AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIAITON. In the Matter of the Arbitration Between NEW ENGLAND POLICE BENEVOLENT ASSOC.

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIAITON. In the Matter of the Arbitration Between NEW ENGLAND POLICE BENEVOLENT ASSOC."

Transcription

1 AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIAITON In the Matter of the Arbitration Between NEW ENGLAND POLICE BENEVOLENT ASSOC. AAA Case No: Date Issued: and Feb. 20, 2014 WORCESTER COUNTY SHERIFF S OFFICE Gr: Corrections Officer Thomas Roy Arbitrator: Sharon Henderson Ellis, Esq. Appearances: Gary G. Nolan, Esq. Jason Rives, Esq. For the Union For the Department ARBITRATOR S DECISION AND AWARD Pursuant to the terms of the collective bargaining agreement between the Worcester County Sheriff s Office WSCO/Employer) and the New England Police Benevolent Association (Union) arbitration hearing in the above matter were held on July 24, August 15 and October 2, 2013 at the Hilton Garden Inn in Worcester, MA. Both parties were provided a full and fair opportunity to call witnesses and submit evidence. The parties written arguments were received by the Arbitrator on or about December 23, At the Arbitrator s request, the due date for the Award was extended to February 20, The Issue Did the Worcester County Sheriff s Office have just cause to suspend Officer Thomas Roy for two working days? If not, what shall the remedy be? 1

2 BACKGROUND The issue in this case involves the two- day suspension of the Grievant, Corrections Officer Thomas Roy. Roy is a nearly ten- year employee and correctional officer at the Worcester County Correctional Facility (WSO). On December 6, 2012, WSO Superintendent Shawn Jenkins issued a disciplinary decision accepting Asst. Superintendent Legendre s recommendation for a two- day disciplinary suspension of the Grievant. The stated basis for the suspension was a failure to attend roll call on November 9 and 26, Pursuant to the parties collective bargaining agreement, the Union filed a grievance on Officer Roy s behalf, alleging an absence of just cause for Roy s disciplinary suspension. After the grievance was denied at the several steps of the contractual grievance procedure, it was presented in arbitration before the undersigned. In both its brief and during the arbitration, the Union asserts that for the following several reasons, there was no just cause for the Grievant s suspension: the Employer a) failed to adhere to the explicit requirements of WSO s progressive discipline system; b) gave no notice about the roll- call tardiness policy as applied 2 ; and c) discriminatorily applied the roll call policy to target the Grievant, a Union officer and activist. According to the Employer, there was just cause for a two- day suspension as discipline for the Grievant s ninth and tenth violations of the Roll Call Tardiness Policy in less than eleven months. It rejects the Union s assertion that the roll call policy has changed and was used to target the Grievant because of his union activity. Summary of Facts & Parties Contentions The two- day suspension of the Grievant, Officer Roy, is based on a charge that on November 9 and 25, 2012, he failed to attend roll call. Since attendance at 1 Jt. Exh. 6, p Union Brief at p

3 roll call was the stated reason for the suspension, understanding what the term means and how it is used in normal parlance at the jail is important. Throughout the record, it seems that two different meanings are ascribed to the term roll call. Broadly speaking, at least, roll call is the 15- minute period preceding each of the three shifts at the jail for which officer are compensated with 22 minutes of extra straight- time pay. In other words, each officer works an 8- hour shift beginning at 7:00 A.M., 3:00 P.M. or 11:00 P.M. But, they are also required to be at the jail at least 15 minutes before the start of their shift. Attorney Jeffrey Turco, former WSO Superintendent, was subpoenaed by the Union as a witness in this case. When questioned, he described roll call as follows, [I]t was a 15- minute window... at quarter to the hour, guys would be punching in, they d get down [to the roll call room], you d wait a few minutes for people to go. And then typically about five minutes in, the lieutenant or the captain... would go through the roll call. It would last two or three minutes. And then the guys would be dispersed to their particular locations. 3 In the past, officers received 15 minutes of overtime pay for roll call. As stated above, however, during negotiations for the last collective bargaining agreement, the parties agreed that rather than receiving 15 minutes pay at time and one- half, they would be compensated at 22 minutes of straight- time pay. 4 Testimony indicates that when the compensation change was negotiated, there was some nervousness on the part of the Union and/or officers that the pay change might result in their being required to punch in 22 minutes before the start of the shift or at some period prior to the traditional start time at a quarter of the hour. All agree, however, that the pay adjustment does not affect the longtime obligation to punch in no later than 15 minutes before the shift starts. The 3 Tr 3, pp. 43,44. 4 The compensation change was made because 22 minutes of straight time pay can be included in an officers calculation for retirement benefits but overtime pay cannot. 3

4 mandatory punch- in time continues to be a quarter of the hour in the Grievant s case, 6:45 in the morning. A second and somewhat narrower meaning of roll call, often used by witnesses and counsel during the arbitration, is the 30- second to five- minute informational meeting during which a captain or lieutenant checks off the attendance roll and reads aloud a prepared synopsis of incidents and events that occurred during the preceding shift. Items included in the synopsis might include, for example, Max- B, upper left out of lock- down status or Outside perimeter much check on LH, Inmate T... at Umass Rm The location of roll call for the main jail is the chapel. Roll call in this definition, then, is the brief informational meeting carried out for the benefit of the oncoming shift. It is not, apparently, a literal calling of the roll by reading names aloud but rather a checking off of names of the officers present and the assignment of officers duty posts. The Grievant regularly works the morning shift beginning at 7:00 A.M. and ending at 3:00 P.M. Officer Roy also, however, works swaps, meaning that two days each week he works two shifts back to back followed by four days off. As a result, Roy is required to report to roll call just two days per week, not four. There are approximately 28 officers who, like Roy, work the 7:00 A.M. shift and must punch in at the jail at one of two time clocks no later than 6:45 A.M. As described by the witnesses, officers like Roy who work in the main jail enter the facility and more or less immediately encounter one of two KRONOS time clocks. There an officer typically punches in his time card. To the right of the time clock is a locker room where Officer Roy, at least, keeps his work boots and uniform. From the time clock it is approximately a one to two minute walk past central control to the chapel where roll call is conducted. Located somewhere between the time clock and the chapel are, however, a series of two to four security- related 5 See E er Exh 3. No. 3 and E er Exh. 2, No. 2. 4

5 gates. 6 While not entirely clear from the record, apparently some gates are open, some are closed and on occasion, not regularly, an officer may be wanded. The Roll Call Tardiness Policy and Progressive Discipline It is undisputed that a failure to punch in at the jail s time clock by 6:45 A.M. constitutes tardiness. Beyond that, everything else related to appearing at roll call and being considered on time or late is disputed. Most of the disputed testimony in this case relates to the current and past practices and/or policy for marking as late an officer who punches in at or before 6:45 A.M. but physically arrives in the roll call room during or after the lieutenant has started roll call that is, the reading of the approximate 3- minute synopsis of prior reported incidents as well as other permutations. 7 Both sides agree that a written policy issued by former Superintendent Jeffrey Turco has been in existence since April 12, 2005, and is titled Roll Call Tardiness Policy. During the arbitration it was often referenced as the Turco policy. It reads: All correctional staff shall, if applicable, report to Roll Call at 15 minutes before the scheduled start of their shift. Any correctional staff arriving less than 15 minutes before the scheduled start of their shift shall be subject to the following policy: 8 1) On the third occasion, between February 1 through January 31, a correctional staff member is late three (3) minutes or less then the Operations Captain shall issue a verbal warning. 2) On the fourth occasion, or more, between February 1through January 31, a correctional staff member is late three minutes or less then the correctional staff member s Assistant Deputy Superintendent shall commence progressive discipline. 3) If, between February 1 through January 31, a correctional staff member is late more than three (3) minutes, the Operations Captain shall immediately issue a verbal warning. 4) If between February 1 through January 31, a correctional staff member is late more than three (3) minutes more than one (1) time, then the 6 The testimony regarding the number of gates was not entirely clear. 7 As part of roll call, there is also a distribution of or verification of essential work tools such as handcuffs, cut- down tool, etc. 8 See Jt. Exh. 2. 5

6 correctional staff member s Assistant Deputy Superintendent shall commence progressive discipline. 5) For purposes of calculating the # of occasions tardy pursuant to this policy, each correctional staff member shall default to zero on February 1 of each year. Nothing in this policy shall allow for the purging or deleting from a correctional staff member s personnel file the multi- year history of tardy. As the Turco Memorandum above references progressive discipline as well as verbal warnings, WSO s progressive or corrective discipline policy seems relevant. It provides in pertinent part: 1. Corrective discipline is a concept designed to reinforce self- discipline and good behavior... discipline is not as much a punishment system as a procedure for modifying inappropriate behavior. In a broad sense, discipline maintains orderliness. It encourages behavior which any reasonable person would expect from an employee normal and orderly conduct. Corrective discipline is predicated on the idea that management has informed employees of the performance and behavior expected of them. The employee then becomes subject to corrective disciplinary action to the extent he/she violates the rules of the organization.... A progressive order of discipline is: a. Counseling... b. Verbal Warning... The supervisor will state the infraction and the actions the employee must take in order to improve within an agreed period of time.... The supervisor, or designee will document the verbal warning on a memorandum to the employee, with a copy to be placed in the employee s personnel file.... c. Written warning: A notice in writing to the employee that further disciplinary action will be taken unless the employee s performance/ behavior improves. A copy of the written warning will be placed in the employee s personnel file.... (WCSO , dated Augsut 2012) Officer Roy s Disciplinary Record in 2012 It is undisputed that prior to 2012, the Grievant had no prior discipline on his record. During 2012, however, several disciplinary measures were recommended 6

7 or issued against him. With one exception, all the disciplinary actions related to asserted tardiness and/or absence at roll call. 9 Those instances are set out below: February 7, March 4, April 25, and May 19, 2012: Roy failed to punch in at work and was marked as late by the captain or lieutenant conducting roll call. May 25: Roy was marked as late for roll call. Roy arrived after 7:00 A.M. but apparently failed to punch in. At that time, Officer Roy was referred to Asst. Supt. Paul Legendre for a disciplinary hearing. At the hearing, Roy s attendance record and the Turco policy were reviewed. In his report of the disciplinary hearing to Superintendent Jenkins, Legendre wrote that he was commencing progressive discipline and issuing a verbal warning to Roy. However, evidence establishes that no written confirmation of the verbal warning was provided to Roy or to the Union, nor was written confirmation placed in the Grievant s personnel file. Roy testified that it was the first time he was made aware of the 2005 Turco policy. He did state in his testimony, however, that Legendre gave him a verbal warning that day. 10 June 11, 2012: Lt. Giangregorio marked the Grievant as late. On that date, Officer Roy failed to punch in. Again, Roy was referred to Legendre for a disciplinary hearing. Legendre reviewed Roy s attendance record with him. In a memorandum to Supt. Jenkins, Legendre reported that he was continuing progressive discipline and issuing a written warning. Apart from Legendre s statement that he was recommending a written warning, there is no evidence that the warning itself was ever provided to Roy or the Union or inserted in Roy s personnel file. 11 July 24, 2012: Capt. Chas. Fuller marked Roy as late for roll call. Apparently, Roy did not attend roll call at all that day. He punched in at 6:55 A.M. Regarding the incident, Asst.Supt. Legendre held a disciplinary hearing with 9 The exception was a 30- day suspension issued in September 2012, for disrespectful treatment towards a Human Resources official. 10 Tr. 3, p. 241, It was at the June 12 meeting that the Grievant explained he had sleep apnea that sometimes affected his ability to arrive on time. While that was ultimately explored by the Administration, it was not considered to excuse any tardiness. 7

8 Roy on August 10, Subsequently, Legendre memorialized the meeting to both the Grievant and to Supt. Jenkins. He wrote, I am recommending to the Sheriff [Jenkins] that you be suspended for one day for violations of the Roll Call Tardiness Policy. Roy testified that he never received further notice of the suspension. Supt. Jenkins testified that Roy served the 1- day suspension but that it was served concurrently with a 30- day suspension Roy received for an unrelated infraction. There is no evidence establishing that the Employer ever explained to Roy in writing or otherwise that he was receiving a 1- day suspension and that it was being served concurrently with an unrelated 30- day suspension. October 28, 2012: The Employer asserts that Roy did not punch in until 6:54 A.M., but Lt. James Giangregorio did not mark him as late or absent. Lt. Giangregorio testified, however, that he spoke to Roy and to all of his officers that day explaining what he, Giangregorio, characterized as the new roll call tardiness policy. At the arbitration, Lt. Giangregorio explained the new tardiness policy as he understood it. He said that officers are to be seated in the roll call room at 6:45 and that roll call is to begin at that time. He further testified to his understanding that any officer not present in the roll call room was to be marked as late. He indicated this was the case even if the officer had punched in early or on time. November 9, 2012: Roy punched in early at 6:44 A.M. However, Capt. Anderson marked him as being late to roll call. November 25, 2012: Roy punched in on time at 6:45 A.M. but was marked as late by Lt. Giangregorio for failing to attend or be on time for roll call. On December 3, Asst. Supt. Legendre held a disciplinary hearing. Legendre s report of the meeting states that Officer Roy was not in the roll call room on either November 9 or 25. Legendre concluded by recommending a two- day suspension of the Grievant. Roy appealed the two- day suspension to Supt. Jenkins. After Supt. Jenkins sustained the two- day suspension, the Union filed the grievance on Roy s behalf that resulted in this arbitration. 8

9 The Union s Response The Union contends that prior to issuing the two- day suspension at issue in this arbitration, the WSO did not follow its own progressive discipline policy. As set out above, the progressive discipline policy requires, for example, that confirmation of verbal and written warnings be placed in the employee s personnel file. Here, neither a memorandum confirming the verbal warning nor the written warning was placed in Roy s file. Similarly, Roy received nothing in writing confirming a one- day disciplinary suspension. Human Resources Director Pellegrino, in a communication dated November 2012, reported that the last discipline issued to Roy was a written warning. She did not reference a one- day suspension. Supt. Jenkins testified that the one- day suspension was served concurrently with Roy s thirty- day disciplinary suspension unrelated to attendance. Even if Jenkins assertion is correct, there is no evidence that Roy himself knew he was concurrently serving a one- day suspension related to a roll- call attendance issue. The Union s position in part is that if notice of the discipline that preceded the two- day suspension was never served on Officer Roy as required by WSO s own progressive/corrective discipline policy, then the discipline for November 9 and 25 could not advance to a 2- day suspension. In addition, however, to its argument that the lower steps of progressive discipline are invalidated, the Union s second challenge to the 2- day suspension is based on an essential requirement of just cause: notice and forewarning of conduct that will result in discipline. The Union contends that Roy was deemed late pursuant to a new tardiness policy about which there was inadequate notice. The greatest disagreement and the most testimony in this case revolves around the question whether the Evangelitis Administration in 2012 changed the longstanding practice regarding attendance at roll call. It is the Union s position that prior to 2012 and except for the instances in November involving Officer Roy, no 9

10 officer was ever marked late and disciplined for same, if the officer arrived at the facility and punched in by a quarter of the hour. The Union s position is that officers who punched- in by quarter to the hour were deemed on time. 12 It asserts, therefore, that prior to the shift in practice, Roy, who punched in on time on November 9 and 25 would not have been subject to discipline tied to those two dates. The Employer s Position The Employer takes the position that even if an officer punches in on time at the time clock, he will be considered late if he is not present for at least some portion of roll call. According to the Employer, this policy is consistent with what has been spelled out in writing since the 2005 Turco policy and cannot be considered a new or changed policy. On both November 9 and 25, 2012, Officer Roy punched in on time. However, the Administration concluded that Roy was not present in the roll call room. Based on that conclusion, Legendre recommended that, in alignment with progressive discipline, a two- day suspension was warranted. Officer Roy, the Grievant, did not accept Legendre s recommendation and asked that it be appealed or considered by Superintendent Jenkins. On December 6, 2012, after considering all the documentation, Supt. Jenkins accepted Asst. Supt. Legendre s recommendation that the Grievant receive a two- day unpaid suspension. It is the two- day suspension that is being grieved in this arbitration. The Practice Then and Now on Reporting to Roll Call A critical question in this case is whether the Employer s practice in regard to the roll- call tardiness policy changed in Five witnesses testified consistently that under the Glodis Administration, when Attorney Turco was the Superintendent, the lieutenant or captain leading roll call had discretion as to when and whether to 12 Union Brief at p

11 mark an officer as late for roll call. All five witnesses testified that never in their experience was an officer disciplined for being late to roll call if he punched in on or before a quarter of the hour. Attorney Turco testified as follows: Roll call consisted of a 15- minute window, during which officers had to punch in and get themselves to the appropriate room where the roll could be called. He testified that the call of the roll was purposefully staggered a few minutes, typically about five minutes, so as to allow officers enough time to arrive, punch in and get through security. Roll call never started at a quarter of the hour, as it was understood that officers could not possibly be in two places at once. Officers were to punch in by a quarter of and then head to roll call. Turco testified that the possibility of starting roll call at a quarter of was specifically considered during the Glodis Administration. However, knowing that such a policy would require officers to punch in prior to :45 and therefore require paid overtime, the concept was never embraced. 13 According to Turco, discipline was rendered strictly in terms of the punch- in times as reflected in the KRONOS reports. He testified that never in his ten years at the facility did he know of someone who punched in by :45 but was disciplined. Asst. Deputy Supt. McMillan testified that prior to 2012, if an officer punched in by a quarter of and was at roll call by the time it started, typically at ten of, he would not be marked late or disciplined. He added that even if roll call had just ended, the officer would not be marked as late or disciplined. In the past, he testified, the senior shift officer had discretion in this regard that they no longer have. He testified that he has never known an officer who punched in on time but was nonetheless marked late and disciplined. 14 Lt. Giangregorio testified that, prior to the current Administration, so long as an officer punched in on time (6:45) he would be marked as present (not late) or absent and would not be disciplined as a result. In his ten years he did not know anyone who punched in by :45 but was disciplined for tardiness. He testified to his 13 Tr. III, 57,

12 dismay that as of about October 2012 he has been instructed to start roll call at a quarter of the hour (6:45). He indicated that this is sometimes even difficult for the senior officer to have everything in place by 6:45. He testified that he announced this tightening of the policy at roll call. However, at no time was a formal or official written explanation of the change disseminated to officers or the Union. Officers Warren Lohnes and the Grievant Roy essentially described the same prior practice that Turco, McMillan and Giangregorio described. Supt. Jenkins was the only witness who asserted that past practice and present practice haven t changed. He testified that the senior shift officers retain discretion as to whether to mark an officer late. He also testified that so long as an officer punched in on time and arrived at roll call, even at the very end, it was not required that he be marked late. However, as the Union pointed out, standards that Jenkins reviewed and possibly amended in July 2012 specifically, WCSO A 15 appear to corroborate the testimony of Turco, McMillan, Giangregorio, Lohnes, and Roy, who asserted that the policy did indeed change. The A standards seem inconsistent with Jenkins s described practice, which is flexible as to the time an officer may present inside the roll call room without being marked late. Also, they do not seem flexible as to when the senior shift officer must begin roll call. Specifically, they read as follows in relevant part: (1) POLICY It is the policy of the Worcester County Sheriff s Office to establish and maintain a roll call system designed to enhance the flow of information from one security shift to another security shift. (2) PURPOSE It is the purpose of this policy to establish procedures governing roll call operations in accordance with management directive promulgated by the Sheriff. (3) PROCEDURES See Union Exh. 4. B. Line staff... on standard shifts shall stand roll call in proper uniform at the designated roll call area. 12

13 C. Applicable staff shall clock in and report to the designated roll call area in preparation for the staff of roll call which shall commence 15 minutes prior to the start of their scheduled shift (i.e., 0645, 1445, and 2245 hours).... J. Roll call format is as follows: 1. Off- going senior shift officer prepares attendance sheet in advance of roll call. 2. Both off- going and incoming senior shift officers conduct roll call. 3. Incoming senior shift officer calls roll call to order at quarter of the hour. 4. Incoming senior shift officer calls the roll noting present, absent or late and refers anyone absent or late to the Captain s office. (Attachment 1) Incoming senior shift officer dismisses roll call. (emphasis added) Asked about the above standards, Supt. Jenkins testified that, realistically, roll call was actually called or got started closer to 6:48. No evidence was presented to indicate that the standards (WCSO A) had been disseminated. Accordingly, I conclude that the Employer s practice did change in regard to punching in and arriving at roll call. At least one change distinguishes the discipline Roy received in November 2012 from what he or other officers experienced in the past: he was disciplined for tardiness even though all parties agree that he punched in on time on the dates on which the discipline rests November 9 and 25. According to the preponderance of the testimony, past discipline has depended largely on the punch- in time rather than timely attendance at roll call. Given that roll call serves an important purpose at the correctional facility, the question arises as to whether Roy was actually at roll call on November 9 and 25. On the facts of those two days, Roy s testimony was tentative. He said that he believed he arrived at one of the two November roll calls in dispute toward the end. If Roy s memory is accurate, then he apparently did not make that assertion when he met with Legendre. In that regard Jenkins wrote, During your meeting with Asst. Supt. Legendre, you not only failed to offer any reasonable explanation or excuse for your tardiness, but simply refused to acknowledge or discuss the specific 13

14 behavior that led to the disciplinary referral. If Roy appeared for at least the last part of roll call, it was incumbent on him to explain that fact during the disciplinary hearing and not at the arbitration hearing many months later Written evidence presented in regard to Roy s attendance at roll call is equally conflicting. On both dates one officer marked Roy as late not absent but Asst. Supt. Legendre s reports stated that Roy was not there at all. Even if it is true, as Legendre reported, that Roy missed roll call entirely, the past practice, according to the five witnesses noted above, was perhaps loose enough that Roy did not foresee that although he punched in on time he could be disciplined for arriving late for the reading of the synopsis. Forewarning and notice as to what conduct may result in discipline is a clear requirement of discipline supported by just cause. Here, the Union asserts that the notice requirement has not been met. More specifically, it asserts that because no other officer who punched in on time was disciplined at any level or even marked as late, just cause for the discipline has not been established. Accordingly, the Union asserts that Roy was unfairly disciplined and could not have known that having punched in on time he could nonetheless be deemed late and subject to discipline. I concur with the Union that the evidence supports the conclusion that prior to Roy s suspension no one who punched in on time was disciplined for being late to roll call. Did the Employer meet the notice requirement? Two instances of rather casual notice comments, even were mentioned in testimony. Officer Roy testified that on November 9, Capt. Daignault, the senior officer on that shift, told him that to be on time, he had to be present at the start of roll call. 16 As noted above, Lt. Giangregorio testified that on October 28, 2012, he had announced the change in a 16 The Captain s reference to the start of roll call is also referenced on page 3 of Joint Exhibit 3. 14

15 roll call. However, for such a far- reaching change in terms of discipline, an official written communication announcing the change was in order. I therefore conclude that adequate prior notice was not present in this case. I am unable to conclude, however, that the changes to the roll call format were intended for the purpose of targeting the Grievant because of his Union activism. The evidence presented is insufficient. Was there other evidence to support the Union s assertion that the Employer failed in its burden of proving that there was just cause for the two- day suspension imposed on Officer Roy based on the events of November 9 and 25? It is difficult to know whether the failure to provide copies of the verbal and written warnings to Roy means the suspensions are essentially void. Officer Roy was told verbally suspensions were being recommended, but the requirement of written confirmation to the Grievant, the Union and the personnel file was not followed particularly regarding the one- day suspension. I conclude that Roy likely did not understand he was being suspended for one day. For one thing, that was the point in time when he raised the sleep apnea issue and no doubt hoped that it would deter any contemplated discipline. More importantly, Officer Roy never actually served the one- day suspension separate from the thirty- day unrelated suspension. As no one informed him that the one- day was being served concurrently with the thirty- day suspension, Roy had no way of knowing he had been suspended one day based on roll- call tardiness. For these reasons the one- day suspension was clearly a surprise and should be considered void. That being the case, the most Roy could have been disciplined for the November 9 and 25 instances was one day, not two. The harder question, however, is whether, in light of the compelling testimony of Lt. Giangregorio, Asst. Deputy Supt. McMillan, and former Superintendent Turco, it is fair in this particular instance to sustain a suspension of any length based on the evidence regarding November 9 and

16 Listening to McMillan, Turco, and Giangregorio, I cannot conclude that in the past, anyone other than Roy who punched in on time was disciplined for roll- call tardiness. Furthermore, it is beyond question that under the Glodis Administration, roll call was never expected to begin right at 6:45. Turco testified that were that the case, extra overtime would have to have been paid because officers would have been required to punch in between two and four minutes prior to a quarter of the hour. Nothing in this decision should be interpreted as a statement on the Employer s ability to devise a roll- call format that serves to ensure that the intended purpose of roll call is being accomplished. Every single witness testified to the importance of roll call.. As the directive quoted above states, It is the policy of the Worcester County Sheriff s Office to establish and maintain a roll call system designed to enhance the flow of information from one security shift to another security shift. If the Employer concluded that the past practice was a little too fluid or flexible to ensure that, within a reasonable time after punching in, all officers were at roll call and hearing the synopsis, it is within its managerial prerogative to explore and devise ways to improve upon the policy and its practice. At a minimum, however, the Employer has to give official notice to the Union and to all officers that the practice as they have known it is being changed. 17 During 2012 at least its latter half there was a reasonable amount of ambiguity about what was or was not required. Some of that ambiguity may have arisen from the Turco policy itself. 18 This complicated case demonstrates that clarity and reasonableness regarding the fifteen- minute window open before each shift will 17 If a change imposes either a duty to bargain about the decision or the impact of the decision, then Management must carry out its contractual/legal obligation. However, that should never entirely tie Management s hands. 18 That policy statement seems sufficiently imprecise that, as demonstrated in this case, both sides were able to interpret it in a way that supported its own contention. 16

17 be invaluable to the Employer, to the Union, to the individual officers, and to the population they all serve. AWARD For all of the above reasons, there was not just cause for the two- day suspension imposed on the Grievant and the grievance is sustained. The two- day suspension shall be expunged from the Grievant s record. Date: February 20, 2014 Sharon Henderson Ellis Arbitrator 17

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR. In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between BARGAINING UNIT OF THE GREEN BAY POLICE DEPARTMENT. and CITY OF GREEN BAY

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR. In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between BARGAINING UNIT OF THE GREEN BAY POLICE DEPARTMENT. and CITY OF GREEN BAY BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between BARGAINING UNIT OF THE GREEN BAY POLICE DEPARTMENT and CITY OF GREEN BAY Case 294 No. 57695 Appearances: Mr. Thomas J. Parins,

More information

JUN 2 0 Z005 REGULAR ARBITRATION PANEL

JUN 2 0 Z005 REGULAR ARBITRATION PANEL 1 1 c zs99~ REGULAR ARBITRATION PANEL In the Matter of Arbitration ) Grievant: Lnenicka between ) UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE ) (hereinafter "USPS") ) and ) Post Office: Yakima, WA Case No : EO1N-4E-D

More information

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between SHEBOYGAN COUNTY INSTITUTIONS EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 2427, AFSCME, AFL-CIO Case 265 No. 52330 MA-8920 and SHEBOYGAN COUNTY Appearances:

More information

WARREN COUNTY NEW YORK, Employer BRIEF AND CLOSING STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF KATHLEEN PLUMMER

WARREN COUNTY NEW YORK, Employer BRIEF AND CLOSING STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF KATHLEEN PLUMMER STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF WARREN IN THE MATTER OF THE HEARING UNDER 75 OF THE CIVIL SERVICE LAW BETWEEN WARREN COUNTY NEW YORK, Employer against KATHLEEN A. PLUMMER, Employee BRIEF AND CLOSING STATEMENT

More information

an Opinion and Award in its case number A Hearing was held at the University, on

an Opinion and Award in its case number A Hearing was held at the University, on 12-21-1998 09:58 P.02 In the Matter of the Arbitration Between: CASE: Frankland #1 University -and- UNION Re: Brian FISH - 10 Day Suspension The undersigned, Kenneth P. Frankland, was mutually selected

More information

BEFORE THE ALASKA OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS ON REFERRAL FROM THE BOARD OF NURSING

BEFORE THE ALASKA OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS ON REFERRAL FROM THE BOARD OF NURSING BEFORE THE ALASKA OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS ON REFERRAL FROM THE BOARD OF NURSING IN THE MATTER OF: ) ) J. DETTE AVALON ) ) Board Case No. 2011-000175 DECISION I. INTRODUCTION This case presents

More information

Arbitration Award. Saundria Bordone, Arbitrator, selected by parties through procedures of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service

Arbitration Award. Saundria Bordone, Arbitrator, selected by parties through procedures of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service Arbitration Award In re Multi-County Correctional Center and Fraternal Order of Police, Ohio Labor Council 124 LA (BNA) 1519 FMCS Case No. 07/03923 December 7, 2007 Saundria Bordone, Arbitrator, selected

More information

WAS THE DISCHARGE OF THE GRIEVANT FOR JUST CAUSE, AND IF NOT, WHAT SHOULD BE THE REMEDY?

WAS THE DISCHARGE OF THE GRIEVANT FOR JUST CAUSE, AND IF NOT, WHAT SHOULD BE THE REMEDY? IN THE MATTER OF THE Glazer #2 VOLUNTARY ARBITRATION Employer, And Union. * * * * * * * * * * * ARBITRATION OPINION AND AWARD * * * * * * * * * * * ISSUE WAS THE DISCHARGE OF THE GRIEVANT FOR JUST CAUSE,

More information

STATE OF WISCONSIN BEFORE THE WISCONSIN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

STATE OF WISCONSIN BEFORE THE WISCONSIN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION STATE OF WISCONSIN BEFORE THE WISCONSIN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - : FENNIMORE EDUCATION ASSOCIATION - : SOUTHWEST TEACHERS UNITED, : : Complainant, : Case

More information

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR. In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between MILWAUKEE DEPUTY SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION. and

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR. In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between MILWAUKEE DEPUTY SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION. and BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between MILWAUKEE DEPUTY SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION and MILWAUKEE COUNTY (SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT) Case 708 No. 69499 Case 726 No. 69683 Case

More information

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR. In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between MILWAUKEE DEPUTY SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION. and

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR. In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between MILWAUKEE DEPUTY SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION. and BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between MILWAUKEE DEPUTY SHERIFFS ASSOCIATION and MILWAUKEE COUNTY (SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT) Case 546 No. 63374 Appearances: Eggert Law

More information

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR. In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR. In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between WINNEBAGO COUNTY HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES UNION, LOCAL 1903, AFSCME, AFL-CIO and WINNEBAGO COUNTY Case 311 No. 57139 Appearances:

More information

FEDERAL MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION SERVICES

FEDERAL MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION SERVICES Frankland #6 FEDERAL MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION SERVICES In the Matter of the Arbitration Between: Union -and- Employer --------------------------------------------------------- Gr: Vacation Schedule/

More information

STATE OF NEW JERSEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION. Docket No. SN SYNOPSIS

STATE OF NEW JERSEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION. Docket No. SN SYNOPSIS P.E.R.C. NO. 2010-19 STATE OF NEW JERSEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION In the Matter of CITY OF NEWARK, Petitioner, -and- Docket No. SN-2009-049 NEWARK SUPERIOR OFFICERS ASSOCIATION,

More information

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR. In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between MILWAUKEE COUNTY. and MILWAUKEE DEPUTY SHERIFF S ASSOCIATION

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR. In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between MILWAUKEE COUNTY. and MILWAUKEE DEPUTY SHERIFF S ASSOCIATION BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between MILWAUKEE COUNTY and MILWAUKEE DEPUTY SHERIFF S ASSOCIATION Case 668 No. 68208 (Shift Selection Grievance) Appearances: Timothy

More information

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between TEAMSTERS, LOCAL NO. 75 and Case 37 No. 52884 MA-9137 THE VILLAGE OF ALLOUEZ Appearances: Mr. David J. Condon, Attorney at Law,

More information

SCHOOL DISTRICT DATE OF ADOPTION: 10/17/2011

SCHOOL DISTRICT DATE OF ADOPTION: 10/17/2011 DEERFIELD COMMUNITY CODE: 527 ADM(1) SCHOOL DISTRICT DATE OF ADOPTION: 10/17/2011 EMPLOYEE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES (DISCIPLINE, TERMINATION AND WORKPLACE SAFETY) The purpose of this procedure is to provide

More information

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - : In the Matter of the Arbitration : of a Dispute Between : : LOCAL NO. 316, INTERNATIONAL : ASSOCIATION OF FIRE FIGHTERS : : Case 137 and

More information

TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, Petitioner, vs. LINDA A. JOHNSON, Grievant

TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, Petitioner, vs. LINDA A. JOHNSON, Grievant University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Tennessee Department of State, Opinions from the Administrative Procedures Division Law 6-2-2008 TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT

More information

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between MILWAUKEE DEPUTY SHERIFFS ASSOCATION and MILWAUKEE COUNTY Case 533 No. 62634 (Anthony J. D Acquisto Grievance) Appearances: Jonathan

More information

Arbitration Decision i United States Postal Service in Case No. S1N-3D-D The Issue

Arbitration Decision i United States Postal Service in Case No. S1N-3D-D The Issue #-6x713 In the matter between Arbitration Decision i United States Postal Service in Case No. S1N-3D-D-9534 Mobile, Alabama (C. C. Fountain) t and i Mobile, AL National Association of ;fail Carriers i

More information

ARTICLE 8 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE

ARTICLE 8 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE ARTICLE 8 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE A. GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. A grievance is a written complaint by an individual employee, a group of employees, or UPTE that the University has violated a specific provision

More information

(:::--: at / 6 4 ~_3 6

(:::--: at / 6 4 ~_3 6 (:::--: at / 6 4 ~_3 6 REGULAR ARBITRATION PANEL In the Matter of the Arbitration ) GRIEVANT : Daniel L. Corban ( between ) POST OFFICE: Lakeland FL ( UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE ) USPS CASE NO: H94N-4H-

More information

ARBITRATION DECISION NO.: 158. UNION: OCSEA, Local 11, AFSCME, AFL-CIO. EMPLOYER: Ohio Student Loan Commission. DATE OF ARBITRATION: August 18, 1988

ARBITRATION DECISION NO.: 158. UNION: OCSEA, Local 11, AFSCME, AFL-CIO. EMPLOYER: Ohio Student Loan Commission. DATE OF ARBITRATION: August 18, 1988 ARBITRATION DECISION NO.: 158 UNION: OCSEA, Local 11, AFSCME, AFL-CIO EMPLOYER: Ohio Student Loan Commission DATE OF ARBITRATION: August 18, 1988 DATE OF DECISION: August 18, 1988 GRIEVANT: Dan Myers OCB

More information

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between CITY OF FOND DU LAC EMPLOYEES LOCAL 1366, AFSCME, AFL-CIO and Case 133 No. 54999 MA-9862 (Baxter Grievance) CITY OF FOND DU LAC

More information

Chapter 19 Procedures for Disciplinary Action and Appeal

Chapter 19 Procedures for Disciplinary Action and Appeal Chapter 19 Procedures for Disciplinary Action and Appeal Bargaining unit refer to contract 19.1 GENERAL PROVISIONS ON DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS 19.1.1 DISCIPLINARY ACTION ONLY PURSUANT TO THIS RULE: A permanent

More information

ARTICLE 21 JUST CAUSE, DUE PROCESS AND PROGRESSIVE DISCIPLINE FTA COUNTER SEP 12, 2013

ARTICLE 21 JUST CAUSE, DUE PROCESS AND PROGRESSIVE DISCIPLINE FTA COUNTER SEP 12, 2013 ARTICLE 21 - JUST CAUSE, DUE PROCESS AND PROGRESSIVE DISCIPLINE 1. No unit member shall be disciplined, reduced in rank or compensation, nor otherwise subjected to adverse action as a result of alleged

More information

Section VI.F.: Student Discipline Procedures for Non-Academic Misconduct

Section VI.F.: Student Discipline Procedures for Non-Academic Misconduct Section VI.F.: Student Discipline Procedures for n-academic Misconduct These procedures supplement and clarify Section VI.F of the Lone Star College System District Policy Manual ( Policy Manual ) last

More information

REGULAR REGIONAL ARBITRATION PANEL. Discipline. ) Termination

REGULAR REGIONAL ARBITRATION PANEL. Discipline. ) Termination c0i44o( REGULAR REGIONAL ARBITRATION PANEL Discipline Arbitration between UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE ) Opinion and Award Kenner, Louisiana ) pertaining to and ) 5lN - 3Q-D-26601 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

More information

This grievance arises from the refusal of the School District to rescind a letter

This grievance arises from the refusal of the School District to rescind a letter IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION BETWEEN: CASE: GRISSOM #1 UNION Case No. 54 AND GR: Mary T. Appel, Ph.D./ Resignation SOMEPLACE PUBLIC SCHOOLS ARBITRATION OPINION AND AWARD This Arbitration took place

More information

S12Y1781. IN THE MATTER OF SIDNEY JOE JONES. In 2011, Sidney Joe Jones (State Bar No ) was convicted of

S12Y1781. IN THE MATTER OF SIDNEY JOE JONES. In 2011, Sidney Joe Jones (State Bar No ) was convicted of In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: June 3, 2013 S12Y1781. IN THE MATTER OF SIDNEY JOE JONES. PER CURIAM. 1 In 2011, Sidney Joe Jones (State Bar No. 734128) was convicted of eleven misdemeanors, including

More information

CANADIAN RAILWAY OFFICE OF ARBITRATION & DISPUTE RESOLUTION CASE NO Heard in Montreal, April 12, Concerning CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY.

CANADIAN RAILWAY OFFICE OF ARBITRATION & DISPUTE RESOLUTION CASE NO Heard in Montreal, April 12, Concerning CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY. CANADIAN RAILWAY OFFICE OF ARBITRATION & DISPUTE RESOLUTION CASE NO. 4631 Heard in Montreal, April 12, 2018 Concerning CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY And TEAMSTERS CANADA RAIL CONFERENCE DISPUTE: Appeal regarding

More information

CITRUS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT STUDENT SERVICES

CITRUS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT STUDENT SERVICES CITRUS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT STUDENT SERVICES AP 5520 References: STUDENT DISCIPLINE PROCEDURES Education Code Sections 66017, 66300, 72122, 76030 et seq., and 76120; California Penal Code Section

More information

University of Wisconsin System Administration Academic Staff Personnel Policies and Procedures

University of Wisconsin System Administration Academic Staff Personnel Policies and Procedures University of Wisconsin System Administration Academic Staff Personnel Policies and Procedures 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS UWSA CHAPTER 1. COVERAGE AND DEFINITION 1.01 COVERAGE...4 1.02 DEFINITION...4 UWSA CHAPTER

More information

SELF-EXECUTING RlJL. The consequences of self-executing rules can be se-

SELF-EXECUTING RlJL. The consequences of self-executing rules can be se- SELF-EXECUTING RlJL There are a few rules in almost every agreement which provide that when a given circumstance occurs, certain specific results must automatically follow. Most such rules simply state

More information

Misconceptions about the Sunshine Act abound, Part 1

Misconceptions about the Sunshine Act abound, Part 1 Misconceptions about the Sunshine Act abound, Part 1 PNA's legal department receives hundreds of hotline calls each year about public access to government meetings and records. Every day a novel problem

More information

MEDICAL STAFF FAIR HEARING PLAN

MEDICAL STAFF FAIR HEARING PLAN Stuart, Florida Last Amended October 25, 2012 Last reviewed in its entirety by Medical Staff Bylaws Committee: 2/07; 7/28/08; 7/14/10; 07/02/12; 7/16/14; 7/11/16 Revised: 5/24/01; 6/28/07; 10/25/12 Reformatted:

More information

17B-005. Civil injunction proceedings. A. Petition for civil injunction. If chief disciplinary counsel or, when necessary, chief disciplinary counsel

17B-005. Civil injunction proceedings. A. Petition for civil injunction. If chief disciplinary counsel or, when necessary, chief disciplinary counsel 17B-005. Civil injunction proceedings. A. Petition for civil injunction. If chief disciplinary counsel or, when necessary, chief disciplinary counsel s designee, determines that civil injunction proceedings

More information

ARBITRATION DECISION NO.: 482. UNION: OCSEA, Local 11, AFSCME, AFL-CIO

ARBITRATION DECISION NO.: 482. UNION: OCSEA, Local 11, AFSCME, AFL-CIO ARBITRATION DECISION NO.: 482 UNION: OCSEA, Local 11, AFSCME, AFL-CIO EMPLOYER: Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections, Allen Correctional Institution DATE OF ARBITRATION: December 3, 1992 DATE OF

More information

ENTRY ORDER SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO MARCH TERM, 2015

ENTRY ORDER SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO MARCH TERM, 2015 Note: Decisions of a three-justice panel are not to be considered as precedent before any tribunal. ENTRY ORDER SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 2014-406 MARCH TERM, 2015 George Kingston III } APPEALED FROM: }

More information

CORRECTIVE ACTION/DISCIPLINARY-GRIEVANCE ACTION POLICY Volunteer Personnel

CORRECTIVE ACTION/DISCIPLINARY-GRIEVANCE ACTION POLICY Volunteer Personnel Virginia Beach Department of Emergency Medical Services CASS # 106.03.01/ 106.3.01 Index # Administration CORRECTIVE ACTION/DISCIPLINARY-GRIEVANCE ACTION POLICY Volunteer Personnel PURPOSE: To provide

More information

STATE OF NEW JERSEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION. Docket No. SN

STATE OF NEW JERSEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION. Docket No. SN P.E.R.C. NO. 2016-83 STATE OF NEW JERSEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION In the Matter of CITY OF ELIZABETH, Petitioner, -and- Docket No. SN-2016-046 ELIZABETH SUPERIOR OFFICERS ASSOCIATION,

More information

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE 7365 DESERT COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE 7365 DESERT COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE 7365 DESERT COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT DISCIPLINE AND DISMISSAL CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES Grounds for Discipline Disciplinary process is defined within the Collective Bargaining Agreement

More information

STATE OF NEW JERSEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION. Docket No. SN SYNOPSIS

STATE OF NEW JERSEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION. Docket No. SN SYNOPSIS P.E.R.C. NO. 2013-13 STATE OF NEW JERSEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION In the Matter of CITY OF RAHWAY, Petitioner, -and- Docket No. SN-2012-004 FMBA LOCAL 33, Respondent. SYNOPSIS

More information

ARTICLE 4 Grievance Procedure

ARTICLE 4 Grievance Procedure ARTICLE 4 Grievance Procedure A. Definition: Any claim by an employee(s), or the Union, that there has been a violation, misinterpretation or misapplication of any provisions of this Agreement may be processed

More information

PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY

PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY EMPLOYEE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE EMPLOYEE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE Table of Contents Section 1.0 Objective Page 1 Section 2.0 Coverage of Personnel Page 1 Section 3.0 Definition of a Grievance

More information

The objectives of corrective discipline can be stated as follows:

The objectives of corrective discipline can be stated as follows: Article IX.A.3.n. Corrective Discipline A. Intent This program of corrective discipline is intended to help promote and maintain a high level of acceptable performance on the part of all regular secretaries,

More information

Handling Complaints Against Police. March 25, 2015

Handling Complaints Against Police. March 25, 2015 Handling Complaints Against Police March 25, 2015 Your Cooperation is Needed Please mute your phone *6 To ask questions and open your line *6 This will help all of our friends! PSAB s Blended Training

More information

Kingsley v. Hendrickson, et al.

Kingsley v. Hendrickson, et al. Kingsley v. Hendrickson, et al. The following summary is merely a compilation of some of the statements attributable to witnesses and others who interacted with or witnessed the interaction among and/or

More information

TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY, Department/, Petitioner, vs. CSGP 06-52VINCENT TUROCY, Grievant/, Respondent

TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY, Department/, Petitioner, vs. CSGP 06-52VINCENT TUROCY, Grievant/, Respondent University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Tennessee Department of State, Opinions from the Administrative Procedures Division Law 4-19-2007 TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT

More information

ARTICLE 28 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE AND ARBITRATION

ARTICLE 28 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE AND ARBITRATION ARTICLE 28 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE AND ARBITRATION 28.1 Policy. The purpose of the Article is to provide for the consideration and resolution of grievances. (a) The procedures in this Article shall be the

More information

AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION OPINION OF ARBITRATOR. In the instant cause, the Grievants have alleged that the Employer failed to properly

AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION OPINION OF ARBITRATOR. In the instant cause, the Grievants have alleged that the Employer failed to properly Cook #1 AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION BETWEEN UNION -and- EMPLOYER OPINION OF ARBITRATOR By: JULIAN ABELE COOK, JR. Arbitrator In the instant cause, the Grievants have

More information

PART XV: Local Trials and Appeals; Internal Appeals Procedures; Reinstatement Procedure; and Member Discipline

PART XV: Local Trials and Appeals; Internal Appeals Procedures; Reinstatement Procedure; and Member Discipline PART XV: Local Trials and Appeals; Internal Appeals Procedures; Reinstatement Procedure; and Member Discipline 1. Local Trial Procedures ARTICLE XX CWA CONSTITUTION I. CHARGES, DUTIES AND RIGHTS A. Charges

More information

RULE 19 APPEALS TO THE CAREER SERVICE HEARING OFFICE (Effective January 10, 2018; Rule Revision Memo 33D)

RULE 19 APPEALS TO THE CAREER SERVICE HEARING OFFICE (Effective January 10, 2018; Rule Revision Memo 33D) RULE 19 APPEALS TO THE CAREER SERVICE HEARING OFFICE (Effective January 10, 2018; Rule Revision Memo 33D) Purpose Statement: The purpose of this rule is to provide a fair, efficient, and speedy administrative

More information

^jei^ Cf/i/pQ. '"'''<n REGULAR ARBITRATION PANEL IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION

^jei^ Cf/i/pQ. ''''<n REGULAR ARBITRATION PANEL IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION ^jei^ REGULAR ARBITRATION PANEL IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION between UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE and NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LETTER CARRIERS, AFL-CIO GRIEVANT: Class Action POST OFFICE: NEW HAVEN- ALLINGTOWN

More information

ESCAMBIA COUNTY FIRE-RESCUE

ESCAMBIA COUNTY FIRE-RESCUE Patrick T Grace, Fire Chief Page 1 of 5 PURPOSE: Personnel that fail to follow established ECFR rules, policies, or guidelines will be subject to disciplinary action. OBJECTIVE: To provide personnel with

More information

APPENDIX C CHAPTER 2: ETHICS PROCEDURES

APPENDIX C CHAPTER 2: ETHICS PROCEDURES APPENDIX C CHAPTER 2: ETHICS PROCEDURES These Ethics Procedures describe the steps for handling questions of a neutral s fitness that involve the neutral s character or alleged unethical conduct. Thus,

More information

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PEORIA HEIGHTS SCHOOL DISTRICT #325 BUS DRIVERS, IFT, AFT, AFL-CIO AND

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PEORIA HEIGHTS SCHOOL DISTRICT #325 BUS DRIVERS, IFT, AFT, AFL-CIO AND AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PEORIA HEIGHTS SCHOOL DISTRICT #325 BUS DRIVERS, IFT, AFT, AFL-CIO AND THE BOARD OF EDUCATION, PEORIA HEIGHTS COMMUNITY UNIT SCHOOL DISTRICT #325 2013-2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS PARTIES

More information

ARTICLE 3 ARBITRATION PROCEDURE

ARTICLE 3 ARBITRATION PROCEDURE ARTICLE 3 ARBITRATION PROCEDURE A. GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. An appeal to arbitration may be made only by the union and only after the timely exhaustion of Article 7 - Grievance Procedure. The appeal to arbitration

More information

American Arbitration Association

American Arbitration Association American Arbitration Association City of Worcester Case # 11 390 648 10 And Gr: D. Rawlston Discharge New England Police Award: February 21, 2011 Benevolent Association Arbitrator: Roberta Golick, Esq.

More information

By-Laws and Rules of the Citizens Police Review Board of the City of Albany, New York

By-Laws and Rules of the Citizens Police Review Board of the City of Albany, New York By-Laws and Rules of the Citizens Police Review Board of the City of Albany, New York The Citizens Police Review Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board ) shall seek to fulfill the purpose and goals

More information

1. ARTICLE XXXVI DURATION

1. ARTICLE XXXVI DURATION Memorandum of Agreement between Worcester School Committee (the School Committee or Committee ) and Educational Association of Worcester, Units A & B (the Association ) This Memorandum of Agreement sets

More information

i i ( In the Matter of the Arbitration ) ( GRIEVANT : G GAUNA between ) ( POST OFFICE : BRAWLEY, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE )

i i ( In the Matter of the Arbitration ) ( GRIEVANT : G GAUNA between ) ( POST OFFICE : BRAWLEY, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE ) i i 1 qq_c_)q REGULAR ARBITRATION PANEL ( In the Matter of the Arbitration ) ( GRIEVANT : G GAUNA between ) ( POST OFFICE : BRAWLEY, UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE ) CALIFORNIA and ) CASE NO : F90N -4F-D95007275

More information

Policy 4F10. Procedures 4F10 (a & b)

Policy 4F10. Procedures 4F10 (a & b) 4F10 Student Complaint Policy Student Complaint Policy--The Vice President, Student Services, or designee shall be responsible for the administration of the student complaint policy. See Procedures 4F10(a

More information

The Arbitration-Ready Grievance

The Arbitration-Ready Grievance The Arbitration-Ready Grievance Or HOW TO MAKE YOUR BUSINESS AGENT HAPPY 1 Dispute Resolution There Are Several Methods of Resolving Disputes P Ignore the Dispute < Simply do nothing about a controversy

More information

HONOLULU POLICE DEPARTMENT

HONOLULU POLICE DEPARTMENT HONOLULU POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY SUPPORT OPERATIONS j February 26, 2016 I COMPLAINTS AND INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS POLICY Anyone who reports a complaint (administrative or criminal) about the Honolulu Police

More information

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) APPEARANCES ISSUES

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) APPEARANCES ISSUES STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY OF CLEVELAND IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS 12 DOJ 02778 TIMMY DEAN ADAMS, Petitioner, v. N.C. Department of Justice, Company Police Program Respondent. FINAL DECISION

More information

COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS 2012 COA 184

COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS 2012 COA 184 COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS 2012 COA 184 Court of Appeals No. 11CA2099 Jefferson County District Court No. 11CR854 Honorable Lily W. Oeffler, Judge The People of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellant,

More information

Commercial Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures (Including Procedures for Large, Complex Commercial Disputes)

Commercial Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures (Including Procedures for Large, Complex Commercial Disputes) Commercial Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures (Including Procedures for Large, Complex Commercial Disputes) Rules Amended and Effective October 1, 2013 Fee Schedule Amended and Effective June 1,

More information

REGULAR ARBITRATION. . Re : Adam Urban - 14 Day Suspension APPEARANCES

REGULAR ARBITRATION. . Re : Adam Urban - 14 Day Suspension APPEARANCES REGULAR ARBITRATION IN TI G MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN TF UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE Employer and the C-~ 9 /&L/. Re : Adam Urban - 14 Day Suspension NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LETTER CARRIERS UNION.

More information

Davidson County Sheriff s Office, Petitioner, vs. William Howell

Davidson County Sheriff s Office, Petitioner, vs. William Howell University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Tennessee Department of State, Opinions from the Administrative Procedures Division Law 1-6-2010 Davidson County Sheriff

More information

Gloria Sanchez vs. DHS

Gloria Sanchez vs. DHS University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Tennessee Department of State, Opinions from the Administrative Procedures Division Law September 2013 Gloria Sanchez

More information

AGREEMENT. Between. BRANT COUNTY ROMAN CATHOLIC SEPARATE SCHOOL BOARD (hereinafter called the "Board") OF THE FIRST PART. And

AGREEMENT. Between. BRANT COUNTY ROMAN CATHOLIC SEPARATE SCHOOL BOARD (hereinafter called the Board) OF THE FIRST PART. And AGREEMENT Between BRANT COUNTY ROMAN CATHOLIC SEPARATE SCHOOL BOARD (hereinafter called the "Board") OF THE FIRST PART And THE BRANT HALDIMAND NORFOLK OCCASIONAL TEACHER LOCAL OF THE ONTARIO ENGLISH CATHOLIC

More information

UTAH EMPLOYMENT LAW QUARTERLY

UTAH EMPLOYMENT LAW QUARTERLY UTAH EMPLOYMENT LAW QUARTERLY Volume 1 / Issue 2 September 2016 UPDATES AND BEST PRACTICES Businesses, employers, and employees face constant changes in statutes, regulations, and laws. Staying current

More information

USPS- NALC ARBITRATION PANEL SOUTHERN REGION WILLIAM J. LeWINTER, ARBITRATOR

USPS- NALC ARBITRATION PANEL SOUTHERN REGION WILLIAM J. LeWINTER, ARBITRATOR USPS- NALC ARBITRATION PANEL SOUTHERN REGION WILLIAM J. LeWINTER, ARBITRATOR IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE (Tulsa, Oklahoma) -AND-!Case No. S4N-3T-D 27530!Record Closed

More information

IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) GRIEVANCE: VIOLATION OF CBA ARTICLE V. DEFINITIONS, SECTION 15. ESTABLISHED PRACTICE.

IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) GRIEVANCE: VIOLATION OF CBA ARTICLE V. DEFINITIONS, SECTION 15. ESTABLISHED PRACTICE. IN THE MATTER OF ARBITRATION BETWEEN AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES (AFSCME), LOCAL 1184, UNION And MIAMI-DADE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, EMPLOYER ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FMCS

More information

Appendix G PARKING CITATION PROCESSING SERVICES (PCPS) Jury Service Ordinance

Appendix G PARKING CITATION PROCESSING SERVICES (PCPS) Jury Service Ordinance Appendix G PARKING CITATION PROCESSING SERVICES (PCPS) Jury Service Ordinance Title 2 ADMINISTRATION Chapter 2.203.010 through 2.203.090 CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEE JURY SERVICE APPENDIX G Page 1 of 3 2.203.010

More information

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 16 October 2012

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 16 October 2012 NO. COA11-1501 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 16 October 2012 MONTY S. POARCH, Petitioner, v. Wake County No. 08 CVS 3861 N.C. DEPARTMENT OF CRIME CONTROL & PUBLIC SAFETY, N.C. HIGHWAY PATROL,

More information

Court on October 1, 2018, on Plaintiff s motion to vacate an arbitration award.

Court on October 1, 2018, on Plaintiff s motion to vacate an arbitration award. STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF ST. LOUIS City of Duluth, DISTRICT COURT SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Court File No. 69DU-CV-18-1705 vs. Plaintiff, COURT S ORDER Duluth Police Union, Local 807, Defendant. The

More information

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHICAGO DEPARTMENT OF POLICE AND THE FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE CHICAGO LODGE NO. 7

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHICAGO DEPARTMENT OF POLICE AND THE FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE CHICAGO LODGE NO. 7 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHICAGO DEPARTMENT OF POLICE AND THE FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE CHICAGO LODGE NO. 7 EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2012 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2017 Rahm Emanuel Mayor Garry F. McCarthy Superintendent

More information

The term of the Collective Bargaining Agreement shall be from February 12, 1996 to March 31, 2001.

The term of the Collective Bargaining Agreement shall be from February 12, 1996 to March 31, 2001. MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT 1999 Section 1. Term The term of the Collective Bargaining Agreement shall be from February 12, 1996 to March 31, 2001. Section 2. Continuation of terms The terms of the 1992-96

More information

REGULAR ARBITRATION PANEL. In the Matter of Arbitration ) Grievant : K. Reilly between ) Post Office : Stamford, CT

REGULAR ARBITRATION PANEL. In the Matter of Arbitration ) Grievant : K. Reilly between ) Post Office : Stamford, CT REGULAR ARBITRATION PANEL C-1447 I(~o9o In the Matter of Arbitration ) Grievant : K. Reilly between ) Post Office : Stamford, CT United States Postal Service ) Case No : B90N - 4B-D 96069758 and ) GTS

More information

* * * * * * * APPEAL FROM CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION ORLEANS NO. 7667

* * * * * * * APPEAL FROM CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION ORLEANS NO. 7667 TYRONE ROBINSON VERSUS DEPARTMENT OF POLICE * * * * * * * * * * * NO. 2012-CA-1039 COURT OF APPEAL FOURTH CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA APPEAL FROM CITY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION ORLEANS NO. 7667 * * * * *

More information

ARBITRATION DECISION NO.: 152. UNION: OCSEA, Local 11, AFSCME, AFL-CIO. EMPLOYER: Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, State Unit 3

ARBITRATION DECISION NO.: 152. UNION: OCSEA, Local 11, AFSCME, AFL-CIO. EMPLOYER: Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, State Unit 3 ARBITRATION DECISION NO.: 152 UNION: OCSEA, Local 11, AFSCME, AFL-CIO EMPLOYER: Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, State Unit 3 DATE OF ARBITRATION: June 10, 1988 DATE OF DECISION: October 26,

More information

SECTION 31 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE

SECTION 31 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE SECTION 31 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE 31.01 Policy. It is the policy of the County to treat all employees fairly and equitably in matters affecting their employment. Employees who believe they have not been treated

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS SEVENTH DISTRICT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS SEVENTH DISTRICT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) [Cite as State v. Haslam, 2009-Ohio-696.] STATE OF OHIO, MONROE COUNTY IN THE COURT OF APPEALS SEVENTH DISTRICT STATE OF OHIO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. JEFFREY R. HASLAM, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. CASE NO. 08-MO-4

More information

CIVIL SERVICE BOARD RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED MARCH 1, 2016

CIVIL SERVICE BOARD RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED MARCH 1, 2016 I. ORGANIZATION, DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Pursuant to Chapter 70-942, Laws of Florida, amended and restated under Chapter 97-376, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the Civil Service Board (hereinafter

More information

RENO POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDER

RENO POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDER RENO POLICE DEPARTMENT GENERAL ORDER This directive is for internal use only and does not enlarge this department's, governmental entity's and/or any of this department's employees' civil or criminal liability

More information

STATE OF NEW JERSEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION. Docket No. CO SYNOPSIS

STATE OF NEW JERSEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION. Docket No. CO SYNOPSIS P.E.R.C. NO. 2017-51 NEW JERSEY TURNPIKE AUTHORITY, Respondent, Docket No. CO-2015 077 IFPTE LOCAL 196 CHAPTER 1, Charging Party. The Public Employment Relations Commission grants summary judgment in favor

More information

DISTRICT VT

DISTRICT VT DISTRICT VT1-000090 .. disciplinary action is final. No arbitration hearing will be held unless a written demand for such a hearing is delivered to the Superintendent by May 20, 2016. For your convenience,

More information

CANADIAN RAILWAY OFFICE OF ARBITRATION & DISPUTE RESOLUTION CASE NO Heard in Montreal, October 14, Concerning CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAY

CANADIAN RAILWAY OFFICE OF ARBITRATION & DISPUTE RESOLUTION CASE NO Heard in Montreal, October 14, Concerning CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAY CANADIAN RAILWAY OFFICE OF ARBITRATION & DISPUTE RESOLUTION CASE NO. 4334 Heard in Montreal, October 14, 2014 Concerning CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAY And UNIFOR DISPUTE: 1. Issuance of 25 demerits to Brampton

More information

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR. In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between THE APPLETON PROFESSIONAL POLICE ASSOCIATION. and THE CITY OF APPLETON

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR. In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between THE APPLETON PROFESSIONAL POLICE ASSOCIATION. and THE CITY OF APPLETON BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between THE APPLETON PROFESSIONAL POLICE ASSOCIATION and THE CITY OF APPLETON Case 389 No. 57890 (Moderson Call-In Grievance) Appearances:

More information

Article 11 ARTICLE 11 GRIEVANCE AND ARBITRATION

Article 11 ARTICLE 11 GRIEVANCE AND ARBITRATION ARTICLE 11 GRIEVANCE AND ARBITRATION 11.1 Grievance A. Purpose of the Grievance Procedure The parties agree that prompt and just settlement of grievances is of mutual concern and interest. Therefore, the

More information

Judge / Administrative Officer. Ruling. Meaning. Case Summary. Full Text DECISION. cyberfeds Case Report 112 LRP 48008

Judge / Administrative Officer. Ruling. Meaning. Case Summary. Full Text DECISION. cyberfeds Case Report 112 LRP 48008 112 LRP 48008 U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Federal Correctional Institution Miami and American Federation of Government Employees, Council of Prison Locals, Local 3690 66 FLRA

More information

Collective Bargaining Agreement

Collective Bargaining Agreement THE COUNTY OF OAKLAND AND OAKLAND COUNTY COMMAND OFFICER'S ASSOCIATION SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT - SERGEANTS, LIEUTENANTS & CAPTAINS Collective Bargaining Agreement 1989-1992 -

More information

State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department

State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department Decided and Entered: December 1, 2011 512137 In the Matter of the Arbitration between SHENENDEHOWA CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

More information

State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department

State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department Decided and Entered: April 11, 2013 515409 In the Matter of NEW YORK STATE CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS AND POLICE BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION,

More information

death penalty. In prosecuting the case, State v. Michael Anderson, Mr. Alford and Mr.

death penalty. In prosecuting the case, State v. Michael Anderson, Mr. Alford and Mr. I. Description of Misconduct In August 2009, Orleans Parish Assistant District Attorneys Kevin Guillory and John Alford conducted a trial on behalf of the State of Louisiana. The defendant faced the death

More information

Resolution No A Resolution Repealing Resolutions No and 1923 Adopting New City Council Procedures

Resolution No A Resolution Repealing Resolutions No and 1923 Adopting New City Council Procedures Resolution No. 1949 A Resolution Repealing Resolutions No. 1867 and 1923 Adopting New City Council Procedures Whereas RCW 3SA.11.020 provides that "the legislative body of each code city shall have power

More information

REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES & CONDUCT OF PROCEEDINGS A. A

REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES & CONDUCT OF PROCEEDINGS A. A ARTICLE 15 REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES & CONDUCT OF PROCEEDINGS A. A grievance may be any matter within the cognizance of USATF New Jersey as described in Article 14. Grievances shall be filed and administered

More information