Rights When Disciplined
Union employees have Weingarten Rights:
You have the right to union representation any time you face a meeting or discussion with a supervisor that could lead to discipline. Your employer usually has no obligation to inform you of your right to have a union representative present. You must ask for your rights! Your employer must give you time to contact a union representative and allow the representative to be present at the meeting.
“Weingarten” rules apply when a supervisor is questioning an employee to obtain information the employee reasonably believes could be used as grounds for discipline. If the meeting is solely to inform about a discipline without an investigation, this rule doesn’t apply. Here’s what you can say to your employer if you’re being called into a meeting:
“If this meeting is an investigation that could in any way lead to discipline or termination, I request that my steward or union representative be present before continuing.”
Just Cause Standards:
All Local 8 union contracts guarantee that employees can’t be disciplined or terminated except for “just cause”. In Washington State, employees without a union contract can be fired “at will” and employers do not have to use just cause standards. Here are those 7 just cause standards for union employees defined:
- Was the employee warned in advance that certain behavior could result in discipline? The rule and penalty must have been communicated to the employee in advance. Employee must be told of the consequences of his or her actions. Certain offenses, i.e. major theft or violence on the job, may not require forewarning.
- Were the employer’s rules reasonable? Could an employee be expected to follow the rule or policy in question or would this be impossible? Are the rules available and understandable? Remember, unless you believe obeying a rule or order will seriously and immediately jeopardize your personal safety and/or someone else’s, it’s best to “obey now, grieve later”.
- Was there an investigation before the discipline? Did the employer, before administering the discipline, make an effort to discover whether the employee did in fact violate or disobey a rule or employer’s order?
- Was the investigation conducted fairly? Was the investigation done fairly and impartially or was there evidence of an effort to “burn” or “trap” an individual employee for practices that are generally unchallenged? Did the employer talk to all witnesses? Was the grievant given a chance to explain the incident? Are there extenuating circumstances behind the employee’s action? There might be physical or medical reasons underlying absenteeism or poor work performance. A fight might have been provoked.
- Did the investigation turn up substantial evidence of wrongdoing?
- Are the rules enforced uniformly and consistently? Is there evidence of discrimination or harassment? There may be others with similar or worse work records who have not been disciplined. This can often, but not always, be used to show unequal treatment. However, the employee’s past disciplinary record may be used to justify a more serious penalty.
- Does the punishment fit the “crime” and the past record of the employee? Discharging an employee for a single absence or for a minor violation of management rules is generally considered inappropriate. Was there progressive discipline? An employee’s record of good behavior may form the basis for a lesser penalty. The burden of proof shifts to the Union to demonstrate that a penalty is too severe.