Monday, September 10, 2007

JOE NUNO said..

8 TEST OF JUST CAUSE !!!

1. IS THERE A RULE?
2. DID THE EMPLOYEE VIOLATE IT?
3. WAS THERE NOTICE OF THE RULE?
4. IS THE RULE REASONABLE?
5. WAS THE RULE APPLIED UNREASONABLY?
6. WAS THERE A FAIR INVESTIGATION?
7. EQUAL TREATMENT WITH OTHERS?
8. IS THE DISCIPLINE-UNREASONBLE?

September 9, 2007 8:01 PM

4 comments:

JOE NUNO said... said...

FOR THE EVALUATION OF ACCEPTABLE DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST EMPLOYEES THAT SUPPORT THE UNION.

1. IS THERE A RULE? WHAT IS IT?
a. IS IT IN WRITING?
b. IS IT CLEAR, PRECISE AND UNDERSTANDABLE?

2. THE EMPLOYEE HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF THE RULE?
a. IS IT POSTED? WHERE?
b. IS IT IN THE EMPLOYER HANDBOOK?
c. WAS IT DISTRIBUTED TO THE EMPLOYEES?
d. IS THERE A SIGNED COPY FROM THE EMPLOYEE?
e. IS THE RULE IN OTHER LANGUAGE?
f. HOW LONG HAS THE RULE BEEN IN EFFECT?

3. IS THE RULE REASONABLE?
a. DOES IT RELATE TO THE EMPLOYER’S BUSINESS?
b. IS THERE ANY BASIS TO BELIEVE THAT THE RULE IS UNREASONABLE OR NOT JOB RELATED?
c. DOES THE RULE EXTEND TO OFF-DUTY CONDUCT?
d. IF SO, IS THERE A NEXUS BETWEEN THE OFF-DUTY CONDUCT AND THE EMPLOYEE’S JOB?

4. DID THE EMPLOYEE VIOLATE THE RULE?
a. WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE-FACTS-THAT SHOW THE EMPLOYEE VIOLATED THE RULE?
b. WITNEESSES, DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE, PRODUCTION RECORDS, TIME CARDS?
c. ARE THE WITNESSES CREDIBLE-BELIEVABLE? DID THEY AND COULD THEY HEAR AND SEE?
d. WHAT IS THE EMPLOYYEE EXPLANATION?
e. IS THE EMPLOYEE STORY BELIEVABLE? SUPPORTED BY OTHERS? WHY OR WHY NOT?

5. WAS THE RULE APPLIED UNREASONABLE?
a. WAS THE EMPLOYEE PREVIOUSLY DISCIPLINED AND IF SO, DID HE SHOW GOOD IMPROVEMENT?
b. WAS THE EMPLOYEE DENIED A BENEFIT, I.E A JOB BID, TRANSFER, PROMOTION ON A PURELY TECHNICAL GROUND DESPITE HIS OTHER QUALIFICATIONS?

6. WAS THERE AN UNFAIR INVESTIGATION?
a. DID SUPERVISION VIOLATE THE EMPLOYEES RIGHTS?
b. WAS THERE A SUBSTANTIAL DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS?

7. WAS THE EMPLOYEE TREATED UNEQUALLY IN RELATION TO OTHERS?
a. CAN THE EMPLOYER SHOW THAT OTHERS, GUILTY OF THE SAME OFFENSE RECEIVED THE SAME DISCIPLINE? ( DISCIPLINARY RECORDS OF OTHER EMPLOYEES? )
b. IF NOT, WHY NOT?
c. IF EMPLOYYEES GUILTY OF THE SAME OFFENSE HAVE BEEN GIVEN LESSER DISCIPLINE WERE THERE OBJECTIVE FACTORS SUCH AS TENURE, CLEAN RECORD, GOOD PERFORMANCE, SPECIAL REASONS? IF THE EMPLOYEE WAS SINGLED OUT FOR HARSHER DISCIPLINE WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE TO PROVE IT? ( I.E. ARE THERE DISCIPLINARY RECORDS AVAILABLE SHOWING TYPES OF MISCONDUCT? )
d. WHAT IS THE EMPLOYEE OPINION? DOES THE EMPLOYEEHAVE ANY OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE-OR IS HIS/HER OPINION PURELY SUBJECTIVE AND SELF-SERVING WITHOUT ANYTHING MORE?
e. IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE THAT OTHERS EMPLOYEES HAVE VIOLATED THIS RULE WITHOUT DISCIPLINE?
f. HAS THE EMPLOYEE RECEIVED PRIOR PROGRESSIVE DISCIPLINE? HOW LONG AGO?

8. IS THE DISCIPLINE SIMPLY TOO HARSH-UNREASONABLE?
a. HOW SERIOUS WAS THE MISCONDUCT? DAMAGE TO PROPERTY? EFFECT ON OTHERS?
b. MITIGATING FACTORS? LONG TENURE, CLEAN RECORD, GOOD PERFORMANCE, SPECIAL FACTORS?

September 9, 2007 9:21 PM
Delete

Anonymous said...

i think organizing a union is a way to look out for ourselve, every one deserve an equal chance to make living. Fed ex companies robbing employees blind by not give them benefit, paid vacations, sick leave, holidays pays, personal day pay, pension, etc. Fed ex is well known company all over the world and they can't afford the pay full benefit???

THE SUPREME COURT ON PAST PRACTICE said...

I. Clarifying Practices

Clarifying practices implement general or ambiguous contract language or handbook. A clarifying practice is almost always considered to be a mutual agreement.

II. Independent Practices

Independent practices relate to subjects not covered by the written agreement. An independent practice that involves a worker benefit, such as free parking or time off for union business, is usually considered a mutual agreement. An independent practice that concerns a method of work or the direction of the workforce, such as a work schedule or a work assignment, is usually not considered a mutual agreement.

III. Conflicting Practices

Conflicting practices contradict language in the written contract. A conflicting practice is usually not considered a mutual agreement. However, exceptions arise if the practice is intended to amend the contract or if the practice causes a party to alter its bargaining demands or otherwise change position to its detriment.

JOE NUNO said...

COMMOM MISCONCEPTIONS



UNEQUAL TREATMENT- Employee A and Employee B are abusive to their supervisor. A is suspended and B is terminated. Unequal treatment? Presumptively…yes,…but…let’s say employee A is a 10 year employee with a good record and employee B is a 2 year employee with prior discipline. The presumption of unequal treatment can be rebutted if there is an OBJECTIVE basis for different discipline. The employee’s work record should have some value.

WHAT IS A PAST PRACTICE? 1-time, 2-times, 15-times, 35-times? For parties to be able to rely on practices the practices must be KNOWN and CONDONED (accepted) by both parties and therefore the more times it has occurred the stronger the argument that a practice exists.

WHY ME? I WAS SINGLED OUT! It’s easy for employees to say that others have done the same thing and have not been disciplined. UNSUPPORTED CONTENTIONS however are obviously self-serving and mean very little.
Therefore you should make every effort to get names, dates, witnesses to prove these allegations-or-explain why you didn’t.