1752 Manion and Simpson v. UAW-Ford Dept.
Case No: 1752
The International Union’s defense of the settlements as rational is based on a misunderstanding of the process set in motion by the reinstitution of a grievance in response to an appeal presented in accordance with Article 33 of the International Constitution. The broad discretion normally exercised by a grievance handler in the negotiation of a grievance settlement does not apply to reinstated grievances. After a grievance has been reinstated, the job of the representative assigned to handle the grievance is to address the problem identified by the remanding authority.
Furthermore, the IEB’s jurisdiction to review complaints about the handling of grievances is not limited to allegations that the matter was improperly handled as a result of fraud, discrimination, or collusion with management, or that the disposition of the matter was devoid of a rational basis. The IEB may declare, as a matter of the International Union’s collective bargaining policy, that the resolution of a grievance was inadequate on its merits. That is essentially what happened in this case. If a settlement acceptable to appellants cannot be negotiated, the Umpire Staff must move beyond the position it previously asserted with respect to the merits of appellants’ claims and be prepared to make a persuasive argument following the reasoning stated in the IEB’s 2013 discussion.
Issues addressed in this decisionContract interpretations
Powers of International officers
Processing of appeals
Processing of grievances
Rational basis test