Take Action NowA "Action Alert" has been declared for IFT
members to oppose SB 512!
Copy and paste into the body of your email and send to your legislators:
IFT Opposes SB 512 because:
• This legislation forces IFT members to make a decision to either
drastically increasing their contributions, opt into the second tier
plan or transfer to a defined contribution plan, essentially creating
a 3-tiered system.
• It is unconstitutional.
• IFT members do not receive Social Security, their pension are
their life savings.
• IFT members have always paid their retirement costs; it is the
state that has not kept its part of the bargain.
• SB 512 would cost taxpayers an additional $34 billion over 15 years.
TAKE ACTION NOW!Make ContactClick here or call 888-412-6570 to be connected directly to your lawmakers in Springfield. Tell them to protect, not cut, public employee pensions. Status CheckStatus is everything these days, but not in the traditional sense! We’re talking about those three little words ‑ “What’s your status?” - that keep us connected at all times on Facebook. Donate your Facebook status to “I Oppose Cuts to Public Employee Pensions” and share your story. Tell your friends how pension cuts will harm you and others who do critical work in our schools, colleges, universities and state agencies every day. Help us spread the word! October 27 Board Meeting StatementThe Mchenry County College Staff Council President, Tawnja Trimble, gave a statement at the October 27, 2011 board meeting regarding the proposed reorganization of the Academic and Student Affairs division.
Tonight you are being asked to approve the Student Affairs reorganization, reference board report number 11-254. We the Staff Council have legitimate concerns with this proposed plan. While the Board is not required to bargain organizational structures, we do have the right to issue a demand to bargain the impact of reorganization with the reduction of workforce.
We believe implementing the plan would allow us to file an unfair labor practice as well as potential grievances. Details of the plan call for the elimination of one full-time staff position, two part-time positions, and the reduction of three full-time positions to part-time. In addition two full-time staff positions will be moved to the administrative level, thus eliminating them from staff council. Click here for the full statement
Is it a complaint or a grievance?Determining what is a grievance, and what isn’t, can be tricky. How do you determine if you have legitimate grounds for a grievance? There are five basic ways.
- Does it violate the contract?
Look at the union contract. While the meaning of a specific piece of a contract language can be debated, you may have a case if a certain section or clause has been violated.
- Does it violate past practice?
Even if something isn’t spelled out in the contract, if it’s been done a certain way for years, a change or crackdown may well be a violation. If you are going to cite past practice, be sure the practice has existed for a substantial period of time.
- Does it violate employer rules/policies?
Has there been a violation of your employer’s own rules and regulations? Uneven enforcement of the rules can provide the grounds for a grievance.
- Does it violate the law?
Your employer cannot violate the law. Even if the contract is silent on a specific issue, you still have the right to grieve if the employer does something illegal.
- Does it violate basic rights?
Finally, you can have legitimate grounds for a grievance if a worker’s basic rights are violated. If there has been discrimination, you may have something to grieve.
Discrimination occurs when two people are treated differently under the same conditions, in a way in which one of them is harmed or treated unequally. While the most common types of discrimination tend to be based on race or sex, there are other ways as well, including age, physical appearance, personality - and union activity, for that matter. Be aware, discrimination charges can be hard to prove.
Submitted by Pat Kallaus, Grievance Chair, MCC Staff Council
Adapted from: The Union Steward’s Complete Guide; Edited by David Prosten
Click here for a pdf version
"All that serves labor serves the nation. All that harms is treason. If a man tells you he trusts America, yet fears labor, he is a fool. There is no America without labor, and to fleece the one is to rob the other."
--Abraham Lincoln
|
Weingarten RightsWeingarten Rights
EMPLOYEE'S RIGHT TO UNION REPRESENTATION
The rights of unionized employees to have present a union representative during investigatory interviews were announced by the U.S. Supreme Court in a 1975 case (NLRB vs. Weingarten, Inc. 420 U.S. 251, 88 LRRM 2689). These rights have become known as the Weingarten rights.
If an employee has a reasonable belief that discipline or other adverse consequences may result from what he or she says during a meeting with a supervisor, the employee has the right to request union representation. Management is not required to inform the employee of his/her Weingarten rights; it is the employee's responsibility to know and request. If you do not invoke, or if you decide to waive your Weingarten Rights during an investigatory interview, you give up your legal protections under the law and the Union has no basis to challenge the investigatory interview with your supervisor.
When the employee makes the request for a union representative to be present management has three options:
(I) it can stop questioning until the representative arrives
(2) it can call off the interview
(3) it can tell the employee that it will call off the interview unless the employee voluntarily gives up his/her rights to a union representative (an option the employee should always refuse.)
Supervisors will often assert that the only role of a union representative in an investigatory interview is to observe the discussion. The Supreme Court, however, clearly acknowledges a representative's right to assist and counsel workers during the interview.
The Supreme Court has also ruled that during an investigatory interview management must inform the union representative of the subject of the interrogation. The representative must also be allowed to speak privately with the employee before the interview. During the questioning, the representative can interrupt to clarify a question or to object to confusing or intimidating tactics.
Remember, NEVER refuse or walk out of a meeting with your supervisor, this could be grounds for insubordination. For your own protection, employees should read or hand this statement to management before the start of any meeting that could lead to discipline:
“If the discussion I am being asked to enter into could in any way lead to my discipline or termination or affect my personal working conditions, I ask that a union representative be present. Unless I have this union representation I respectfully choose not to participate in this discussion.”
Weingarten rights do not cover meetings where the communication is one way; that is, when the purpose is merely to convey information to an employee or to notify an employee of a decision already made regarding discipline. Also, keep in mind that discussions of job performance (annual review) do not automatically include the right to representation. That right exists only if the meeting also involves giving answers to questions that may then lead to a disciplinary action.
Submitted by Pat Kallaus, Grievance Advocate, MCC Staff Council
Did You Know...The Illinois Federation of Teachers represents 103,000 men and women who are teachers and paraprofessionals in school districts throughout Illinois, faculty and staff at Illinois' community colleges and universities, public employees under every statewide elected constitutional officer, and retirees.
For more information please visit the IFT-AFT website at
|
