Processing of appeals

1826 Sass, et al. v. UAW International Union

Under Article 33, §4(c) of the UAW International Constitution, Appellants had 30 days from when they first learned of the withdrawal of their grievance in which to file an appeal with the International Executive Board.  Regrettably, Appellants failed to file a timely appeal.  Appellants argue that they should not be ...
VIEW DETAILS

1823 Pearson in the Matter of Robinson v. UAW Local Union 140

The International Union asserts that this case falls under the appellate limitation found in Article 33, §2(b) of the International Constitution pertaining to obviously correct interpretations of bargaining agreements.  As the PRB has concluded in past decisions, the Article 33, §2(b) limitation does not apply when complex or heavily contested ...
VIEW DETAILS

1819 Rankin v. UAW International Executive Board

The PRB has jurisdiction to review the IEB’s decision to impose a suspension under Article 30, §4 of the International Constitution.  Under Article 30, §4, the default rule is that an accused International officer will continue to function in his or her elected capacity pending trial.  However, Article 30, §4 ...
VIEW DETAILS

1817 Hall v. UAW International Union

This case involves an appeal from International Representative’s  decision to withdraw Appellant’s termination grievance.  Accordingly, the applicable time limit under Article 33, §4(c) is 30 days.  Union members have a responsibility to abide by the Constitution’s time limits for filing an appeal.  In this case, there is no dispute that ...
VIEW DETAILS

1813 Tague v. UAW Local Union 450

Appellant’s primary argument is that he is entitled to additional compensation under Local 450’s Bylaws.  The plain language of the Bylaws does not support this contention.  Appellant’s secondary argument that the Local has made retroactive adjustments in the past is also not persuasive.  As the Appeals Committee found, the Local ...
VIEW DETAILS

1793-II Baltrusaitis, et al. v. UAW Region 1

As the PRB determined in its prior decision in this case, Appellants have made a sufficient threshold showing that fraud or collusion could have impacted the 2011 transfer of operations to warrant further investigation.  Under the circumstances, the Board found it appropriate for the International Union to present documents or ...
VIEW DETAILS

1807 Slight et al. v. UAW International President

Appellants acknowledge that they did not file an appeal within 30 days of when they first became aware that their grievances had been withdrawn.  As a result, they recognize that the International President must grant a request for a waiver of time limits in order for them to proceed with ...
VIEW DETAILS

1476 Gaston-Kelley v. UAW DaimlerChrysler Dept.

Gaston-Kelly has identified a sufficient number of irregularities in the actions taken by the Local Union and the DaimlerChrysler Department to require further inquiry on the part of the International Union to determine that her removal was not for reasons that would violate the UAW Ethical Practices Codes. The case ...
VIEW DETAILS

1459 King and Charney v. Local Union 600

Local 600 is an Amalgamated Local Union with a Joint Council established pursuant to Article 35, §2, of the Constitution. In accordance with Article VIII, §1(a), of the Local’s Bylaws, the Election Committee required by Article 38, §10(c), of the Constitution is elected by the General Council from among its ...
VIEW DETAILS

1476 II Gaston-Kelley v. UAW DaimlerChrysler Dept.

A Department Director has broad discretion in the matter of appointing and removing special purpose representatives, but there is no evidence of an exercise of that discretion in this case. Gaston-Kelley never received anything from the DaimlerChrysler Department removing her from her appointed position as Local Heath and Safety Representative. ...
VIEW DETAILS