1778 Fluty v. Region 2B
Case No: 1778
The International Representative’s conclusion that Fluty’s grievance could not be successfully arbitrated has some support in the record. Fluty never disputed the charge that he failed to report to work during the week he believed he was on voluntary layoff. The doctor’s note that Fluty eventually submitted did not cover the relevant period. In light of these circumstances, Representative Sims concluded that successful arbitration of Fluty’s grievance would not be possible because no violation of the collective bargaining agreement had been established. The International Union’s responses to Fluty’s appeal to the IEB and in response to his appeal to the PRB have relied heavily on the argument that Fluty’s violation of the contract made any further investigation irrelevant. We have no remedy to offer for the UAW’s lack of curiosity or detailed investment in this member’s situation. It is a disappointing performance; but not an irrational one–as that term is generally understood in the context of the union’s duty to fairly represent its members, or in the language of the Constitution defining the limits of our jurisdiction over grievances and related appeals.