Episodes

This episode focuses on the principle of “corrective rather than punitive” discipline. Corey argues that while arbitrators often interpret “corrective discipline” as synonymous with “progressive discipline,” true corrective action requires management to actively help employees improve their performance rather than simply issuing escalating punishments. Corey emphasizes management’s obligation to manage, using examples like an employee […]

This episode is about defending City Carrier Assistants (CCAs) facing disciplinary action by the United States Postal Service. Corey emphasizes that CCAs are particularly vulnerable to discipline because they lack the protections of tenure and a “bank of goodwill.” He highlights the principle of “corrective rather than punitive” discipline that applies to CCAs, emphasizing that

Corey enthusiastically details a federal court decision (M-01967) that upholds the right of the union to seek escalated monetary awards, also referred to as punitive awards, from the USPS in cases of contract violations. The decision stems from an arbitration case in Kingsport, Tennessee, where the arbitrator awarded a substantial sum to the union due

This podcast episode focuses on the fifth of six “just cause” principles in labor arbitration: “Was the disciplinary action taken in a timely manner?” Corey explains that management cannot delay disciplinary action indefinitely and that the discipline must be issued promptly after the offense occurs. He gives several examples of cases where arbitrators ruled that

This episode continues the discussion of “just cause” principles in labor arbitration. Corey is focusing on the third of six sub-questions related to just cause: “Was a thorough investigation completed?” He explains that this principle is crucial because it protects employees from disciplinary actions based on insufficient investigations. He emphasizes that the investigation needs to

This episode focuses on the fourth of six “just cause” principles in labor arbitration, emphasizing that a complete investigation encompasses more than just the investigative interview; it includes all steps leading to the disciplinary action. Several examples are given of inadequate investigations, highlighting instances where management failed to ask relevant questions during interviews, added questions

This podcast episode is about the third of six “just cause” principles in labor arbitration. Corey focuses on the principle of “Is the rule consistently and equitably enforced?” He explains that management often tries to enforce rules inconsistently, and that this inconsistency can be used to challenge their actions. He gives an example of a

The second of the “just cause” principles, Corey argues that this often-overlooked aspect is crucial when challenging management actions. They emphasize the importance of demonstrating that a rule is not only present but also reasonable in relation to safe and efficient work performance and business efficiency. Corey provides examples of unreasonable rules, such as a

This episode is about labor arbitration, specifically focused on the “just cause” principle. Corey emphasizes the importance of starting any grievance process with the “just cause” principles, especially focusing on whether a rule exists that the carrier violated. He emphasizes that management frequently cites rules that don’t exist or don’t apply to the situation. Corey

This podcast episode is about Article 16.1 of the National Agreement which deals with the “just cause” principle for disciplinary actions. Corey explains that the “just cause” principle requires management to have a fair and provable justification for any disciplinary action. He highlights that Article 16.1 specifies that discipline should be corrective rather than punitive.