1853 Franklin v. UAW Stellantis Department

In appeals involving the removal of a special purpose representative from office, the PRB’s jurisdiction is limited to whether the removal violated the UAW Ethical Practices Codes (EPC).   As the Board has held in past cases, a UAW member does have the right to expect ethical treatment by the Union.  In this case, the Board finds that Appellant has demonstrated that her removal was conducted in a manner inconsistent with the EPC’s guarantee of due process and contrary to generally accepted ethical principles.  Due process requires that the decision to remove an appointed representative is based upon a fair and thorough investigation.  A decision based upon unsubstantiated rumors and innuendo does not meet this standard.  In addition, a fair investigation requires an impartial evaluation of relevant information, as opposed to a predisposition to achieve a certain result. 

To be clear, the PRB fully appreciates that special purpose representative positions are at will and that removal decisions are not reviewed under a just cause standard.  Nevertheless, when (as in this case) the removal of a representative rests upon an asserted cause, due process requires that the decisionmaker undertake a thorough investigation to determine if the asserted reasons have a factual basis.  Removal based upon demonstrably false allegations or concocted grounds does not comport with due process.