Chapter 1 DefVsDisc2016: Difference between revisions

{{quote|text=<b>We begin</b> where Just Cause first appears in our Collective Bargaining Agreement:

:<b>“ARTICLE 16 DISCIPLINE PROCEDURE

:Section 1. Principles</b>

In the administration of this Article, a basic principle shall be that discipline should be corrective in nature, rather than punitive. No employee may be disciplined or discharged except for just cause such as, but not limited to, insubordination, pilferage, intoxication (drugs or alcohol), incompetence, failure to perform work as requested, violation of the terms of this Agreement, or failure to observe safety rules and regulations. Any such discipline or discharge shall be subject to the grievance-arbitration procedure provided for in this Agreement, which could result in reinstatement and restitution, including back pay.”

The above quoted</b> provision explains that Management must have just cause to issue discipline, but the provision does not explain what just cause is. In Collective Bargaining Agreements throughout the United States, ours may be unique in that we have a clear definition of

what just cause is. That definition is found in the <b>EL-921 Handbook, Supervisor's Guide to

Handling Grievances,</b> under Article 19 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement:

</br></br><b>The Principles of Just Cause</b></br></br>

  </br><b><li>Is there a rule? If so, was the employee aware of the rule? Was the employee forewarned of the disciplinary consequences for failure to follow the rule?</b></br></br>

It is not enough to say, “Well, everybody knows that rule,” or, “We posted that rule ten years ago.” You should be prepared to present the document(s) that supports that the employee knew, or reasonably should have known, the rule (posting and location, previous discipline, relevant sections of handbooks, regulations, etc.)</br></br>

Certain standards of conduct are normally expected in the work place, and it is assumed by arbitrators that employees should be aware of these standards. For example, an employee charged with intoxication on duty, fighting on duty, pilferage, sabotage, or insubordination, may generally be assumed to have understood that these offenses are neither condoned nor acceptable, regardless of whether management has issued specific regulations to that effect.</li>

  </br><b><li>Is the rule a reasonable rule?</b></br></br>

Management must make sure rules are reasonable, based on the overall objective of safe and efficient work performance. Rules should be reasonably related to business efficiency, safe operation of our business, and the performance we might expect of the employee.</li>

  </br><b><li>Is the rule consistently and equitably enforced?</b>

A rule must be applied fairly and without discrimination. Consistent and equitable enforcement is a critical factor. Consistently overlooking employee infractions and then disciplining without warning is improper. For example, if employees are consistently allowed to smoke in areas designated as No Smoking areas, it is not appropriate to suddenly start disciplining them for this violation. In such cases, management loses its right to discipline for that infraction, in effect, unless it first puts employees (and the unions, when appropriate) on notice of its intent to enforce that regulation.</br></br>

employees commit an offense, it would not be equitable to discipline only one.</li>

  </br><b><li>Was a thorough investigation completed?</b></br>

When considering disciplinary action, management must investigate to determine whether the employee committed the offense. Management must ensure that its investigation is thorough and objective. This includes the employee’s “day in court privilege.” Employees have the right to know with reasonable detail what the charges are and need to be given a reasonable opportunity to defend themselves before the discipline is initiated.</br></br>

The investigation should also include a review of the employees past record in order to determine what, if any, action is appropriate and/or warranted. When in doubt supervisors are encouraged to consult with their managers or with the District Labor Relations office.</li>

  </br><b><li>Was the severity of the discipline reasonably related to the infraction itself

employee’s past record?</b>

tion, but it may be used to determine the appropriate disciplinary penalty.</li>

  </br><b><li>Was the disciplinary action taken in a timely manner?</b>

been committed.</li>

<b><u>The Daugherty ‘Tests’ of Just Cause</b></u>