GRIEVANCE STRATEGY ISSUES- Part 5 (Remedies)
We are back with Part 5 of our Grievance Strategy series that aims to give union reps a deep look at how to deal with the six most critical parts of a union grievance. As with the four previous editions (See the URL links below), let’s start with an example of a grievance situation. Imagine that a big promotion decision was announced yesterday and this morning one of the union’s members, Joe Hill, asked you to file a grievance on his behalf. He points out that he knows he was on the seven-person Best Qualified list #21-09, but was never interviewed despite the contract provision (Article 13, Section 5 Ranking and Selection Obligations Subsection (B)(3)(d)), requiring that “all those on the BQ list be treated uniformly.” Further imagine that you have charged the agency with not only violating Article 13, Section 5 of the agreement, but also related laws and regulations such as the civil rights acts, the prohibited personnel practices, and CFR requirements. It is now time to describe the remedy you want. Many stewards will ask that the agency re-rank the candidates consistent with law, regulation and the agreement as well as give Joe Hill priority consideration if his ranking changes. A few more will add that Hill and the union should be granted “all other appropriate remedies.” They know that phrase gives the arbitrator the power to impose other corrective actions beyond the re-ranking and priority remedies should further developments in the case show they are needed. But often an arbitrator will not think of what other remedies might be appropriate even when you give her/him the power to do anything appropriate. So, it pays to include that phrase AND to list examples, but not an exhaustive list, of the other remedies that you want the arbitrator to order. Here is what would be on our list and why. Continue reading →
