if there is no back pay claim, even though the discharge is rescinded, there can be no back pay check.
Review Language of Each Grievance Carefully
Every shop committeeman should carefully review the language of each grievance written to determine if amendment is necessary. Then again, at second step, the shop committee chairman should do likewise. If amendment is necessary, it should be accomplished before the end of the second step, should be done in writing and become a part of the grievance.
JANUARY, 1955 Newsletter
Include Second Step Minutes in Umpire Cases
There are still many briefs of Umpire Appeal Cases being submitted which do not include a copy of the second step minutes. This means that the case record is incomplete and information recorded at second step is not available immediately for review.
It is essential that these second step minutes accompany all cases appealed to third step and to the Umpire. Local unions are urged to include this material with the case record submitted to the Regional Office and in turn this material can then be submitted as part of the case record if it is appealed to the Umpire.
JANUARY, 1955 Newsletter
Reappeal of Umpire Cases Previously Referred Back
It sometimes occurs that cases appealed to the Umpire are referred back to second and third step of the grievance procedure either by Corporation or Union request.
Should a case referred to second and third step be reappealed to the Umpire, it should carry the same case number as before but next to the number the word: "reappeal" should appear.
In this manner the cases can more easily be identified for further processing.
INVESTIGATION OF GRIEVANCE
NOVEMBER, 1952 Newsletter
Interviewing Foremen
Interviewing witnesses is one of the most important and most difficult tasks in investigating a grievance. A case may be won or lost on the interview of a foreman or a fellow employe witness.
One of the problems raised by committeemen is that, for example, they interview a foreman, get his story and then find at second step that the story isn't the same as originally told. Either the foreman denies he told the story as the committeeman claimed or that the committeeman misunderstood him.
Suggested Procedure when Interviewing Foreman
One good way to avoid such pitfalls is to write down the interview as it progresses. Take your time and get it right. Then read back to the foreman what you have written and ask him to sign it as being accurate. If he refuses to sign it, don't press the point. Simply ask him if it is correct as read to him, make corrections as he notes them and then sign it yourself with the time and date and write beneath your signature:
"This interview was read to (John Doe) and he agreed it is accurate but refused to sign it. "
This type of record has much greater value before the Umpire than verbal testimony which attempts, months later, to recall the interview. Always attach such records of interviews to the case appealed to the Umpire. Be sure that the interview recorded has bearing on and is important to the grievance.
MARCH, 1954 Newsletter
Written Statements‑‑Testimony Given to Management
In discipline cases, particularly written foreman reports to his superiors and witness' statements obtained by management, may be of paramount importance. In most General Motors plants, foremen are instructed to submit a written report to their superiors stating the circumstances under which disciplinary action has been taken. These reports are usually written within a very short time after the incident has occurred when the details are still fresh in the foreman's mind.
Often management's side of the case is based on the facts submitted in the foreman's report. It sometimes occurs that facts submitted at second and third step by management, however, differ in some material aspects from the facts submitted in the foreman's report. This might have significant force in determining credibility in a given case. The same is true of written statements given by witnesses.
Request Copies from Management
Sometimes management reads aloud to the union representatives the reports and statements in its possession, yet the union has often
failed to request a copy of them or the right to copy them. It is important that such request be made so that the union will have in its possession the material management is using to support its case.
Of course, when management makes similar requests for union reports for statements, it should be given a copy or the opportunity to make a copy.
The fundamental purpose of "laying all the cards on the table" in this fashion is to make sure that the whole case has been properly discussed and negotiated and to avoid surprises at later steps in the grievance procedure.
APRIL, 1959 Newsletter
Challenging Management's Facts and Arguments
In recent months a number of cases appealed to the higher stages of the grievance procedure have suffered from a factual deficiency.
The local committees involved while extensively preparing their own arguments and contentions blithely ignored important insertions made by management.
Unfortunately management's factual arguments will not disappear if they are ignored, but will instead assume major importance before the Umpire because they are in fact unchallenged.
The local union must examine the Shop Committee‑Management Meeting Minutes, Management's Statement of Unadjusted Grievance and the minutes of the Four Man Appeal Hearing. Any new contentions made by management at any of these steps must be investigated and clearly answered by the union as soon as possible thereafter.
The Educational Outline issued by the General Motors Department clearly sets forth the procedures to be followed in such instances.
Don't allow unchallenged management statements to cause the loss of an otherwise equitable case.
DECEMBER, 1953 Newsletter
Handling New Facts Submitted Late in the Procedure
It often occurs, in processing grievances, that management will bring up new facts in the Statement of Unadjusted Grievance or in the third step. Too often local unions are failing to check such new facts before a case is appealed further. As a result some facts cited by management enter the fourth step completely unchallenged.
The Umpire has long held that he will accept any facts entered in the earlier case record which remain unchallenged by the other party. This means that new facts submitted by management at later steps in the procedure should be reviewed, checked and, whenever possible, challenged.
Suggested Procedure for Challenging New Facts
If new facts are contained in management's Statement of Unadjusted Grievance, they should be checked as carefully as possible before entering the third step hearing so that a challenge to such facts can be entered at that time. If management submits new facts directly at third step, it is desirable to hold the case in abeyance at that step so that the new facts can be checked and subsequently challenged, if possible, at a further third step hearing on the case.
Such a procedure will give the union the opportunity to challenge each of management's fact statements before going to the Umpire and thereby strengthen the union's position at the Umpire hearing. It must always be kept in mind that the Umpire will usually not accept new facts or arguments presented for the first time at fourth step.
HANDLING GRIEVANCES
GENERAL
Page
Past Practice‑Principles of Application ....................................................................................... 37
Umpire's Application of Past Practice ......................................................................................... 37
Application to Wage Agreement Cases ...................................................................................... 37
Other Applications of Past .......................................................................................................... 37
General Principles in Applying Past Practice .............................................................................. 38
PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES IN HANDLING GRIEVANCES—GENERAL
JANUARY, 1954 Newsletter
Past Practice‑‑Principles of Application
A question which has often been raised in handling grievances is: What is the proper way to use past practice to support a case? There seems to be some confusion concerning the application of past practice and its effect on grievances under the terms of the National Agreement and local agreements.
Umpire's Application of Past Practice
In general, the Umpire has applied past practice to specific grievances in the following manner. If the language of the clause in dispute is ambiguous and therefore open to more than one meaning, past practice may be used to establish what the proper application of the language is. If on the other hand the language in dispute is clear, unambiguous and open only to one meaning, past practice to the contrary will not supersede the clear meaning of the language as written. Furthermore, if the dispute concerns a matter not related to any language of the National Agreement or a local agreement, in general the Umpire will not have jurisdiction over the issue and past practice will have no effect upon the case; the Umpire will refer it back without decision.
Application to Wage Agreement Cases
The most common use of past practice in deciding a case relates to wage agreements. A wage agreement usually contains just a classification title and a rate for the job. If a dispute arises as to whether certain functions fit into a specific classification, past practice may be determinative (except where the principle of "obvious error" may be applied). In such a case the classification title is usually not in itself clear in defining the specific functions of the job. That is why past practice may be determinant.
Other Applications of Past Practice
On the other hand, for example, there was the case (E‑90) where for years fire patrolmen were not considered inside the bargaining unit. The union finally contested this, claiming that under Paragraph 3 fire patrolmen were specifically designated as being within the bargaining unit. Despite the past practice, the Umpire held the fire patrolmen were in the bargaining unit since the National Agreement was clear and unambiguous concerning this issue. The Umpire said:
"That Local 663 has not heretofore insisted upon its right to represent fire patrolmen does not alter the fact that under the clear language of Section 3 such a right exists and must be recognized by the Umpire."
Then there is the situation exemplified in Decision E‑162. In that case there was a considerable past practice concerning the granting of relief time. Management changed the relief time by unilateral action. No written agreement existed concerning this matter. The Umpire held that, since no written agreement existed on which he could rule, he had no jurisdiction in the matter and referred it back. In this case, then, the past practice did not affect the case because the Umpire was without jurisdiction.
General Principles in Applying Past Practice
In applying past practice then there are three general principles to keep in mind:
1. If the language in dispute is ambiguous past practice may be determinative in establishing the proper interpretation.
2. If the language in dispute is clear and unambiguous, past practice will not be the determinant of the proper interpretation.
3. If the Umpire has no jurisdiction over the issue in dispute, he must refer the case back to the parties without decision; past practice will not affect such a decision.
PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES
HANDLING GRIEVANCES‑BY SUBJECT MATTER
Page
Paragraph (48) .............................................................................................................................. 42
Paragraph (50) .............................................................................................................................. 43
Paragraph (56)‑Representation of Probationary Employees........................................................ 45
Paragraph (59)‑Elimination of Jobs............................................................................................... 46
Protection of Wage Rate When Jobs are Eliminated............................................................. 46
Paragraph (64)(e) Memorandum .................................................................................................. 47
Paragraph (69)‑Supervision‑Return of Salaried Non‑Supervisory Employes .............................. 49
Paragraph (71)‑Equalization of Overtime...................................................................................... 51
Handling Paragraph (71) Cases ............................................................................................. 51
Facts to Look for in Paragraph (71) Cases............................................................................. 51
Party in Interest in Paragraph (71) Cases .............................................................................. 51
Paragraph (74) Change of Address ............................................................................................. 52
Paragraph (75)‑Shift Preference .................................................................................................. 54
Skilled Trades Vs. Plant Seniority for Shift Preference Purposes ......................................... 54
International Executive Board Ruling ...................................................................................... 54
Disciplinary Action Cases.............................................................................................................. 54
Handling Disciplinary Action Cases ........................................................................................ 54
Checking the Records in Disciplinary Action Cases .............................................................. 55
Interviews and Discussions with Management Representatives ........................................... 55
Checking Record of Past Discipline ................................................................................. 55
Management's Burden of Proof in Disciplinary Action Cases ................................................ 56
Charge of Multiple Shop Rule Violations............................................................................ 56
Umpire Decision on Charges of Multiple Rule Violations ............................................................. 56
Paragraph (76) Notice for Probationary Employes ...................................................................... 57
Paragraph (76a) ............................................................................................................................ 60
Paragraph (77)............................................................................................................................... 62
Threats and Violence Involving Guns and Knives......................................................................... 64
Insurance Continuation‑Terminated or Disciplined Employes...................................................... 66
PRODUCTION STANDARDS....................................................................................................... 68
Paragraph (78b)............................................................................................................................. 68
Paragraph (78c)............................................................................................................................. 70
Paragraphs (101)(a) and (101)(b)................................................................................................. 21
PARAGRAPH (102)‑NEW JOBS.................................................................................................. 72
Seniority Problems Created by Application of Paragraph 102................................................ 72
Seniority Supplements Subject to Approval by National Parties ........................................... 72
Other Issues Raised by New Wage Classification................................................................. 72
SUBCONTRACTING..................................................................................................................... 73
VACATION PAY ALLOWANCE..................................................................................................... 75
Night Shift Premium................................................................................................................. 76
PAID PERSONAL HOLIDAYS....................................................................................................... 77
Absence for Union Business................................................................................................... 77
Voluntary Overtime and Paid Personal Holidays..................................................................... 78
JURY DUTY PAY........................................................................................................................... 80
BEREAVEMENT PAY.................................................................................................................... 81
Letter No. 609
March 26, 1974
Re: Paragraph 48
Greetings:
During 1973 national negotiations, one of the proposals submitted by the union in connection with the grievance procedure was that the company's back pay liability should begin with the date of a contract violation rather than the date a grievance was first filed in writing. This matter generated extensive discussion. It was finally resolved on the basis of the Corporation's statement across the bargaining table that it would continue, with clarification, a commitment made by the Corporation some years ago involving this question. The commitment was made by General Motors Director of Labor Relations, Earl Bramblett, to E. J. Moran, Administrative Assistant to the then Director of the General Motors Department, Vice President Leonard Woodcock. The commitment was to the effect that if it were established an employe was clearly entitled to certain monies pursuant to an agreement, General Motors would not rely on the restrictions set forth in Paragraph 48 as a basis for denying payment of the money. The only qualification to the commitment was that the employe not be guilty of "sandbagging" the company, that is, deliberately ignoring for a period of time the fact that he is owed money in order to build up a substantial management liability.
During the course of the 1973 negotiations, questions arose as to the variety of situations embraced by this commitment. The Corporation's response was that the scope of the Bramblett commitment now is exactly the same as before; however, for purposes of clarification, it was recognized that it included beyond any doubt matters concerning wage rate, holiday pay and vacation pay. This elaboration of the Bramblett commitment was accepted by the union in good faith and the Paragraph 48 issue was thereupon resolved.
The Bramblett commitment can be properly applied of course to situations other than those noted above. The critical factor is whether an employe is clearly due the money in accordance with the terms of an agreement and that the employe did not "sandbag" the management in order to acquire a sizeable back pay award.
Please convey this information to the various shop committeemen and alternate committeemen who are responsible for the day-to-day administration of the contract in the plant.
Questions concerning any specific case which you cannot resolve should be directed to the Regional Office or the General Motors Department.
Fraternally,
Irving Bluestone, Vice President
Director‑General Motors Department
IB : isc
opaiu42
cc: Regional Directors
Regional Representatives
July 19, 1974
Re: Paragraph 50
Unemployment Compensation ‑
SUB Equivalent
To All GM Local Union Presidents and Chairmen
Greetings:
Prior to 1973 national negotiations, there were frequent instances of employes being denied State Unemployment Compensation and SUB because of a disciplinary layoff or loss of seniority. Subsequently their grievance may have been settled on the basis that they would be made whole pursuant to Paragraph (50) of the National Agreement. However, Paragraph (50) did not include State Unemployment Compensation and SUB as a part of the total liability assumed by the Corporation, and, as a result, employes received no redress for periods they would otherwise have been laid off if they had not been disciplined or lost their seniority. This problem was corrected in the 1973 National Agreement. Paragraph (50), with the relevant language underscored, reads:
"All claims for back wages shall be limited to the amount of wages the employe would otherwise have earned from his employment with the Corporation during the periods as above defined, and in the case of protested discipline or loss of seniority, the amount of Supplemental Unemployment Benefits and Unemployment Compensation (provided the denial of this benefit is final) the employe applied for in a timely manner; was otherwise entitled to, but did not receive because of such discipline or loss of seniority, less the following:
1. Any Unemployment Compensation received for a week which corresponds to a week the employe would have worked for the Corporation which the employe is not obligated to repay or which he is obligated to repay but has not repaid nor authorized the Corporation to repay on his behalf.
2. Compensation for personal services other than the amount of compensation he was receiving from any other employment which he had at the time he last worked for the Corporation and which he would have continued to receive had he continued to work for the Corporation during the period covered by the claim.
"Wages for total hours worked each week in other employment in excess of the total number of hours the employe would have worked for the Corporation during each corresponding week of the period covered by the claim, shall not be deducted.
"The calculation of a back pay award made pursuant to this paragraph will be provided to the employe involved at his request. "
For an employe to benefit from these new provisions, he must file a timely application for Unemployment Compensation with the appropriate state agency. In the event he is denied Unemployment Compensation /SUB because of the discipline or loss of seniority and the denial is a final denial, i.e., it is not appealed by the employe, the amount of Unemployment Compensation /SUB covering the period of the denial becomes a part of the total liability owed by the Corporation in the event it is determined subsequently that the employe is entitled to back pay.
It is requested that all local unions take the necessary steps to acquaint all committeemen with this provision of the contract, so that employes who are disciplined or who suffer a loss of seniority, are instructed to routinely file for Unemployment Compensation/SUB if they believe their discipline or loss of seniority is improper.
Fraternally,
Irving Bluestone, Vice President
Director‑General Motors Department
IB:ics
opaiu42
January 25, 1973
Greetings:
Occasionally charges of improper representation are being filed with the EEOC, the NLRB or a State Agency, claiming that a local union has failed to represent a discharged employe with service of 30 days or less.
The General Motors Department has recently become aware that one of the defenses advanced by the local union is that the union has no right to represent an employe with service of 30 days or less. The assumption that the union does not have the right to represent an employe who has 30 days or less service is incorrect. The International Union is the bargaining agent for all employes, including those who have 30 days or less service. The difficulty is successfully representing such employes.
Paragraph 56 relieves the Corporation of any obligation to return such an individual to work even though the separation from employment might not have been for cause. It is a fact under the National Agreement that during the first 30 days of employment management need not show cause for terminating an employe with service of 30 days or less. However, it is the opinion of the General Motors Department that if such an employe is separated due to discrimination forbidden by Paragraph 6(a), the union does have a right to process such a grievance to a successful conclusion, including arbitration.
Will you please acquaint your committeemen with the correct position in this regard so that when an employe is separated with 30 days or less service and requests the service of a committeeman, he will be assured of consideration of the facts of his complaint. However, the employe should be advised that there is little probability that the union can successfully process his grievance.
Fraternally,
|
Irving Bluestone, Vice President
Director‑General Motors Department
IB:isc
opeiu42
cc: Regional Directors
Regional Representatives
PARAGRAPH 59 ‑‑ ELIMINATION OF JOBS
FEBRUARY, 1960 Newsletter
Protection of Wage Rate When Jobs Are Eliminated
In applying Paragraph 59, where changes in methods, products or policies occur, it is well to remember that the displaced employe must be given a comparable job he can do in line with his seniority. This means that consideration must be given not only to the nature of the job to which he is transferred but to the rate as well.
Management sometimes attempts to give such an employe a considerably lower rated job while there are other higher rated jobs he can do with employes holding less seniority. Whenever management attempts to by‑pass its obligations in this regard, it should be noted immediately and a grievance filed.
Of course, when a grievance is filed the union must be prepared to specify the higher rated job to which the employe should have been transferred, to show he is capable of doing it and to show that a lower seniority employe is on it.
January 31, 1975
Re: Paragraph 69 ‑ Supervision
Return of Salaried Non
Supervisory Employes
To All GM Local Unions
Greetings:
As a result of the massive layoffs in General Motors occasioned by the downturn in auto sales, substantial numbers of supervisors have been returning to the bargaining unit pursuant to the provisions of Paragraph 69 of the National Agreement. In addition, there have been numbers of salaried non‑supervisory employes who have likewise been transferred into the bargaining unit.
This is to alert the local union that for a supervisor to be eligible to return to the bargaining unit with his accumulated seniority pursuant to the provisions of Paragraph 69, he must first have established seniority in the bargaining unit prior to his transfer to supervision. Likewise, the same is required for returning salaried non‑supervisory employes. Thus in both instances the individuals involved must have acquired seniority in the bargaining unit before their transfer to a non‑bargaining unit job.
In addition, with regard to returning supervisors, their employment with the Corporation as a supervisor must have remained unbroken. For example, a supervisor who acquired seniority in the bargaining unit in Plant A is transferred to supervision in Plant A and subsequently is transferred to Plant B as a supervisor. He is eligible to return to Plant A with his accumulated seniority providing all of his employment in both Plants A and B has been as a supervisor. If while in Plant B he was transferred to hourly rate or his service as a supervisor was broken in some other manner, he would not be entitled to return to Plant A with accumulated seniority.
With regard to salaried non‑supervisory employes, their right to return with accumulated seniority is contingent upon their remaining as a salary employe in the plant of origin. In other words, if the salaried non-supervisory employe is transferred from Plant A to Plant B on salary non-supervision, his seniority in the bargaining unit in Plant A would be considered broken and he would not be entitled to return with accumulated seniority. (Many Local Seniority Agreements specifically cover the matter of the continuing seniority of salary non‑supervisory employes.)
Problems in implementing these particular provisions should be brought to the attention of the Regional Office and the General Motors Department immediately.
Please send promptly to the General Motors Department the number of supervisors and non‑supervisors, respectively, who have returned to the bargaining unit since January, 1974 and how many had enough seniority to hold a job in the unit or were immediately laid off from the unit upon returning to it.
Fraternally,
Irving Bluestone, Vice President
Director‑General Motors Department
IB:ics
opeiu42
cc: Regional Directors
Regional Representatives
PARAGRAPH 71 - EQUALIZATION OF OVERTIME
APRIL, 1953 Newsletter
Handling Paragraph 71 Cases
Under the terms of Paragraph 71 of the National Agreement:
"Extra work in periods of part time operation and overtime should be equalized in the group engaged in similar work as far as practicable. "
This clause has been interpreted many times by the Umpire in cases brought to him. A committeeman, when confronted with a Paragraph 71 claim, must make a careful investigation of the facts before he can be sure a valid grievance exists.
Facts to Look For in Paragraph 71 Cases
For one thing he must establish when employes comprise the group engaged in similar work. Normally the group is established by long past practice or by actual written agreement. Once the group of employes under consideration is established then three questions must be answered. In Umpire Decision E-78, the Umpire listed these questions as follows:
(1) Was the work "similar" to that normally done by the complainants?
(2) Are there other groups engaged in "similar work" who might have an equal or superior claim? In other words, did the employe who performed the disputed work also normally do this work and, therefore have an equal claim to it?
(3) Would the assignment of the complainants to the work have been "practicable" under all the circumstances? In other words, could management have foreseen the need for the work and make arrangements to have the proper employes come in to do it or was it an emergency which gave no opportunity to management to notify the proper employes of the work available?
If the Union can show that the answer to the first question is Yes; the answer to the second question is: No; and the answer to the third question is; Yes;‑‑then, the chances are the case can be won.
Party in Interest in Paragraph 71 Cases
Another thing to remember about Paragraph 71 cases is that the award, if the case is won, normally goes to the employe in the group engaged in similar work who has the least number of overtime hours. Therefore, when writing up the grievance the claim should be for the employe or employes with the least number of overtime hours.
April 6, 1971
Re: Change of Address
To All General Motors Local Unions
Greetings:
For several years permanent layoffs of unknown duration in General Motors Plants were minimal in number. The majority were of known duration with the employes being advised to return at a specific time.
The economic condition of the automotive industry has recently resulted in longer and more frequent layoffs in many plants which require written notice of recall by mail or telegram.
Many employes are running into trouble and are being released as voluntary quits because they fail to respond to such recall notices.
Paragraph (74) of the Agreement reads as follows:
"To protect his seniority, it is the employe's responsibility to keep the Plant Management informed of his proper home address. The method of notification of change of address is to be established by the respective Plant Managements for their operations. Forms for this purpose shall be available in designated offices in the plant. "
Many employes remember to make address changes in the payroll department, the SUB office, the insurance office, etc. , but overlook the most important place; i.e. , changing their address of record in the Personnel Office on the forms provided for that purpose. The former notice of address change is often a matter of employe convenience and is usually given by employes going on vacation, visiting relatives or for any number of other reasons for notifying management to send checks to an address different from their official address of record or "proper home address. " The latter address is the only one used for purposes of recall from layoff and must be properly maintained at the grave risk of loss of seniority.
Umpire Decision M‑72 dealt with such a case.
Each local union should periodically publish warnings to its members to properly record their addresses in accordance with the method of notification in effect in your particular plant. Notices can be printed in local union newspapers and placed on the union bulletin boards so that employes are constantly reminded of this very important contractual requirement.
Fraternally,
|
Irving Bluestone, Director
General Motors Department
IB: sjw
opeiu42
PARAGRAPH 75 ‑‑ SHIFT PREFERENCE
FEBRUARY, 1960 Newsletter
Skilled Trades Seniority vs. Plant Seniority for Shift Preference Purposes
From time to time the General Motors Department receives inquiry from local unions and in some cases from individuals seeking authorization or advice to permit individuals to use their plant seniority date for shift application purposes while carrying the classification of EIT (Employes ‑In‑Training) or when reclassified as Journeymen.
The International Executive Board, in the matter of Francis A. Cantwell versus Local 933, decided that use of the plant seniority date in these type of circumstances was improper.
It has been the policy of the General Motors Department that EIT's may only use their EIT seniority date, and reclassified Journeymen may only use their skilled trades seniority date for shift application preference purposes.
In many cases the plant seniority date is used for the purposes of breaking a tie when two individuals have the same date and shift transfer possibilities exist for only one.
AUGUST, 1952 Newsletter
Handling Disciplinary Action Cases
Grievances involving disciplinary action usually raise two problems: (1) is the claimant guilty as charged by management and (2) is the amount of penalty assessed fair under the circumstances.
If the claimant is found not guilty he will in most cases receive back pay. However, even if he is found guilty, the amount of penalty assessed should be carefully reviewed and the facts surrounding the incident evaluated for mitigating circumstances that might help to reduce the penalty. If the penalty appears too severe, even if the claimant should be guilty, or if mitigating circumstances exist which could be used to reduce the penalty, an argument should be entered asking for a reduced penalty. Submitting such an argument will not harm in any way the first contention that the claimant is not guilty at all.
Suggested Claims For Relief In Discipline Cases
Thus, in such cases, the contention should be:
(1) the claimant is not guilty and therefore should receive full back pay for time lost and
(2) even if the claimant is found guilty, the penalty is too severe and should be reduced with back pay for the remainder of the time lost.
Example of Successful Use of Suggested Procedure
An example of the success of this approach is Umpire Decision G‑28. In this case the claimant was charged with loitering and given a balance of shift plus three days layoff. The union argued she was not guilty and added the contention that even if she were guilty of loitering the penalty should be reduced because the foreman had failed to stop the loitering even though he claimed to have observed it and further because the foreman failed to call her committeeman when requested to do so. The Umpire held that she had loitered and wasted time in violation of the shop rule but he reduced the penalty to balance of shift plus one day with back pay for the remainder of time off because of the mitigating circumstances.
OCTOBER, 1952 Newsletter
Checking the Records in Disciplinary Action Cases
In the handling of disciplinary action cases the following is important to remember in such cases.
Interviews and Discussions With Management Representatives
Often omitted in the record of a disciplinary action grievance, but of major significance, is information concerning the discussions between the claimant and the foreman at the time discipline is invoked and during interviews in the personnel office.
Cases can be won or lost on the basis of what discussions were held before the employe left the plant or in interviews held after discipline was invoked. In recording the facts on such cases, therefore, it is urged that the information submitted go beyond the point where discipline is invoked and record all discussions with the foreman and personnel department representatives of management.
Checking Record of Past Discipline
It is important, also, that the past disciplinary record of the claimant, especially in disciplinary cases, be included in the record of the grievance. This is necessary to evaluate whether the penalty involved is proper in the light of the corrective discipline principle. Moreover, the Umpire has, on several occasions, requested that such disciplinary records be incorporated in the total record of the case.
JANUARY, 1953 Newsletter
Management's Burden of Proof in Disciplinary Action Cases
It is commonly accepted in arbitration circles that management must sustain burden of proof in disciplinary action cases. This means that management has the major responsibility for proving the discipline meted out is proper, just and fair. However, this does not permit the union merely to sit back, place the onus on management and not bother to counter management's facts and arguments, since failure to take issue with management on its facts and arguments will result in blanket acceptance by the arbitrator of management's position,
Charge of Multiple Shop Rule Violations
The fact that management does sustain burden of proof in disciplinary action cases, however, is helpful to the union. One important aspect of this principle to watch for concerns those cases in which the disciplined employe is charged with more than one violation. Sometimes a foreman believes that the penalty invoked will "stick" better if he "throws the book" at the employe and charges him with multiple shop rule violations. Always demand to know the exact charges used to invoke discipline. When there are multiple charges, management is obligated to prove all the charges in order to sustain the entire penalty. It is assumed that if an employe is given a two week layoff for violating three different shop rules, then management must have felt this was the proper penalty for such violations. If any of the alleged violations did not occur, however, and thus cannot be proven, then the original penalty, under normal circumstances, should not stand in its entirety. Careful checking of this type of case will frequently be rewarded with reductions in penalty and back pay even where partial guilt is established.
Umpire Decision On Charge of Multiple Rule Violations
A good example is Umpire Decision B‑83 where an eight day layoff was imposed. The claimant had been told by his foreman that he was not maintaining production and to notify him (the foreman) if trouble developed on the job which would delay the claimant in his work. Shortly afterward the foreman saw the claimant talking with another employe and falling out of position on the line. An argument developed between the foreman and the claimant, ending in the penalty on three charges: (1) refusal to obey orders; (2) restricting production; (3) abusive language to the foreman.
The Umpire found that the claimant had used abusive language but he had not refused to obey orders and had not restricted production. Since management did not prove all three charges, but only one of them he reduced the penalty from eight days to two days and awarded back pay for the remainder.
Re: Paragraph 76 Notice for
Probationary Employes
February 28, 1969
TO ALL GENERAL MOTORS LOCAL UNION PRESIDENTS AND CHAIRMEN
Greetings:
In recent months a number of local unions reported a problem in connection with the release or discharge of probationary employes.
Many managements were not issuing a Paragraph 76 Notice of Disciplinary Action to the probationary employe or to the committeeman when the probationary employe was released or discharged.
Management is required however to furnish to the chairman of the shop committee weekly a list of probationary employes who had their employment terminated while in a temporary status. This provision is contained in Paragraph 61(b)(d) of the Agreement.
Temporary employes may be released for a variety of reasons under the general headings of incompetence, unsatisfactory, lack of ability, inability to adjust to factory work, etc., which do not fall into the areas of misconduct or violation of shop rules. Of course, there were also the releases or discharges which do fall into these categories. The reason for release is not shown on the Paragraph 61(b)(d) list.
It is doubtful that we could have prevailed in front of the Umpire in establishing the applicability of Paragraph 76 in cases involving the release or discharge of such employes.
A series of discussions were held between the UAW‑GM Department of the International Union and the General Motors Corporation regarding this problem. It was resolved on the basis that the provisions of Paragraph 76 of the 1967 Agreement will be applicable to temporary employes with more than thirty (30) days of employment who are released or discharged. The provision does not apply to temporary employes who are laid off in a reduction of force.
Paragraph 61(b)(d) will continue to apply to temporary employes with less than thirty (30) days of employment as well as temporary employes covered by this provision.
The provision is not retroactive and any cases in the procedure filed prior to this time will stand or fall on their merits without regard to any procedural argument involving this particular provision.
We are certain that compliance with the provisions of Paragraph 76 for those temporary employes who have thirty (30) days or more will aid committeemen in evaluating and processing cases involving their release or discharge.
Please advise all committeemen and alternates of this interpretation.
Attached you will find a copy of a notice sent to local plant managements by the Corporation dealing with this same question.
Fraternally,
Leonard Woodcock, Vice President
Director ‑ General Motors Department
LW:is
cc: Regional Directors
Regional Representatives
Attach.
(Letter No. 532 Continued)
As a result of a series of discussions between the International Union, UAW and the Corporation, it has been agreed that the provisions of Paragraph 76 of the 1967 GM‑UAW National Agreement will be applicable to temporary employes with more than thirty (30) days of employment who are released or discharged. This provision, of course, is not applicable to any employe laid off due to fluctuations in manpower requirements.
The parties also agreed that this interpretation is not retroactive. Accordingly, cases currently in the procedure involving temporary employes should be processed on their merits without regard to the procedural requirements of Paragraph 76.
December 13, 1973
Re: Paragraph (76a)
To All GM Local Union Presidents and Chairmen
Greetings:
The language added to Paragraph (76a) during 1973 negotiations was the outgrowth of specific proposals by the Union to General Motors concerning the concept of discipline procedures. The Union proposed that an employe faced with disciplinary action should be afforded the opportunity for a hearing before being required to leave the plant. The purpose of such a procedure was to allow adequate opportunity for a review of the facts surrounding the impending discipline before management decided whether the facts warranted the imposition of discipline.
The added language is a substantial step in accomplishing this objective.
Paragraph (76a) with the added language underscored reads:
"(76a) When a suspension, layoff or discharge of an employe is contemplated, the employe, where circumstances permit, will be offered an interview to allow him to answer the charges involved in the situation for which such discipline is being considered before he is required to leave the plant. Any employe who, for the purpose of being interviewed concerning discipline, is called to the plant, or removed from his work to the foreman's desk or to an office, or called to an office, may, if he so desires, request the presence of his District Committeeman to represent him during such interview. "
Properly applied, this language requires that before a suspension, layoff or discharge is imposed ‑ while it is in the "contemplated" stage ‑ the employe must be offered the opportunity for an interview. As in the past, the employe has the right to have a committeeman present to represent him during the interview.
During the interview, management must explain the basis for the contemplated discipline so as to "allow him to answer the charges involved in the situation." At this point, the decision to impose discipline has not been made but is only being "considered."
In the event discipline is finally decided upon, Paragraph (76) is applicable in the usual fashion.
The added language of Paragraph (76a) contains the phrase, "where circumstances permit," in connection with offering the employe an interview. The question may arise as to what this phrase was intended to mean.
In the discussion of this particular phrase, it was generally understood that it covers a situation in which an employe could not properly participate in such an interview because he is violent and must be removed from the plant by police or he is under the influence of drugs or alcohol. While these were the reservations expressed in interpretating the phrase, the committeeman should apply a rule of reason with regard to each situation. In certain types of incidents, such as violence or imminent danger to the grievant or to other employes, it may be prudent for the employe to be removed from the plant immediately. In such circumstances the committeeman should not insist on an interview even though the employe may request one. This should be done on an individual, "without prejudice," basis to avoid the possibility of establishing a past practice which could subsequently be cited with possible harmful results.
Any difficulties experienced in applying this language of the agreement in any given situation should be brought to the attention of the Regional Office or the General Motors Department immediately.
Please bring this letter to the attention of all committeemen and others having the responsibility of implementing the new agreement at the local level.
Fraternally,
|
Irving Bluestone, Vice President
Director-General Motors Department
IB:ics
opeiu42
cc: Regional Directors
Regional Representatives
February 25, 1977
Re: Paragraph (77)
To All UAW‑GM Local Unions
Greetings:
Attached is a Memorandum of Understanding regarding Paragraph (77) of the National Agreement.
In 1976 national negotiations, Paragraph (77) was expanded to include provisions to insure discussion of disciplinary action grievances on the plant floor and in a meeting between members of the Shop Committee and local Management. These provisions were designed to correct problems in certain plants in which no in‑plant discussions were held prior to the exchange of Statements of Unadjusted Grievance.
Following ratification of the new agreement, the Corporation issued instructions relative to Paragraph (77) which adversely affected certain plants that had followed a practice of in‑plant discussion and Shop Committee meetings on disciplinary action cases. These instructions tended to impose restrictions on discussions in those plants where no problem existed. That was not the intent of the new language.
The thrust of the attached Memorandum is to permit those plants with a mutually satisfactory practice of processing grievances at the Shop Committee step to continue to do so. The attached Memorandum is effective immediately.
Fraternally,
Irving Bluestone, Vice President
Director‑General Motors Department
IB:ics opeiu494
cc: Regional Directors
Regional Representatives
attach.
|
November 1, 1971
TO ALL PRESIDENTS AND CHAIRMEN OF
GENERAL MOTORS LOCAL UNIONS
Greetings:
The increased number of incidents of violence involving guns and knives in our cities is having its counterpart in similar incidents in the plants. The responsibility for maintaining proper order in the plant rests with Management. Nevertheless, our members should be aware of the probable consequences of a threat made with a knife and/or the possession of a gun in the plant, and how such an incident is viewed by the Umpire.
In recent decisions the Umpire has made it perfectly clear that the possession of a loaded gun in the plant, or a threat accompanied by the display of a knife is a dischargeable offense, regardless of the employe's length of service.
Decision M‑47 concerned an employe with ten (10) years seniority who was caught carrying a loaded pistol into the plant. The employe said it was for self‑protection, so, obviously, if he felt it necessary, he fully intended to use it. The Umpire held that "possession of a loaded pistol in the plant must itself be regarded as a major offense ‑‑as an offense so serious that the length of service and a clean disciplinary record cannot be given their normal weight."
Decisions M‑59 and N‑8 involved long seniority employes who pulled knives in the plant accompanied by a threat either expressed or implied. The Umpire said:
". . . the pulling of a knife is the mark of a bully, and hence the mark of a dangerous person, and that this is what the case must turn on. The pulling of a knife cannot legitimately be likened to an enraged outburst which, though wrongful for the lack of control which it manifests, is nonetheless not vicious and is pardonable for its lack of meanness. If anything, the present case, rather than likened to such 'outburst' cases, should be likened to the 'gun' case covered by Decision M‑47. "
The Umpire's decision makes no distinction between the possession of a loaded pistol and the pulling of a knife on Company premises. An employe who does either places his seniority in jeopardy. It is obvious, of course, that employes should not possess guns on Company premises nor should they make threats accompanied by the display of a knife. An employe who does either can expect short shrift from the Umpire.
Local Unions might well take steps either through their Local Union newspaper or by posting on the Union's Bulletin Board to alert the membership to the consequences of such an act in the hopes of discouraging such incidents.
Fraternally,
Irving Bluestone, Director
General Motors Department
IB:is
opaiu4Zaflcio
cc: Regional Directors
Regional Representatives
Letter No, 542
January 22, 1970
Re: Insurance Continuation
Terminated or
Disciplined Employes
TO ALL GENERAL MOTORS LOCAL UNIONS
Greetings:
The 1967 GM‑UAW Insurance Agreement provides for Metropolitan Group and Hospital, Medical, Surgical and Drug Insurance continuation for terminated or disciplined employes. The applicable language for terminated employes is found in Exhibit B, Section 6, on Page 9 of the Insurance Agreement and is as follows:
"In the case of an employe who on or after October 1, 1964, loses his seniority pursuant to Paragraphs (64)(a), (64)(b), (64)(c), (64)(d), (111)(a), or (111)(b) of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, and if such employe is seeking to have his seniority reinstated through the grievance procedure established in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, Life and Extra Accident Insurance‑ and Hospital, Medical and Prescription Drug Expense Coverages provided in Articles II and III, respectively, of the Program may be continued while his grievance is pending. The employe shall contribute 50¢ per month per $1000 of Life Insurance and the full monthly premium or subscription charge for Hospital, Medical and Prescription Drug Expense Coverages continued hereunder."
DISCIPLINED EMPLOYES
Employes given a disciplinary layoff have insurance continuation the same as provided for employes who are laid off in a reduction in force without effective SUB credits. Metropolitan Group (including Sickness and Accident) and HSMD coverages are continued for the remainder of the month in which the layoff occurs and the following month provided the employe worked anytime during the month of the layoff. These coverages are continued at no cost to the employe.
After this period ‑ the remainder of the month and the following month if the employe remains on disciplinary layoff and a grievance is in process protesting the discipline, he must make the applicable premium contributions as noted in the quoted Insurance Agreement language for insurance continuations.
REIMBURSEMENT OF PREMIUM CONTRIBUTIONS
Terminated and disciplined employes who make applicable premium contributions for insurance continuation in accordance with the Insurance Agreements may be reimbursed for such premium contributions under the provisions of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (Par. (64)(g)(i) page 49).
Reimbursement of such premium contributions will be made provided that the termination or discipline grievance settlement provides: (1) reimbursement will be made for the premium contributions, (2) pay for time lost will be allocated to each month for which the employe made premium contributions.
COMMITTEEMAN RESPONSIBILITY
The Agreements do not contain language which mandate management to notify terminated or disciplined employes of their insurance continuation privileges, therefore, it is most important that Committeemen, when filing grievances for such employes, inform them of their rights to continue their insurance coverages.
Questions or problems concerning insurance continuation or provision of benefits should be referred to the Benefit Plans Section of the General Motors Department.
Disputes concerning reimbursement of premium contributions are subject to the grievance procedure.
Fraternally,
Leonard Woodcock, Vice President
Director ‑ General Motors Department
L W : mvm
opeiu42
P. S. We are sending several extra copies of this letter to the Chairman of the Shop Committee for distribution to other members of the Committee.
Letter No. 606
January 7, 1974
Re: Paragraph (78b)
1973 GM‑UAW Agreement
To: Chairmen and Presidents of
All UAW‑GM Local Unions
Greetings:
Paragraph (78b) of the November 19, 1973 Agreement reads as
follows:
"Work assignments on conveyor lines will be made in accordance with line speeds and available work space and the expected normal ratio of model mix and optional equipment. When it is necessary to adjust the normal scheduled mix on conveyor lines which results in more or less work being required, compensating adjustments in work assignment, manpower, spacing of units, line speed or any combination thereof will be made. Arrangements will be made locally to establish procedures which will provide advance knowledge of mix changes that require compensating adjustments so that such adjustments will be made in a timely manner. On conveyor line operations, Management will designate specific off‑line operations from which manpower will be made available to compensate for such mix changes when one of the compensating adjustments requires an increase in manpower and in such case the assignment of manpower will be given priority over the off‑line operation. Upon request, Management will advise the Union of the arrangements made. "
The paragraph provides in part that "Management will designate specific off-line operations from which manpower will be made available to compensate for such mix changes when one of the compensating adjustments requires an increase in manpower and in such case the assignment of manpower will be given priority over the off-line operation. Upon request, Management will advise the Union of the
arrangements made. "
During 1973 negotiations considerable discussion took place over the intent and the application of this specific language.
The corporation complained that some local unions were taking the position that management had to designate specific employes rather than operations as set forth in the language.
The union complained that in many plants the managements were not making such designations and were ignoring the agreement provision altogether.
The corporation assured the union that the off-line operations would be designated as required by the paragraph.
Each assembly plant local union should make certain this Corporation commitment and the language of Paragraph (78b) are complied with. You are entitled to receive this information upon request.
If you experience any difficulty please notify the General Motors National Department setting forth the necessary factual background.
Fraternally,
Irving Bluestone, Vice President
Director-General Motors Department
IB:sjw
opeiu42
cc: Regional Directors
Regional Representatives
Letter No. 607
January 7, 1974
Re: Paragraph (78c)
1973 GM‑UAW Agreement
To Chairmen and Presidents of
All UAW‑GM Local Unions
Greetings:
Paragraph (78c) of the November 19, 1973 Agreement reads
As follows:
"After the time or the requirements for a normal operator to perform an element has been established on a car, body or truck line assembly operation and the element is subsequently changed because of engineering changes, a change in method, machinery, equipment, layout or tools, only the time or the requirements of the elements affected by such change will be adjusted. "
During the course of the 1970 Agreement and during the negotiations in 1973. disagreements arose as to the proper interpretation of this paragraph.
The union cited the original discussions that took place when this paragraph was initially agreed to and gave the following as its general interpretation.
Assume a job consists of ten (10) elements:
Element 1 Chevrolet "x" time
Element 2 Chevrolet "x" time
Element 3 Chevrolet "x" time
Element 4 Chevrolet "x" time
Element 5 Chevrolet "x" time
Element 6 Pontiac "x" time
Element 7 Pontiac "x" time
Element 8 Buick "x" time
Element 9 Buick "x" time
Element 10 Buick "x" time
Cycle Total "x" time
Subsequently an engineering change occurs which changes the element time on the Buick elements #8, #9 and #10 while the Chevrolet and Pontiac elements #1 through #7 remain unchanged. It was the union's position that since only elements #8, #9 and #10 were affected and the others remained as is, the total cycle time could be revised upwards or downwards only to the extent of the change which occurred in the specific elements involved. All others remained constant.
The corporation agreed with the union's interpretation.
All local unions are cautioned to make certain local management does not attempt to change or alter the times of any elements which have not been affected by the change, nor change the overall cycle time except as it may be modified by the time of the affected element.
We, of course, retain the right to agree or disagree on the impact of the change in the elements involved as well as the overall cycle time.
If you experience difficulty with the application of this paragraph please advise the General Motors National Department setting forth the necessary particulars.
Fraternally,
|
Irving Bluestone, Vice President
Director‑General Motors Department
IB:sjw
opeiu42
cc: Regional Directors
Regional Representatives
PARAGRAPH (102) ‑ NEW JOBS
MAY, 1954 Newsletter
Seniority Problems Created by Application of Paragraph 102
During the year many local unions find it necessary to negotiate new wage classifications as supplements to the existing wage agreement. Sometimes overlooked, however, is that such new classifications must be fitted into seniority groupings in the seniority agreement in order to give seniority agreement application to employes in the new classifications.
Since many local seniority agreements include a flow chart type of seniority groups, it is most important that negotiations be undertaken either to fit a new classification into an existing seniority group or to establish a new seniority group as the case may be.
Seniority Supplements Subject to Approval by National Parties
Modifications of or additions to the seniority groupings thus negotiated should be written and signed as a supplement to the seniority agreement and submitted to the national parties for approval.
Other Issues Raised by New Wage Classifications
Other aspects of the problem created by the establishment of a new wage classification relate to Paragraph 71 and Paragraph 63 (a) (promotion procedure). It is wise to explore the application of these paragraphs to employes in the new classification and to attempt to negotiate with management on any problem which the new classification creates.
The wage rate for the new job then is not the only issue to resolve. Complex seniority issues also must be considered and resolved and local unions would do well to pay close attention to these problems.
November 26, 1974
Re: Special Grievance Procedure
Subcontracting
To Presidents and Chairmen of
All UAW‑GM Local Unions
Greetings
Attached is a copy of the special grievance form to be used in subcontracting disputes.
There will be two copies of the special grievance form ‑‑ a white original copy and a yellow duplicate copy. The white copy is to be retained by the union and the yellow copy given to labor relations. The duplicate copy should be legible.
The General Motors Corporation has informed us the special grievance forms should be available in the plants around the first week in January 1975. Arrange with your management to receive an adequate supply for your use.
The special grievance forms will bear the letter "S" designation to identify them as subcontracting complaints, followed by five digits.
Subcontracting grievances which are not resolved and which are appealed should bear the designation "SP‑1, " "SP‑2, " "SP‑3, " etc. Do not assign them your current "P" appeal number. Start such appeals with the SP‑1 designation. Thus, the appeal will be identified as a subcontracting appeal in the "P" series and the number will also give each local union and local management a running inventory of the number of subcontracting appeals at that location.
Fraternally,
Irving Bluestone Vice President
Director ‑General Motors Department
IB:sjw opeiu42
cc: Regional Directors
Regional Representatives
(Letter No. 614 Continued)
GRIEVANCE FORM
Special Procedure ‑ Contracting of Work
Grievance No. 500001
A .M.
Department No._________________ Date__________Time__________ P. M.
Nature of Grievance__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chairman or Shop Committeeman_____________________________________
Received by A. M.
Labor Relations__________________Date____________Time_________P. M.
 |
Disposition by Labor Relations_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Date_________________ Signed_____________________________________
 |
Grievance Satisfactorily Settled