April 16, 2015
Office of Public Affairs
202-273-1991
publicinfo@nlrb.gov (link sends e-mail)
www.nlrb.gov
WASHINGTON, DC– The Board invites the filing of briefs in order to allow parties and interested amici the opportunity to address issues raised in United Steel, Paper and Forestry Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, Local 1192 (Buckeye Florida) (12-CB-109654).
Among the issues raised by the Board is whether parties and amici believe the Board should adopt a rule permitting unions to collect fees from nonmembers for grievance processing.
On March24, 2014, Administrative Law JudgeWilliam Nelson Catesissued a decision in the above-captioned case,finding that the Respondent violated Section 8(b)(1)(A) by maintaining and implementing a “Fair Share Policy” requiring nonmember bargaining-unit employees topay a grievance-processing fee. Excepting, the Respondent asks the Board to adopt a rule allowing unions to charge nonmembers a feefor grievance processing, so long as that feedoes not exceed the amount a union could charge nonmemberobjectorsunder Beck1 and California Saw.2
Briefs from parties and interested amici must be submitted on or before June 15, 2015.
[gview file=”http://www.postal-reporter.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Board-Decision.pdf” save=”1″]
I too agree there is strength in numbers and was a union member for many years, however i dropped out because of the disgust and corruption of how our local is being ran. Complaints to the national have gone unanswered. the last straw was when as a member my grievance was settled without my consent with deals made between the craft directer and mgnt.
I will not waste my time or money filing another grievance. I bet most non members have quit because of the way the locals are ran. I do support the national level and would be open to a fee to support them only. Its time the national takes a good look at why people like me no longer want to participate!!!!!
As a retired Mailhandler, I believe that any union that the laws allows crafts to choose not to become members of their unions should be allowed to charge grievance fees. My proposal to the US senate was that the union would be allowed to charge initial fees of up to the amount of the craft workers unmion dues for the last 3 years. If the grievance were to go to arbitration the fees could go as high as 25 percent of the settlement. This would encourage craftworkers to choose union membership rather than to be “scabs”! Unions invest the majority of their dues money so that they will have the funds to represent the workers when there are arbitration cases. By allowing the fees to be set at 25% this will help the unions in the fair representation of all of the craft workers.
I have been a Teamsters and APWU member for more than 26 years total.
My fair and honest thinking on this issue is to pre-pay fees for non-members.
One month Dues to file grievance, additional monthly Dues per each grievance step until settled.
As for any Monetary Class Action Settlement non-members should be required to pay One month Dues, plus 10% of their settlement goes to the Union General Fund for Legal Costs.
To me this seems fair to all of US Union Members who pay in excess of $700.00 per year for Dues..
Yeah but what if mgt decided to pay non members 2 per hour more than members for same job? Promote them at will because union demands different playing fields. That door swings both ways.
There is another side to this. If a non union or union employee tried going to the NLRB for help, they are told that you have a union and the NLRB will not help any employee.
Most employees drop out of the union because of the union failing to represent them. Where I work, this is the problem. If the union was able to enforce the contract, employees would not mind joining.
Can union members get a discount on their dues for not filing grievances?
I filed 1 grievance in 27 years and the union settled without my consent.
By all means, non-members of unions, or scabs, as I prefer, should have to pay a fee for representation in grievances. As far as the Postal Service is concerned, I, were I in charge of the NALC, would waive the fee for CCA’s at least while they were on their 90 day probation, maybe their first year. Career scabs however should have to pay for their representation just like union members pay through their dues. A fee should equal approximately the amount of a dues deduction. Additionally, those scabs who refuse to pay a fee would not receive representation at any step of the process.
I hate reading these posts where scabs run the unions down, but take full advantage of the wages, benefits and representation without contributing a dime. They are cheap and believe whatever Republicans tell them. To me, a scab working as a city letter carrier, my craft, or any craft position for that matter, is no better morally than a stupid street thug who robs convenience stores. Scabs are getting a lot for nothing while others pay. If that’s not stealing, what is it?
I know there are lots of problems in organized labor as well as management, but unlike managers, you don’t have to quit the union because you don’t like the leadership. Officers are elected and can be removed.
Legally, closed shops are prohibited. But it wouldn’t bother me if scabs who refuse to belong to a union be hired and managed under a totally different set of standards as management sees fit, and not be able to use the union in their defense. Try working for management under those circumstances, scab. You’d get your pay cut at least in half, insurance rates would be unaffordable from the USPS or Blue Cross, leaving you with independent insurance companies to work with. You would not have the discipline progressive system – you know, from “official discussion” to a “letter of warning” to suspension and removal. If management decided to can your ass you’re out the door.
They would run you into the ground, ignore the seniority system for mandatory overtime with you, harass the living shit out of you and make your routes so goddamn long you’d be out 12 hours a day with no auxiliary assistance from union workers because you wouldn’t have Article 8 protection.
You’d get annual leave whenever management said you could. Hell, you might just get the standard two weeks a year period like lots of businesses do if they offer vacation time at all.
If you think your pay, retirement, benefits and union representation are there because management offered it out of the goodness of their hearts, you are either a management suck up trying to get a management job by snitching, being a 204-B or a relative of a manager, or a deluded selfish ignoramus. Which would be the probable case, as so many idiots eat shit and breathe FOX News, Limbaugh and others who are out to destroy you, the middle class and any hopes of a nest egg in retirement for anybody. That defies common sense in every stretch of the imagination.
Actually closed shops are legal in minimum wage states according to NLRB.
Fine, charging non-members to file grievances is a good idea, but the procedure needs to be corrected first. The last grievance I filed, as a member, was in 2008 and it was settled in 2014. This is unacceptable, whether you pay dues or pay-as-you-go for grievances.
Point: my grievance that took 6 years to be arbitrated, I won. So, why did it take 6 years to process a grievance through the system for a member?
This would be only fair. For too long, the non-members, or scabs, have taken free money and benefits by leeching off of the gains made by the unions, which are supported by union dues. One of two things should come from this case…either a fee, maybe $35 an hour for grievance handling for non members should be charged , or, and i like this one better, let the non-members fend for themselves, and not be allowed to have the same wages and benefits as union members. They can take whatever our kind and generous Postal management offers them?? One look at what the PSEs and CCAs get, and you would see a great number of new union members.
The non union members should be forced to pay for union grievance services! Why should they be allowed to be freeloaders? The non union workers hate unions so much until they are in trouble and need help. They should just hire an attorney. Why should a union dues paying member help out a management lackey? And when they want a pay raise, hire an attorney. Such hypocrisy!
It might be contrary to the Postal Union’s interests to file a brief or to otherwise draw attention to themselves in this particular dispute. A Presidential primary season is approaching, and restricting govt employee collective bargaining opportunities will certainly be a campaign issue. Why file a brief and give your opponents something to beat your cause over the head with (sic)? Why give your opponents quotations from you to use against your interests? But that is the unions’ call to make. There are times, when “lying low” is the prudent thing to do. I assume they know what they are doing.
It’s high time we make the freeloading scabs pay up !