Episode 74: My Dad, a removal, is your business agent a shepherd or a sheepherder? Dealing with relevancy letters.

Corey discusses relevancy letters, removals, and formal step A meetings. He emphasizes the importance of the formal step A process as a critical juncture for building a strong case. Corey recounts a recent conversation with a carrier facing a removal, highlighting the importance of thoroughly understanding the controlling documents and asking clarifying questions to ensure a strong position. He emphasizes the importance of the carrier being aware of their rights and knowing they are correct, regardless of management's rhetoric. He also cautions against answering questions directly from management without union representation present. Corey details a specific removal case, where management used scanner data to justify the disciplinary action, and criticizes the management approach. He stresses the crucial role of a shop steward, branch president, and business agent in defending carriers' rights. He criticizes the perceived cowardice of some business agents and urges them to be proactive shepherds rather than passive sheep herders in representing their members. He also dissects a specific relevancy letter from management, highlighting the union's rights regarding information requests under Articles 17 and 31 of the National Agreement. Corey asserts that management does not dictate relevancy; the union does. He discusses cases using pertinent arbitration decisions, like those from Arbitrators August and Mittenthal, to demonstrate that his approach aligns with established precedents. Crucially, Corey emphasizes the importance of thoroughly examining the reasoning behind the management's position. Finally, he addresses listeners' concern about quarterly overtime and future topics. http://www.fromatoarbitration.com/