In case 11, A Laid-Off Glass Worker, the Union has filed a grievance against the Company for allegedly violating the Labor Agreement in regards to Ronald Petrie. In this case after Mr. Petrie was laid off the remaining employees in the Glass Department worked overtime and temporary transfers were utilized in the department without calling Mr. Petrie back to his position. The overtime and use of temporary transfers went on for approximately three to four months. It is the Union’s opinion in this case that the Company should have acknowledged the fact that a position was open or needed; and the Company should have called Mr. Petrie back to his position. Union Position
The Union suspects from the amount of overtime and transfers to the Glass Department that a position as become available. It is also understood that if an employee is recalled from a layoff status the recall will be conducted in seniority order. Additionally, the Union also states that in the past employees have been recalled for short periods of employment. These situations occurred in 1995 and 1996 where a total of four employees were recalled to their positions. Company Position
The Company believes that their actions in not recalling Mr. Petrie were not only appropriate, but reasonable and in accordance with the Labor Agreement. Furthermore, they have they have the right to decide if a position exists or not. In this case, since the work assigned was temporary, the Company argues in this circumstance its actions were indeed warranted. A full-time position was not reflected in the hours assigned. The Company also wants to bring to the attention of the arbitrator that the Union has failed at past attempts to limit temporary transfers. Contract Language
The Management Rights in Article 3 Section 3.2 state that the Company has the complete control over its employees in regards to their direction, and instruction. The Article goes on to say “Including but, not limited...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document