Episodes

This episode focuses on the importance of the informal step A meeting in grievance cases. Corey argues that this initial meeting is crucial, as it’s often the first time management reveals their position in writing. He emphasizes the need for shop stewards to be prepared and aggressive in this meeting, encouraging stewards to develop detailed […]

This episode focuses on Article 31 of the National Agreement, which governs information requests during grievance cases. Corey explains that this article is closely linked to Article 17, which deals with the right of stewards to access information for grievance processing. Corey emphasizes that when a shop steward encounters a situation where management fails to

This episode discusses the importance of information requests in grievance cases. Corey argues that failure to provide requested information constitutes a serious violation of the collective bargaining agreement, potentially leading to the dismissal of the grievance. Corey emphasizes that stewards have a right to investigate, adjust, and process grievances, including reviewing relevant documents, files, and

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