This episode of From A to Arbitration is a passionate and critical assessment of the current NALC leadership’s approach to grievances, especially regarding management tactics and the perceived lack of member support. Corey begins by addressing technical difficulties and previews upcoming episodes on emergency placement and clock-ring falsification cases.
The episode’s central theme revolves around Corey’s criticism of the union’s leadership for their perceived passivity and lack of proactive advocacy against management tactics. Corey argues that management is successfully manipulating the system, citing examples like the use of “hour office time” policies and their aggressive approach to route adjustments, often placing the burden of proof on carriers.
He dissects several specific recent arbitration cases, and, critically, analyzes how these cases demonstrate the union’s failures in responding to management’s violations of the contract. Corey’s analysis targets both management and union tactics, emphasizing how the union’s perceived reluctance to challenge management aggressively through the formal grievance process has left carriers vulnerable to abuse.
Corey critiques specific examples of management behavior, such as the use of “locally generated forms,” and the seemingly intentional creation of undertime situations in order to bypass contractual obligations. He analyzes the lack of consistency in the application of discipline for carriers, contrasting it with the seemingly lenient treatment of managers who continually violate the contract, illustrating a critical double standard.
Corey emphasizes the need for a more proactive and militant approach from union representatives, urging them to defend their members and hold management accountable. He calls on the audience to understand the strategic nature of management’s tactics and to educate themselves about their rights and responsibilities to challenge these actions.
The episode ends with Corey sharing recent examples of successful grievances and arbitration cases and emphasizing the importance of maintaining a unified and aggressive stance against management. He again stresses the need for new leadership within the union, suggesting that a stronger and more proactive union would address the issues more effectively, particularly related to the falsification of heat illness training records. The overall message is a call for change and a more militant approach by the union to protect letter carriers from perceived abuses.