latest System Board Results

CWA LOCAL 3645   Date: May 17, 2022                                                                                                                       TO: CWA Local 3645 Members     From: CWA Local 3645      Subject: System Board Hearings

On May 11, 2022, CWA Local 3645 held the System Board of Adjustment in CLT. An agent from CLT was appealing a level 3 for work performance. The Company argued that the gate agent put the wrong passenger on the plane because the passenger whose ticket was scanned was asking to be rebooked and had not boarded that flight. The Union argued that the gate agent followed all boarding procedures including verifying ID before the boarding pass was issued. The Company confirmed the camera footage did verify the agent asked for ID for every boarding pass they issued on that flight. There is no way an agent is responsible for a boarding pass once the ID is verified and issued. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled to remove the level.

An agent from CLT was appealing a travel suspension for 12 months due to traveling while on medical leave. The Company argued the agent presented a doctor’s note but the agent traveled on one of the days the note covered. The agent called out for two days then said they felt better and traveled on their 3 days off. Upon returning the agent did not feel well again, so they went to the doctor due to pre-existing medical issues. The doctor faxed over a note to the company but had backdated the note to include the days the agent traveled, which was a travel violation. The Union rep argued that during the time the agent traveled there was no violation and it only became one because the doctor back dated the note. The agent was unaware of the dates on the note at the time because the note was sent directly to the Company from the doctor’s office. The agent also testified that since they didn’t realize the doctor backdated the note, they would take the dependability points for the two days prior. Agent agreed that there was a violation because of the note but didn’t think their violation warranted 12 months and asked for a lesser penalty. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled to reduce the 12 months travel suspension to 6 months to be reinstated on June 15th.

A group of agents from CLT were appealing dependability points due to a weather event (ice storm). The Company argued that the company has a nofault dependability policy, offered hotels, allowed agents to come in late without accruing points and that the governor did not issue an order to not drive on the streets or get ticketed. The Union rep argued that road conditions were bad and let each individual agent present their circumstances. When each agent was asked why didn’t they take the hotel, each agent responded that they couldn’t because of family at home. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled the points were given for just cause.

A group of agents from CLT were appealing dependability points due to another weather event. The company argued that the company has a no-fault dependability policy, offered hotels, allowed agents to come in late without accruing points and the Governor did not issue an order to not drive. The Union rep argued that in this case and on this date the Company failed to offer hotels to the agents via email or manual sign-ups. The Company admitted to offering hotels through word of mouth. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled to remove the points for all the agents for this weather event because it was the Company’s job to offer them a hotel so they wouldn’t have to drive and they failed to do so.

An agent from CLT was appealing dependability points. The Company argued the agent received the dependability points due to not returning from a Covid related absence. The Union rep argued the agent presented a doctor’s note that cleared her from Covid and she asked in the email if she was now clear to return. The Company responded and said they would let the agent know but got back to the agent and clear them to come back to work. After considering all the facts the Board ruled to remove the dependability points as the communication failure was not on the agent.

An agent from CLT was appealing dependability points they received by being late on the January weather event day. The Company admitted that points are not given for tardiness on severe weather days (snow or snow storms). The Union rep argued the points were given unjustly. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled to remove the points.

An agent from CLT was appealing a 12-month travel suspension for the agent and a permanent ban for a D-3 travel guest. The Company argued the agent’s travel privileges were suspended because the agents D-3 guest had brought a ticket while being listed for the same flight. The agent said that he was traveling with the D-3 guest and they had to split. While the agent was on their flight, the D-3 guest didn’t think they would make it, so they purchased the ticket. Although the agent understood they would have to be held accountable for the violation, the agent felt that 12 months was excessive. The Company argued that AA sends the punishment. The Union argued that although AA sends the suggested punishment, Piedmont holds the responsibility to choose the punishment. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled to reduce the 12 months to time served as the suspension for the active agent and the AA permanent ban on the D3 guest will remain.

In Solidarity,

Donielle Prophete – President                                                                                                                                            Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President                                                                                                            Douglas Christian - Vice President                                                                                                                                    Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer

CWA Local 3645

 

CWA LOCAL 3645

 Date: April 13, 2022                                        To: CWA Local 3645 Members

From: CWA Local 3645                                   Subject: System Board Summary

 

On April 13, 2022, CWA Local 3645 held the System Board of Adjustment in CLT.

 An agent from CLT was appealing their termination due to violating a 90-day probationary period. The agent won their job back from the System Board of Adjustment in August 2021. The Board ruled that the agent would have a 90-day probation and the last day of the employee’s probation would be 11-21-21. Due to badging issues, the Company said the agent couldn’t return to work in a timely manner, so the Company changed the date on the employee’s 90-day probation and gave them a new December 30th end date. The employee had a tardy on December 8th and although the employee only had 9 points, the Company terminated them for dependability and a violation of a last chance agreement. The Union rep argued that the agent’s return to work date was changed by the Company and not by the System Board members who originally awarded the agent’s job back nor did the agent have a last chance agreement. The Union argued that the decisions made during the System Board are legally binding and the Company had no right to change the agents return to work date on their own. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled the Company had no cause to terminate the agent. Agent will be returned back to work with 17 weeks of backpay.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a termination for a failed drug screening. The Company argued that any failed drug test will result in termination. The Union rep argued that the agent, who is 61 years old, was on pain killers and took them regularly for pain to work on the ramp. This caused the false positive results. After reviewing all the facts, the Board deadlocked. This case will be sent to the CWA district 3 staff representative for arbitration review.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing their termination based on travel pass violations. The Company said the agent transported dogs on multiple one-way flights, therefore costing AA thousands of dollars in lost revenue. The Company presented multiple documents detailing trips that indicated that the agent and the registered guest were transporting animals. The Union rep argued that the agent was unaware that their registered guest was traveling with dogs and offered to reimburse American Airlines the thousands of dollars in lost revenue.

Although the agent said they were unaware that their registered guest was traveling with dogs, the Company showed 5 trips where the agent and registered guest traveled together in the same record locator with a dog and didn’t return with the dog. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled to uphold the termination.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a termination based on travel pass violations. The Company said the agent had been transporting dogs for multiple years using their employee privileges, therefore costing AA thousands of dollars in lost revenue. The Company presented multiple documents detailing 70+ trips that indicated the agent was transporting animals. The agent

admitted to transporting animals but stated that they were for friends and family. The AA travel policy states that an agent can only travel with their own personal animal. The Union rep argued that the agent was unaware of the policy. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled to uphold the termination.

 

An agent from CLT was grieving their termination for dependability. The agent reached 34 points. The Company argued that they have a no-fault dependability policy and that they were being consistent with their policy. The Union rep argued that the agent had covid the prior year and was sick again and thought the sickness was related to Covid again. The agent submitted a negative covid test but never came back to work and never submitted a doctor’s note writing him out on medical. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled to uphold the termination.

 

An agent from SDF was grieving a termination based on a travel pass violation. The Company said the agent called out and then traveled while on medical leave without asking for permission from the Company as the AA Travel policy required. The Union rep argued that the agent wasn’t aware that they couldn’t travel while on medical. The Company argued that the agent was out on medical before and was aware of the rules restricting travel while out on medical. Although this was the agent’s first time violating the travel policy, the Company felt the violation was egregious enough to terminate. The Union rep argued that although the agent did violate the travel policy, the punishment did not fit the crime as the agent had no performance issues in the past 12 months. After reviewing all the facts, the Board voted to overturn the termination with no backpay and issue the agent with a level 3 and a 6-month travel suspension.

 

In Unity,

 Donielle Prophete – President

Darryle Williams PhD – Executive Vice President

Douglas Christian – Vice President

Shaquelle Baker – Secretary/ Treasurer

 

CWA LOCAL 3645

Date: March 23, 2022              TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From: CWA Local 3645         Subject: System Board Hearings

On March 23, 2022, CWA Local 3645 held the System Board of Adjustment in CLT.

 An agent from AGS was appealing a termination for a travel violation and return from leave notification. The station manager was working the gate and saw the agent board the flight. They checked the agent’s PNR and saw the agent was traveling on an AA20 ticket. The manager then filed a travel violation through the non-rev reporting tool. The agent was also required to turn in a current medical note because the current medical leave had expired. The manager sent the agent a certified letter with a timeline to submit the note. The Union rep argued the medical note issue first by showing evidence that the Company gave the agent a date to submit the note and the agent submitted the note to the Company per the certified letter requirement. The agent testified that they did in deed travel on an AA-20 ticket but they asked the AA rep if they were allowed to buy while on medical and the rep said yes. After reviewing all the facts, the Board found that the agent did turn in the doctor’s note by the required time but the agent did travel on an AA 20 ticket while on medical which is against the AA travel policy. The agent will be returned back to work unpaid and with a 30-day travel suspension for violating the travel policy.

 An agent from CLT was appealing a termination due to dependability points. The agent testified that they were late due to inclement weather on New Year’s Day which forced them to be 16 minutes late. There was no inclement weather on New-Year’s day. As a matter of fact, the temperature was recorded as 68 degrees. The two points placed the agent over 30 points according to the Company’s no-fault dependability policy. After reviewing the facts, the Board ruled to uphold the termination.

An agent from CLT was appealing their 12-month travel suspension due to the misuse of travel privileges or misconduct involving the employee and/or someone on their travel pass. American Airlines travel department received a report from someone who claimed the agent was paid 4k for their registered guest. The Company presented inbox text/Facebook messages from two people where one person admitted to paying the agent 4k and offering to get them on someone else’s pass for $4500. The Union rep argued that the Company didn’t do a thorough investigation because the agent’s pass traveler said that Facebook/text message did not come from their profile. The agent then testified that the screen shot that was submitted was not the profile pic of their pass traveler. The agents pass traveler also submitted a letter saying they have never paid the agent any monies to be on their pass. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled that the Company did not meet the burden of proof to show that someone paid monies to be on the agents pass travel. The 12-month travel suspension was over-turned.

 An agent from CLT was appealing dependability points received during the two CLT inclement weather incidents in January. The Company argued that the company has a no-fault dependability policy and the points were given as per company policy. The Company also argued that all agents were given the option of a hotel and presented the email that was sent to all agents with the instructions on how to secure a hotel. The agent testified that they opted not to get a hotel. After reviewing all the facts presented, the Board ruled to uphold the points for both weather days.

 An agent from CLT was appealing dependability points received during the CLT inclement weather. The Company argued that the company has a no-fault dependability policy and the points were given as per company policy. The Company also argued that all agents were given the option of a hotel and presented the email that was sent to all agents with the instructions on how to secure a hotel. The agent testified that they opted not to get a hotel because they didn’t realize the weather would be that bed until they woke up the next day. After reviewing all the facts presented, the Board ruled to uphold the points.

 An agent from CLT was appealing dependability points received during the CLT inclement weather. The Company argued that the company has a no-fault dependability policy and the points were given as per company policy. The Company also argued that all agents were given the option of a hotel and presented the email that was sent to all agents with the instructions on how to secure a hotel. The agent testified that they tried to get a hotel but the link provided showed the hotels were booked. The Company argued they never ran out of hotels and the link was only a sign-up sheet and the agent never signed up for a hotel. After reviewing all the facts presented, the Board ruled to uphold the points.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing dependability points received during the CLT inclement weather. The Company argued that the company has a no-fault dependability policy and the points were given as per company policy. The Company also argued that all agents were given the option of a hotel and presented the email that was sent to all agents with the instructions on how to secure a hotel. The agent testified that they opted not to get a hotel but they felt that the Company should care about their well-being enough to not penalize them because they chose not to come in. The Company argued that it wasn’t fair to all the agents that did come to work. After reviewing all the facts presented, the Board ruled to uphold the points.

 

In Solidarity,

Donielle Prophete – President                                                                                                                                       Darryle Williams- Jones PhD - Executive Vice President                                                                                         Douglas Christian - Vice President                                                                                                                             Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer CWA Local 3645

 

CWA LOCAL 3645

Date: March 16, 2022               TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From: CWA Local 3645          Subject: System Board Hearings

 On March 16, 2022, CWA Local 3645 held the System Board of Adjustment in CLT.

 An agent from CLT was appealing the dependability points received due to CLT having inclement weather. The Company argued that the company has a no-fault dependability policy and the points were given per their policy. The Union rep argued that this agent was not afforded the chance to get a Company issued hotel because they never received notification from MGT. The MGT did not produce evidence of any hotel notifications gone out to the agents. The agent was fully prepared to report to work but the conditions of the agent’s driveway and roads were hazardous due to layers of ice. The agent presented pictures of those conditions. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled to remove the points because the Company had no knowledge or proof of agent being notified of hotel options.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing dependability points received due to CLT having inclement weather. The Company argued that the company has a no-fault dependability policy and the points were given as per their policy. The Company also argued that all agents were given the option of a hotel and presented the email that was sent to all agents with the instructions on how to secure a hotel. The agent did not secure a hotel. The Union rep argued that the agent did not miss work intentionally. The agent was fully prepared to report to work but the conditions of the agent’s driveway and roads were hazardous due to layers of ice. The agent presented pictures of those conditions. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled to uphold the points because the agent had an opportunity to get a hotel and chose not to.

 An agent from CLT was appealing dependability points given received due to CLT having inclement weather. The Company argued that the company has a no-fault dependability policy and the points were given as per company policy. The company also argued that all agents were given the option of a hotel and presented the email that was sent to all agents with the instructions on how to secure a hotel. The Union rep argued that the agent did not miss work intentionally. The agent was fully prepared to report to work but the conditions of the agent’s driveway and roads were hazardous due to layers of ice. The agent presented pictures of those conditions. The agent also testified that they could not access the link to secure a hotel, so they went to TMS where they walked the agent through the process and still was not offered a room. After reviewing all the facts, the board deadlocked. The case will be sent to the CWA district 3 representative for review for arbitration.

 An agent from CLT was appealing dependability points received due to CLT having inclement weather. The Company argued that the company has a no-fault dependability policy and the points were given as per their policy. The Company also argued that all agents were given the option of a hotel and presented the email that was sent to all agents with the instructions on how to secure a hotel. The agent did not secure a hotel. The Union rep argued that the agent did not miss work intentionally. The agent was fully prepared to report to work but the conditions of the agent’s driveway and roads were hazardous due to layers of ice. The agent presented pictures of those conditions. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled to uphold the points because the agent should have secured a Company issued hotel.

 In Unity,

Donielle – President                                                                                                                                    Darryle Williams PhD– Executive Vice President                                                                                      Douglas Christian – Vice President                                                                                                            Shaquelle Baker – Secretary/Treasurer

 

CWA LOCAL 3645

Date: March 2, 2022                 TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From: CWA Local 3645          Subject: System Board Hearings

 On March 2, 2022, CWA Local 3645 held the System Board of Adjustment in CLT.

 An agent from CLT was appealing their termination. The Company stated the agent violated section 8(work rules) and 22 (zero tolerance) of the Piedmont Ground Handling Policy and Procedures Manual. The agent was accused of cursing out his co-worker. The Company submitted the agents written statement as evidence where the agent admitted to telling their co-worker to do their own f**king job. The Company also submitted prior discipline where the agent was just disciplined for zero tolerance again in the previous 12 months. Agent testified and admitted that they said a Spanish couple should not come to America without speaking English and they did curse the co-worker out. Agent said they had a bad day. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled to uphold the termination,

 An agent from CLT was appealing a level 2 performance write up for failing to report a wheelchair that fell off the belt loader and the wheels and battery came off. The Company testified that the agent just put the wheels and battery back on and delivered the wheelchair to its connecting gate. The Union rep argued the agent placed the wheels and the battery back on because their mom had the same wheelchair and knew it wasn’t broken. The rep also argued that the agent did report it to management immediately after they delivered it to the gate. After testimony, it was discovered that the agent was the only person who reported the wheelchair and the Company would not have been notified if the agent, who was the bag runner, didn’t report it. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled to overturn the level 2 and issue agent with a verbal coaching.

 An agent from CLT was appealing a level 3 performance for insubordination. The Company said the agent refused to assist with wheelchairs on an inbound flight, therefore violating the Piedmont Policy and Procedures manual Section 8 work rules. The agent testified that they didn’t say no but they wanted to finish the task they were already doing. After review of all the facts, it was discovered that the agent ultimately completed the assigned task and was not insubordinate. The Board ruled to overturn the level 3.

 An agent from CLT was appealing a level 1 work performance for boarding more passengers than the weight restrictions required. The Company said the agent boarded a non-rev passenger which put the passenger count over the restricted amount. The agent testified that someone else gave the non-rev the seat assignment. After reviewing all the facts, the agent was not the person who gave the non-rev a seat. The agent wasn’t notified until the passenger boarded to realize the passenger count was now over the restricted amount which was prior to flight departure. The Board ruled to reduce level to a coaching.

 An agent from SDF was appealing a level 3 for failing too properly report absences. The Company said the agent failed to call out at least one-hour prior for all absences they had covered by a doctor’s note because the Company expected the agent to continue to call out daily until their rosterapps was updated with the doctor’s note. The Union argued immediately that the Company issued the discipline after the 21-day contractual timeline required by the CBA (Collective Bargaining Agreement). After reviewing the facts, the Company had multiple times during the 21 days to issue discipline when the agent was at work and failed to do so. The Board ruled the write up was not timely. Level 3 was overturned.

 An agent from CLT filed a contract violation grievance for unreasonable denial of vacation. The agent did not bid their vacation weeks during the normal vacation bidding which now means they can only bid their vacation based on the Company’s availability. The Company argued that the agent was requesting weeks that were already full and the Company showed evidence of the already awarded vacation.After reviewing the facts, the Board ruled that the denial of vacation was not unreasonable and the Company did not violate the contract. As such, the grievance was upheld.

 In Unity,

Donielle – President                                                                                                                                    Darryle Williams PhD – Executive Vice President                                                                                      Douglas Christian – Vice President                                                                                                            Shaquelle Baker – Secretary/Treasurer

CWA LOCAL 3645

Date: February 2, 2022  TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From:  CWA Local 3645   Subject: System Board Hearings

 

On February 2, 2022, CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT.

An agent from CLT was appealing a contract violation for not being paid holiday pay because they called out FMLA the day before the holiday. The company presented Article 11 section F that outlined when holiday pay would be issued. The company also presented examples including roster apps summary of when multiple agents were not paid holiday pay because they didn’t work the day before or after the holiday. The agent argued that the Contract article 11. F verbiage says “UNLESS” the employee presented proof of illness from a qualified medical examiner or for other reasons submitted (ex. Death in family) and the proof is accepted by the Local management personnel. The agent felt that since FMLA was approved by the Company that the Company basically was accepting their medical reason for absence. The Company then argued that the agent never submitted proof of illness. The agent did not submit proof of illness to the Board neither. They only had proof that FMLA didn’t give them points for the call out. The Board could not find a contract violation with the documents that was presented so they ruled to uphold the denial.

 

An agent from ILM was appealing a level 3 for violating the Zero Tolerance

policy. The agent was accused of making racially insensitive comments while atwork. The agent testified that they made the statements but didn’t know the

comments were insensitive nor did they feel that they were. The company

presented statements from various agents who said they were offended by the

statements. The company presented a corrective with varying dates and also

statements from 3 agents with varying dates which caused confusion about

whether the write up was timely according to the contractual 21-day time period to get a corrective counseling. The Union rep argued that the agent did not know they were violating the Zero Tolerance policy and that they were sorry. The rep also argued that the dates did not match up and that a level 3 was too harsh considering the agent had no prior discipline in their file. After reviewing all the facts, the board deadlocked. This case will go to the CWA District 3 staff rep to be reviewed for arbitration.

 

In Solidarity,

Donielle Prophete – President

Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President Douglas Christian - Vice President

Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer CWA Local 3645

CWA LOCAL 3645

CWA LOCAL 3645 Date: January 5, 2022 TO: CWA Local 3645 Members From: CWA Local 3645 Subject: System Board Hearings

On January 5, 2022, CWA Local 3645 held the System Board of Appeal in CLT.

An agent from CLT was appealing dependability points they received The Company presented a case with documents showing the agent was not absent on the day they were grieving. Unfortunately, the agent grieved the wrong date, so the Board ruled to uphold the points. An agent from CLT was grieving a level one they received from equipment damage. The agent testified that he did not do the walk around but they expected the tug to not start if it was still plugged in. The Company testified that because the agent didn’t do the walk around, they were not able to see that the plug was still attached. Although the tug should not start, there are procedures in place to hopefully prevent these types of accidents from happening when the normal procedures fail. The Company also testified that the agent failed to report the accident which should have resulted in termination but yet the agent only received a level 1. After reviewing the facts, the Board ruled to uphold the level 1.

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 2 performance corrective for driving on the AOA without a seat belt and earbuds. The agent testified that they did have their seatbelt on but it must have broken off during their run. The agent also admitted to wearing their earbuds because they like listening to music. The agent also testified that they were never trained to not wear earbuds on the ramp. After reviewing the facts presented, the Board ruled to uphold the level 2 and suggest retraining.

Three agents from HSV were grieving a level 3 performance for leaving their work area and clocking out without permission from the supervisor on duty. The Company said according to the Policy and Procedures section 8 which states the following: Customer Service Agents are required to remain on company premises and to work their ENTIRE shift unless they received specific permission from management to leave the premises or leave early. All three agents presented their roster apps clock out time where all three clocked out at their bid line’s out time. All three agents admitted to not checking out with their manager but they submitted a copy of an email directive from their station GM that stated everyone should leave at their out time. The Union rep presented proof that it was a station practice  that they were told to leave at their out time and they didn’t have to check out. After reviewing the facts presented, the Board unanimously voted to overturn all three level 3’s due to the Company not following their own P&P by sending that email to all agents in the station.

President Donielle Prophete – President                                                                                                    Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President                                                                                        Douglas Christian - Vice President                                                                                                       Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer CWA Local 3645

Date: December 1, 2021, TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From:  CWA Local 3645          Subject: System Board Hearings

 

On November 30, 2021, CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT. An agent from OAJ was appealing a termination for dependability. The agent had accrued over 30 points and the company presented documents where the agent had been given multiple chances by the management. After reviewing all the facts. The board ruled the termination was justified.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a termination for dependability. The company argued that the agent had accrued over 30 points. The company presented documents for dependability that contradicted each other with different dependability points. The union argued that the agent had doctors notes that covered some of the points in question. In addition, the agent was offered a last chance agreement during the Step one grievance hearing. After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled to overturn the termination and return the agent back to work.

 

An agent from CLT was grieving a level 1 for a safety violation. The company argued that the agent cut off a plane with their tug. The union argued that the video did not show the plane ever slowing down or stopping as the tug drove past the plane. The video also did not show how close or how far the tug was from the plane. After reviewing all the facts the board ruled to overturn the level 1.

 

An agent from CLT was grieving a level 3 for a seatbelt violation. The company argued the agent was given a seatbelt violation during a safety audit in which the manager approached the agent to inspect if the seatbelt was on . The Union argued that the seat belt was on but could not be seen under the jacked. After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled that the level 3 was justified.

 

A ramp agent from GSP was grieving a level 3 for loading dangerous goods on to a plane. The company argued that the agent should not have loaded the package when they saw the scratched-out markings on the package. The Union argued that package had a bag tag on it which was placed there by the ticket counter agent.  The ticket agent had let the passenger reuse a box without properly removing all the marking.  The ramp agent saw the marking and felt the package to see if it felt hot or cold or if it was hissing or otherwise showing signs of a dangerous good. The package did not and since it had a bag tag on it the agent scanned the package and loaded it. After reviewing all the facts, the board to remove the level 3.

 

Another ramp agent from GSP was grieving a level 3 for loading dangerous goods on to a plane. The company argued that the agent should not have loaded the package when they saw the scratched-out markings on the package. The Union argued that package had a bag tag on it which was placed there by the ticket counter agent.  The ticket agent had let the passenger reuse a box without properly removing all the marking.  The ramp agent saw the marking and felt the package to see if it felt hot or cold or if it was hissing or otherwise showing signs of a dangerous good. The package did not and since it had a bag tag on it the agent scanned the package and loaded it. After reviewing all the facts, the board to remove the level 3.

 

An agent from GSP was grieving a level 3 for aircraft damage.  The company argued that the agent parked the jet bridge incorrectly and had to be moved by a manager who caused the damage. The union argued the agent had deplaned a whole flight and the manager verified that there was not damage prior to them moving the jet bridge. The agent never touched the jet bridge after the inbound flight so they could not have caused any damage. After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled to reduce the level 3 to a coaching with jet bridge OJT.

President Donielle Prophete – President

Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President Douglas Christian - Vice President

Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer CWA Local 3645

CWA LOCAL 3645
Date: October 6, 2021
TO: CWA Local 3645 Members
From: CWA Local 3645 Subject: System Board Hearings
On October 6, 2021, CWA Local 3645 held the System Board of Appeal in CLT. An agent from ILM was appealing a termination for violating the mask policy. The agent was on a level 3 last chance agreement when a mainline manager asked the agent to take the Black Lives Matter mask off because it was out of compliance. The mainline manager reported to the Piedmont management that the agent failed to comply and they had to be asked twice. The agent claimed they grabbed the BLM mask out of their car by accident and worked a full 24 hours without anyone saying anything to them. Once the manager asked them to remove it, they did immediately. The Company presented a previous coaching and read and sign where the agent was warned about mask compliance during the previous 12 months of discipline. The Union rep argued that the discipline was egregious. The Company argued that the termination was for just cause because of the active last chance agreement and 5 other manager notes and/or coaching’s in the agents file after signing the last chance agreement. After reviewing all the facts, the board deadlocked. This case will be sent to the CWA National Staff Rep for review for arbitration. An agent from ILM was appealing a level 1 for work performance. A passenger complained that the agent was rude to him and didn’t respect him. The customer also said the agent mischarged his wife for checking a bag. The company argued the agent had violated the customer care policy. The Union rep presented a statement that the Company asked the agent to complete on the day of the incident because management was made aware of the incident that day. The Company disciplined the agent more than 21 days after the alleged incident. The Board ruled to remove the level 1 because the Company was made aware of the incident in enough time to issue discipline, therefore it was untimely. An agent from CLT was grieving a termination for failing to comply with the Customer Service Policies and Procedures. The Company stated the agent was a part of an altercation and during the altercation the agent was charged with 1 – horseplay or loud quarreling on company premises, 2 – Using threatening or abusive language or intimidation, 3- Fighting or any act of violence on company premises and 4 – Disruptive conduct while on duty or while on company property. The Union rep argued that the agent was verbally assaulted by a fellow co-worker which included being spat on twice and never during the altercation did the agent respond. The Company argued that the agent was supposed to not engage and report it to management. The Union argued that the agent did report it to their direct manager. The incident took place just steps from a manager and that the manger failed to defuse the altercation. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled to overturn the termination and return the agent back to work with 8 weeks of back pay for the unjust termination. An agent from CLT was grieving a termination for dependability. The agent accrued 30 points and was terminated per the Piedmont Airlines dependability policy. The agent testified that they were out due to a medical procedure and upon returning to work had complications from the medications in addition to an injury caused by pushing wheelchairs. The agent was instructed to not perform such task post-surgery. The agent admitted they didn’t realize that they could have applied for a personal leave in addition to applying for accommodations after the surgery. The agent had 5 years of service. After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled to overturn the termination and return the agent back to work with no back pay and remain on a dependability probation until Dec 30th, 2021. An agent from CLT was grieving a termination for stealing company time. The Company argued that the agent clocked in and went to their car or left the premises and reported to their work area 50 minutes late. The agent said they were in the baggage claim area with their girlfriend and during the time there, an argument pursued causing them to lose their badge. Once they got their badge back, they returned to work but they never left the airport premises. The Company argued the agent did leave but they never presented proof of the agent actually leaving the premises. The union rep argued that the agent did not steal company time but they were late to their work area. After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled to return the agent back to work with no back pay. The agent had no prior discipline in their file and had 11 years seniority. The agent will be issued a level 3 final warning and any infractions resulting in agent not being in assigned work area on time will result in immediate termination. An agent from CLT was grieving a termination for work performance. The Company argued that the agent broke a headset during a pushback by throwing them down on a tug. The agent argued that they never threw the headset. The Union rep argued the Company had no proof of a broken headset and they were falsely accusing this agent because the agent’s headset was working fine in order to speak directly to the captain. The Union also testified that the headsets that were actually broken was one of the wing walkers. After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled the agent was not terminated for just cause and will be returned back to work with 8 weeks of back pay. An agent from CLT was appealing a level 1 for work performance for operating a bag cart with broken curtains. The Company argued the agent drove the baggage cart even though the curtains could not be closed and secured. The company argued that the agent violated safety protocols of reporting damaged equipment to their manager for immediate tag out. The Union rep argued the agent was trying to ensure that the bags were on time. The agent admitted that they feared discipline for not getting the bag there on time. After revieing all the facts the board ruled to uphold the level 1 because safety should NEVER be jeopardized in an effort to get bags on time. All damages must be reported immediately and tagged out by management.
Donielle Prophete – President Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President Douglas Christian - Vice President Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer CWA Local 3645
CWA LOCAL 3645
Date: September 13th, 2021
To: CWA Local 3645 Members
From: CWA Local 3645
Subject: System Board Hearings On September 1st , 2021, CWA Local 3645 held the System Board of Appeal in CLT. An agent from DAB was appealing a termination for falsifying a doctor’s note. The Company said they took the note to the doctor’s office and the doctor wrote on the note that this agent was not a patient there. The agent argued they are indeed a patient there and produced multiple documents to prove it. The Company presented a hand-written note from the alleged office. The Union argued that anyone could have written on that note. The Board ruled that the termination was unjust. Agent was returned to work with 6 weeks of backpay minus any unemployment. An agent from CLT was appealing 9 dependability points. While the agent was at work, their child’s school called and said they had to come and get them due to possible exposure to covid. The manager on duty gave them a VTO for their morning shift. The agent then called out multiple days and submitted a note from the child’s doctor for Covid screening. The Company argued they have a no-fault dependability policy and the covid leave was written for their child and not the agent. As per the Piedmont Dependability policy, medical notes have to be for the employee. Agents are allowed to request a personal leave of absence or apply for FMLA for family members. Neither of which the agent did. After reviewing all the facts, the Board could not agree because the Union argued that the Company set precedence by allowing the agent to illegally VTO because VTO should only be based on seniority and not situations. The manager should have at least VTO’ed the agent for the full day and the Union wanted that day to be credited and the Company Board members did not agree. They felt the manager should not have given them a vto period based on the contact guidelines of a VTO but since they did it, the morning shift was a credit the agent received. Therefore, deadlocking the case and it will be forwarded to CWA Staff rep for arbitration consideration.
CLT. An agent from CLT was appealing their termination for violating the dependability policy. The agent testified that he reached the 30 points due to a personal family emergency that forced him to miss work. The agent acknowledged that they did not ask for a personal leave of absence as stated in the CBA but was asking for mercy due to this family emergency. The Board ruled to return the agent back to work without backpay and remain on a 90-day dependability probation. Any dependability events will result in termination. An agent from CLT was grieving their termination due to failing a post-accident drug test. The agent said someone tampered with their urine which caused the failed test. The Company disputed such charge and the Union/agent presented no facts to support the claim. After reviewing the facts, the Board upheld the termination. An agent from CLT was grieving a termination for failing to comply with the Customer Service Policies and Procedures as it pertains to the dependability policy. The Union rep said the agent was tardy on multiple occasions due to complications with the turnstile and also because they had a flat tire. The Company argued that on the days the agent claimed the turnstile was down, they never reported it to management and they had no records of multiple people being late due to the turnstile on the days in question. The Company stated when multiple people have this issue, the records are adjusted. The Company also argued that the Union’s case was only based on one day and the agent was over the 30-point threshold. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled to uphold the termination. An agent from CLT was grieving their termination for submitting a fake doctor’s note. The agent said her note was not fake. The Company presented a faxed verification from the doctor’s office that stated the agent was not seen in their office on that date. The Board ruled to uphold the termination. An agent from CLT was appealing a termination for engaging in an unsafe procedure. The Company said the agent did an unapproved pushback. The agent captured the aircraft then signaled for the crew to release breaks while no one was in the Tron. As a result, the aircraft rolled backwards with an unmanned Tron attached. The agent testified that the crew informed them that they wanted to add a family of kids to the flight before they depart and they were following the directive of their supervisor. The Company showed the video of the incident and in the video, the agents’ supervisor was there and it appeared the agent was indeed following the directive of the supervisor. The Board ruled to overturn the termination with the requirement to complete learning hub courses on pushback and OJT pushback in the station. Agent will not receive backpay
Donielle Prophete – President Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President Douglas Christian - Vice President Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer CWA Local 3645
CWA LOCAL 3645 
Date: June 16, 2021 TO: CWA Local 3645 Members
From:  CWA Local 3645 Subject: System Board Hearings
 
On June 16th, 2021 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT. An agent from GPT with 4 years of seniority was appealing a termination for failing a drug test. The agent said they were taking a variety of medicines that could have triggered the positive result. Agent had no prescriptions or doctors notes stating such. The Company cited the CBA article 20 B, E. which states For employees with less than five (5) years of Fleet and Passenger Service seniority, disciplinary action that occurs as a result of theft, term pass violations, physical violence, or drug and alcohol testing violations, only the issue of whether the employee engaged in the alleged misconduct may be the subject of a submission to the System Board of Adjustment. The Board ruled to uphold the termination.
 
An agent from TYS was grieving a termination for unsolicited and unprofessional interaction between them and a AA passenger. According to the Company, they received multiple complaints from the agent’s coworkers stating an AA passenger hugged the agent and the agent did a sexual indication with her tongue. The coworkers said the agents actions created a hostile work environment and violated the sexual harassment policy. The Union argued the agent did not do what the agent was being charged with and the Company had no proof of such behavior, nor did they have a sexual harassment complaint from the AA passenger traveling. The Company presented a video of the alleged interaction between the agent and the passenger. After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled that there was no evidence of sexual harassment to the coworkers, no complaint from any AA passenger citing sexual harassment and the video showed the agent wearing a mask during the interaction, so there was no citing of facial expressions or tongue interaction. Agent was returned to work with full back pay.
An agent from OAJ was grieving points received for calling out due to an OJI issue. The agent’s OJI case manager referred them to a different OJI doctor. While waiting for the new doctor assignment, the agent had a reaction to medicine given from the previous OJI doctor that caused them to seek medical attention from their personal doctor. The seeking medical physician put in the doctors note that the agents side effects were due to the medicine the OJI doctor gave them. The Company’s argument was that the agent should keep the points because the note was not from the Company’s doctor. After deliberation, the board ruled that although it wasn’t from the Company’s doctor, the circumstances didn’t afford the agent the opportunity to seek the work doctor and the agent proved the medical was directly related to the OJI. Board ruled to overturn and remove the points for the medical request directly related to the dates of the doctors note.
An agent from GSP was grieving dependability points related to a medical leave where the agent turned in 3 separate notes from two separate facilities. The Company argued because it wasn’t one note for the consecutive days, HR told them the three notes did not constitute a medical leave of absence. The Union/agent argued that the agent is part time with no medical insurance and went to different Urgent Cares. The first one wrote them out for some days and when they continued to feel bad, they went to another facility because the first one was closed. The Union also argued that the station had a past practice of taking multiple notes before. The Board ruled that the agent had a legitimate reason for the multiple notes and the points would be removed and the medical leave of absence would be honored.
An agent from HSV was grieving a level 3 final for job abandonment. The Company argued the agent left the work premises without permission from a manager, didn’t clock out for their lunch and came back late from the lunch. The agent testified that they had permission from two different managers to go to lunch. Because their last flight left later than usual, they ended up leaving later for lunch. They acknowledged they did leave the airport for lunch as they have done before but they forgot to clock out. The agent also admitted they were late returning and they immediately notified their MGT to explain why. After deliberation, the Board ruled that it was not job abandonment because the agent came back to work. The agent should have been assessed dependability points for being tardy. The level 3 was reduced to a level 1.
An agent from CLT was grieving dependability points received for turning in a medical note for their sick child. The Company argued that medical leave is for the active employee and not an employees family. When a agent takes medical, it can be covered by short term disability and that requirement is for the employee only. The agent/Union argued that in “this” case the child’s doctor actually excused the agent on the note and they put the reason was the agents child. Based on those contributing factors, the Board ruled to remove the points received for the medical leave of absence request. The agent will also be instructed that they need to apply for FMLA for family or they can request a personal leave of absence according to article 14. A. for any future medicals related to family members.
In Solidarity, Donielle Prophete – President Williams PhD – Executive Vice  President Douglas Christian – Vice President Shaquelle Baker – Secretary/Treasurer CWA Local 3645

Date: April 21, 2021              TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From: CWA Local 3645 Subject: System Board Hearings

On April 21, 2021 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal. An agent from CLT was appealing a level 1 for violating the Company’s Covid-19 Health and Safety check policy. The Company argued the agent came to work knowing they had symptoms of covid-19 therefore putting their coworker’s health at risk. The shop steward argued that the agent only had a runny nose and it was in January and the agent did not know they had covid. They thought the runny nose was a symptom of the weather and or a seasonal cold. They went through the temp check every day and passed. It wasn’t until the agent started feeling bad and actually had a temp that made them get tested to later find out they were positive. The Company stated they gave the agent a survey over the phone and the agent admitted to coming to work knowingly sick but had no proof of said discussion because a TMS worker actually filled out the survey, not the agent. The Union argued that there was no proof the agent said that. The Board ruled to overturn and remove the level. An agent from CLT was appealing a level 3 for not servicing an aircraft therefore causing a 20-minute delay and violating the Piedmont Utilities Operations manual which states, “agents must meet their first aircraft upon arrival and service remaining aircrafts based on departure time.” The Company advocate stated that the plane arrived to the gate at 14:40 and the agents out time was 15:30, therefore the agent should have serviced the aircraft. The Company’s documents showed the scheduled departure time for that aircraft was 16:14 and it left at 16:34. The agent argued that the aircraft did not show up on GET and they had no knowledge of the aircraft before being allowed to leave. The Company was asked to verify what time the plane arrived to the gate, a copy of the delay service reason/code and what time the CSA finished off loading passengers and the Company advocate did not have the requested information. After reviewing the facts, the Company did not meet their burden of proof to determine whether the agent was indeed responsible for the delay and if the plane was not gate changed to the agents’ gate after they were released to go home. There was also a concern that the agent did check out with management as required and why a manager allowed them to leave if their work assignment was not completed. The Board ruled to overturn the level 3. All other grievances scheduled to be heard were settled prior to the board hearing.

In Solidarity, Donielle Prophete – President  Williams PhD – Executive Vice President Douglas Christian – Vice President Shaquelle Baker – Secretary/Treasurer CWA Local 3645

Date: April 9, 2021       TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From: CWA Local 3645 Subject: System Board Hearings

On April 9, 2021 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal. An agent from CLT was appealing a termination for a violation of the Piedmont Airlines Drug & Alcohol Policy. The agent admitted that he had a problem and argued for consideration since he/she was a 13-year agent. The Company argued that Piedmont has a zero-tolerance policy for drugs and alcohol and since the agent never self-disclosed before their accident, the agent should not get any considerations. The Union argued that Article 20, E. of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) states that since agent’s with less than five (5) years of fleet and passenger service seniority can only argue whether the alleged misconduct is true or false, that agent’s with more than 5 years can argue for other considerations. Therefore, the agent explained to the Board that they were suffering from depression, taking care of a sick parent and Covid anxiety caused them to turn to drugs which later resulted in them being an addict. Agent said they were now in active counseling and willing to go to an in-patient facility as well as commit and pay for their own random drug test. After long and hard deliberation, the Board deadlocked and this case was sent to the CWA Staff rep for arbitration consideration.

The shop steward from VPS filed an Et Al grievance for a contract violation of Article 6A – An employee may be released from work in seniority order by work group and shift when flight schedules are cancelled or changed for any reason. If an insufficient number of volunteers agree to be released, employees will be released in inverse seniority order. During the start of the Covid-19 Pandemic, the station did not ask for any volunteers but instead sent agents home. The Union argued there was still work to be done. Agents had learning hubs they needed to get done and the station had a closeout procedure that needed to be done. The most senior agent was forced to go home while a junior agent was allowed to stay and due the closeout. The Company argued they were following a directive. Not a policy and/or the contract. The Union argued, a verbal directive doesn’t trump the Contract. The Board ruled the Company was in violation of article 6-a for not soliciting volunteers and therefore sending the senior agent home before the junior agent. The Board awarded that agent with 1 hour of lost time. Since the grievance was an et al for VPS, all agents that can verify they were impacted by the violation will be awarded the same lost wages. The shop steward from VPS also filed a contract violation grievance because they stated the Company violated Article 6 H. 1. – Severe weather or Acts of God - Employees must make every reasonable effort to report to work during periods of inclement weather. Employees are not required to report to work if travel is prohibited by state or local authorities. The shop steward was not actually clear why they filed this et al grievance. They believed the Company told them they were sending agents home because of this article. However, this article is in reference to agents not wanting to come into work due to acts of God and not agents who actually want to be at work. The Board ruled this grievance had no merit.

An agent from CLT was grieving a repeat level 3 for not wearing a mask while in the terminal. The Company argued the agent should have their mask on at all times. The agent claimed they were actively drinking and had a cup in their hand when the manager approached them and later wrote them up. The Union argued that according to the mask restriction guideline in place at the time the agent was written up, the mask could be down while actively drinking or eating. The Company argued the mask mandate was changed but could not show proof that the timeline of the change matched the timing of this incident. The Board ruled to reduce the level 3 to a coaching.

In Solidarity, Donielle Prophete – President Williams PhD – Executive Vice President Douglas Christian – Vice President Shaquelle Baker – Secretary/Treasurer CWA Local 3645

Date: March 24, 2021      TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From: CWA Local 3645 Subject: System Board Hearings

On March 24, 2021 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal. 21 agents from HSV filed a contract violation grievance for Article 6 A. – an employee may be released from work in seniority order by work group and shift when flight schedules are cancelled or changed for any reason. If an insufficient number of volunteers agree to be released, employees will be released in inverse seniority order. Due to the covid pandemic, flights were cancelled in HSV and instead of the Company asking for volunteers to go home, they forced agents to go home who had higher seniority then the agents who were allowed to stay. The Company claimed they sent everyone home. The union claimed and showed some cases where multiple agents did not go home. The Company requested that the Union hear all cases at one time as an et al but then the Board decided that it could not be heard all together because each person’s story was different. The Company Board members requested that the Union meet with the area rep and the GM of HSV to possibly work on a settlement after finding out who was actually wrongfully sent home. The Union Board members agreed. At that time the Board ruled to deadlock the case with the anticipation of a settlement. However, the Company Board member stated the HSV GM was not interested in a settlement so this case was sent to the CWA Staff rep for arbitration consideration.

In Solidarity, Donielle Prophete – President  Williams PhD – Executive Vice President Douglas Christian – Vice President Shaquelle Baker – Secretary/Treasurer

Date: March 10, 2021         TO: CWA Local 3645 Members From: 

CWA Local 3645 Subject: System Board Hearings

On March 10, 2021 CWA Local 3645 held the System Board of Appeal. An agent from CLT was appealing a level 3 for a violation of EGOM, section 4 – Receipt and Dispatch 4-52 & 4-53. The Company stated the agent repositioned the Tron when the cradle arms were not open completely causing damage to two tires. Agent claimed he had just used the equipment on another flight and it worked fine. Agent states he followed all training procedures and it wasn’t his fault the equipment failed while operating. The Company offered the agent a level 1 during the step 1 hearing and agent wanted the discipline removed. Due to the 90-minute delay caused by the damage and the fact that the Company already offered the agent a level 1, the Board ruled to reduce the level 3 to a level 1 as originally offered.

An agent from CLT was grieving a level 1 for refusing to service an aircraft. The Company claimed the Agent suggested that the Company get a supervisor to do it since it wasn’t his gate. The Company showed evidence that the gate was assigned to him in the beginning of his shift and he was indeed responsible for the gate. The Company also testified that the agent ended up actually servicing the gate but claimed the plane took a delay due to this interaction. The Company’s documents showed that the delay was not caused by the Utility department. Due to the inconsistencies of whether the delay was caused by the agent or the Company and whether the agent actually refused to service the plane, the Board deadlocked and this case will be sent to the CWA Staff rep for arbitration consideration. The same agent from CLT was grieving a level 2 for a failure to wear the required PPE (faceshield) while servicing the aircraft. This was a violation of EGOM section 6 – The use of a face shield and protective gloves are required at all times when servicing the lavatory. Agent was also accused of failing to stop at the diamond of safety as required by EGOM Section 2 – Ramp Safety. Agent had already completed the front of the aircraft when he was approached by a DM and told that he needed to have a face shield. The Company witness claimed he told the agent to leave and get a face shield immediately. The agent claimed the DM told him to finish that aircraft and then get a face shield. The agent admitted that he serviced the plane without his face shield because it blew off of his cart. As it pertains to the diamond of safety violation, the agent said he stopped and management brought no video to show otherwise. That charge was not considered by the Board but the Board ruled to uphold the level 2 for the failure to wear the face shield, however; if the agents’ level 1 wins in arbitration this level 2 will be reduced to a level 1 and that one-time decision is not referable nor precedent setting.

A CLT agent was grieving a 30-day travel suspension for failure to follow the mask policy while traveling. The flight attendant claimed they refused to pull their mask up while actively eating a sandwich. Agent asked if that was per the CDC guidelines. Agent claimed he had passenger witness statements showing proof that the FA was rude and disrespectful. The Board ruled that since the agent did not receive any written discipline from Piedmont and by the time the case came to the System Board the 30-day suspension was over, this was not a timely case for the system board. Agent also wanted clarity on why his travel was suspended and to be reimbursed for having to purchase a ticket to Florida. The Board denied his request and instructed agent to seek clarity from AA travel.

In Solidarity, Donielle Prophete – President Williams PhD - Executive Vice President Douglas Christian - Vice President Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer CWA Local 3645

CWA LOCAL 3645

Date: February 24, 2021                                                       TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From: CWA Local 3645 Subject: System Board Hearings

On February 24, 2021 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT. An agent from CLT was appealing a level 3 final for insubordination. The Company suspended the agent and gave the level 3 final because a manager asked them to do a specific task. The agent was moved from their work area to assist in another work area. The agent’s argument was that when they went to do their task, the new manager told them to go clarify the assignment area with the original manager. When the agent went back to their original manager they asked why they were being moved because the contract states they should be moved by seniority. The Union argued that it was miscommunication and the Company was viewing the agent questioning their placement as insubordination. After reviewing the facts presented, the majority of the board ruled that although the agent was correct about the contract verbiage in article 3, D. (Except as may otherwise be provided in this Agreement, Fleet and Passenger Service seniority will govern employees in the case of bidding work schedules, vacation preference, furlough , recall, job reassignment (including location movement) based on the needs of the operation and early release) and they should have been moved by seniority, the agent should have followed the directive of the manager and worked that new area and then filed a contract violation grievance later. The board ruled that the agent was not insubordinate in questioning the work area placement but was insubordinate by not completing the work assignment/directive (noting that the directive was not violating their safety) given by their manager. The Board agreed that insubordination is a terminable offense but, in this case, ruled to issue a level 1 with no backpay for suspension.

An agent from HHH was appealing a level 3, suspension of travel privileges, back pay for suspension and repayment of the $4800 travel costs for the D3’s companion passes. The company argued the agent gave a previously terminated agent their companion passes in turn violating the American Airlines travel guide which states that former team members who are discharged for any type of misconduct or who resigned in lieu of discharge for any type of misconduct are ineligible. The Union rep argued there would be no way an agent would know why a former agent would be separated from the Company since the Company doesn’t reveal. The Union also argued that the Company doesn’t have a clear directive on “misconduct”. The agent did testify that she knew the agent was indeed terminated but she didn’t know it was for misconduct. The agent was not aware of the travel policy and didn’t know she was doing something wrong with listing a former employee/friend as a guest traveler. The board was not unanimous but ruled the agent will receive a repeat level 2 because all agents must know the travel policy but agreed that the agent should not be held accountable for knowing why the former agent was terminated. Therefore, the agents travel privileges will be restored and not have to repay the $4,800 travel cost. Agent will not receive back pay.

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 1 for work performance. The company stated after doing a reverse audit at the ILM station, CLT was alerted that 17 bags were not scanned. The agent said they scanned all bags as they always do and asked for the proof of this apparent claim. By the time of the system board the agent claimed they still had not received any documents to show their supposed error. During the system board the Company still failed to produce evidence of such error. After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled that since the agent requested a coaching to be made whole, the agent will receive a coaching. An agent from SDF was appealing a level 1 for job performance. The company argued the agent was not in place to meet a flight that was assigned to them. The Union rep stated the agent was a night shift agent who never received the actual flight assignment because management said, it was left on a desk from the morning management but the agent said it wasn’t on the desk. The management testified that the agent had been coached previously about missing flights but agent didn’t have a coaching in their file. After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled the agent will receive a coaching. The Union filed an Article 3. E. (The Company will post and make available to the Union an updated station seniority list prior to a work schedule bid. The seniority list will contain the name of each employee, his position, and Company and Fleet and Passenger Service seniority dates. An employee will be permitted a period of fourteen (14) calendar days after the posting in which to protest any omission or inaccuracy affecting his seniority. If no protest is made within this fourteen (14) day period, the list, as published, will be deemed correct and no changes will be made thereafter) contract violation grievance for the HSV station because they failed to follow the bid timeline. The Company argued that they spoke with the local shop steward and he agreed to an emergency bid. The Union argued that the local shop steward didn’t have the authority to approve an emergency bid and the Company needed to seek approval from the Executive Board of the Local or CWA International. After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled going forward the company will follow the bid timeline as outlined in the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). If the company fails to follow the bid timeline then the bidding process will stop and start over again following the timeline out lined in the CBA.

An agent from HSV filed a contract grievance for a violation of articles 14 I-1(An employee’s return to work after a leave of absence must be coordinated with a Company designated representative. The Company may require, if applicable, a physician’s statement verifying that the employee is able to perform the duties of the position to which he is returning.), 15.B (An employee who has exhausted his sick leave may elect to use earned vacation time to be paid for any additional hours of work missed because of illness or non-occupational injury). 15.D (In addition to Article 16 Medical Examinations, the Company will require a medical examiner’s written release before the employee is allowed to return to work after an illness or injury when a medical examiner previously provided such note holding them out of service or when the Company has reason to suspect the misuse or abuse of sick leave. The statement will verify the date of the employee’s full release to return to full duty). The agent tested positive for Covid 19 and returned back to work with a doctor’s note for the 14 days the agent was out as per Piedmonts Covid 19 policy published on the [email protected] website. The station would not let the agent return without a negative covid test. The agent disputed the Company’s request to have to have a negative test but took the second test and tested positive again and the company made them stay out another 14 days. The agent reached out to the Union and the Company inevitably let them return without the negative test but the agent had missed 2 more weeks in the process. After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled the HSV station did not follow Article 15 d, by denying the agents return even with the medical examiners release note or the Piedmont Covid 19 policy which also stated they were to follow the medical examiners note. Agent was awarded 14 days backpay including any RPD’s they missed while out.

In Solidarity,

Donielle Prophete – President                                                                                                                           Williams PhD - Executive Vice President                                                                                                         Douglas Christian - Vice President                                                                                                                  Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer CWA Local 3645

Date: February 10, 2021               To: CWA Local 3645 Members

From: CWA Local 3645          Subject: System Board Hearings

On February 10, 2021 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Adjustment Hearings in CLT. An agent from CLT was appealing a level 3- and 5-day suspension for work performance due to aircraft damage. The aircraft door contacted the jet-bridge because the jet-bridge was inside the sterile area when agent marshalled in the aircraft. Investigation showed the agent did the walk around but the agent stated she could not tell that the jet-bridge was over the line. After reviewing the facts presented, the board ruled that the jet bridge was in the sterile area but agreed it was hard to tell it was over the line. Due to there not being any damage to the jet bridge or aircraft, the board ruled to reduce the level 3 to a level 1 and all agreed a 5-day suspension was too excessive. Agent will be paid for suspension and removed from their file.

An agent from CLT was appealing a repeat level 3 for work performance due to falsifying service. The Company claimed the agent went to service an inbound aircraft but didn’t take taking their lav bag on the aircraft. Company also stated agent only stayed on the AC for 2 minutes. After reviewing the facts, the agent admitted to not servicing the bathroom because the aircraft had no power and agent admitted to not having their lav bag. The agent not providing the required laboratory service resulted in someone else having to come out and service the aircraft causing an 8 min delay. The board ruled that the level 3 was given for just cause for failure to provide the required service. 

 An agent from CLT was given a level 1 work performance for moving the jet-bridge into a bag cart. Agent claimed they had no knowledge of any aircraft accidents and was only notified 45 min later about the so-called incident. There were no witnesses, video footage or pictures indicating or proving anything. The Company only provided two pictures of a bag cart with no damage. After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled to remove the level 1 and award the agent back pay for the suspension. There were 4 other cases scheduled. The Company settled two and two were rescheduled for the next system board date - Feb. 24th. In Solidarity, Donielle Prophete – President  Williams PhD - Executive Vice President Douglas Christian - Vice President Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer CWA Local 3645

Date: January 20, 2021           TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From: CWA Local 3645                  Subject: System Board Hearings

On January 20, 2021 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT.

An agent from FAY was appealing a termination for Job performance. The agent was terminated for having an accident in a tug. After reviewing the facts presented, the Company violated article 24. R- Absent extenuating circumstances, all disciplinary letters will be issued within twenty-one (21) days from the date of the incident or the date the Company is aware of the incident, whichever is later. This time limit will not apply to investigations requiring response from an external agency. The termination was overturned with backpay.

An agent from SDF filed a contract violation grievance claiming the Company violated article 14 & 15 by forcing them to take vacation hours to recover from Covid19. The agent and Union advocate claim both articles support agents using their vacation hours for sick leave but doesn’t require it. After reviewing the facts, the board ruled, the Union and the Company disagree on the interpretation of sick leave and medical leave so this case should have been heard at that interpretation board according to article 20, B – 3. All agreed to have this case reheard at that board scheduled for April 2021.

An agent from SDF filed a contract violation grievance claiming the Company violated article 8 B, C, G. According to article G – a rotation method for the assignment of mandatory overtime may be established locally when mutually agreed upon by the Company and Union. The agent claimed they received 3 points because they had to call out due to be improperly mandated. After reviewing all the facts, the Company claimed their understanding of their station specific agreement was different from what the Union’s understanding. The agreement was supposed to be in writing but neither side had copy of said agreement. The board ruled to uphold the 3 points but the company and the Union must revisit the specific agreement and include scenarios and examples for better understanding and put an agreement in writing within 30 days. The Company and the Local had 8 cases scheduled for this system board hearing date and the Company settled 5 prior to the hearing.

In Solidarity,

Donielle Prophete – President                                                                                                                                     Williams PhD - Executive Vice President                                                                                                        Douglas Christian - Vice President                                                                                                                              Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer                                                                                                                          CWA Local 3645