latest System Board Results

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

 

CWA LOCAL 3645

Date: November 18, 2020       TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From:  CWA Local 3645   Subject: System Board Hearings

 On November 18, 2020 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT. An agent from CLT was appealing a Level 1 for Job performance. The company said that the agent was using their phone on the tarmac. The agents stated they were using their phone to see the time. The Steward asked the manager who wrote the agent up did he see the agent on his phone or see him texting on his phone. The manager said he did not see the agent doing either of those. After reviewing the facts presented, the board ruled to reduce the level 1 to a coaching.

 

An agent from HSV had a contract violation grievance for back pay. The agent showed documentation that the company adjusted their start time causing the agent to lose pay. The union argued that Article 6 section A is referring to releasing agents not adjusting their bid start time. The company argued that they could do that based on Article 6 section A. After reviewing all the facts presented the board agreed that the company cannot adjust agents bid start times. The company can release agents already at workunder the conditions in  Article 6 section A  when flights are cancelled or changed. The agent was awarded 1.5 hours in back pay.

 

An agent from HSV had a contract violation grievance for back pay. The agent showed documentation that the company adjusted their start time causing the agent to lose pay. The union argued that Article 6 section A is referring to releasing agents not adjusting their bid start time. The company argued that they could do that based on Article 6 section A. After reviewing all the facts presented the board agreed that the company cannot adjust agents bid start times. The company can release agents already at work under the conditions in Article 6 section A when flights are cancelled or changed. The agent was awarded 2.5 hours in back pay.

 

An agent from CLT was grieving a level 2 for missed bags. The company argued that the agent did not follow the drop off route they were told to follow to deliver bags. Instead the agent used the skip button to bypass the route for two bags. The company also argued the skip button is never to be used and all routing issues should be reported to management. The agent stated that the bags were for a flight that was four hours later, and they used the skip function because they were going to drop the bags off at the later belt. The steward argued that the routing device losses connectivity sometimes. The company presented all the agents bags scans and there were not any scans of the bags to the later belt. The company also argued the agent did not report to management that there was an issue with the device they were using to route bags. The agent said that he did scan the bags and he did not tell management about any problems with the device. After reviewing all the facts presented the board ruled to uphold the level 2.

In Solidarity,

Anthony Barden - President,

Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President Donielle Prophete - Vice President

Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer CWA Local 3645

 Date: Nov 12, 2020   TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From:  CWA Local 3645   Subject: System Board Hearings  On November 12, 2020 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT.  

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 1 for job performance. The Company said the agent entered the turnstile with their phone in their hand. Therefore, they were violating the EGOM Section 2 ramp safety C. The agent said they did have the phone in their hand but it was not in use. The Company testified that the phone was not being used but their argument was that no agents should have their phone on the AOA period. After reviewing the facts, the Board agreed that the EGOM article states there is no USE of cellular telephones on the AOA and all agreed the agent was not using the phone. The Board ruled to remove the level 1.

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 3 for aircraft damage. The Company stated the jet bridge tapped the stairs of the aircraft and when the agent was notified by the FA, the agent moved the jet bridge and didn’t notify management. The Union steward argued that the agent didn’t realize they touched the stairs and that’s why they didn’t notify management. The FA told the agent the auto leveler wasn’t touching, so the agent thought it was just the auto leveler malfunctioning. The plane was not damaged and the aircraft went out normally. The Union steward also presented other redacted correctives that showed the Company was not being consistent with their discipline behaviors because multiple agents had been given a level 1 for damages. After reviewing all the facts, the Board ruled to reduce the level 3 to a level one because the agent was also suspended without pay.  

 n Solidarity,

Anthony Barden - President,

Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President

Donielle Prophete - Vice President

Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer CWA Local 3645 

Date: November 5, 2020, 2020          TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From:  CWA Local 3645   Subject: System Board Hearings

On November 5, 2020 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT. An agent from CLT was appealing a termination for job performance. The Agent was terminated for wearing PLD’s on the ramp. The Company stated the agent was told to take off their PLD by a mainline manager as they were exiting the bag room. The agent admitted to being told to remove PLD and did before entering the ramp as they stepped off the sidewalk of the bag room., The company admitted that Mainline mangers can’t discipline the Piedmont agents. After reviewing the facts, the Union argued that the agent was not on the ramp but the bag room sidewalk. The Union steward also argued that the agent is employed by Piedmont and it wasn’t a Piedmont manager who saw the agent therefore they should not have issued any discipline because it was only heresay. The Union & the Company disagreed. The case dead locked and will be sent to the CWA Staff representative for review for arbitration.

An agent from CLT was appealing a termination for a failed drug test. The agent had less than 5 years seniority. According to the contract, the only thing that could be discussed was if the agent engaged in the act. The agent admitted to using drugs. After reviewing the facts presented, the board ruled to uphold the termination.

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 1 for performance. The Company stated the agent missed their outbound flight. The agent stated they were in the break room and when they checked GET it showed two aircrafts on top of each other and that is how they missed the outbound. The company argued that the agent should always be at their gate prior to boarding. After reviewing the facts, the Board ruled to uphold the level 1.

A T-Point agent from CLT was appealing a level 3 for performance. The Company claimed that a bag missed the flight and the agent was the last one to scan the bag. The agent stated that they scanned the bag by mistake and told their supervisor that the bag was scanned by accident. The bag was then placed in front of the correct cart for pickup to its correct gate. The agent also stated that the supervisor never informed them who should have taken the bag to the correct gate. The Company did not bring the supervisor, nor the other agent involved in order for the Board to ask questions. After reviewing all the facts the board ruled to remove the level 3. 

in Solidarity,

Anthony Barden - President,

Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President Donielle Prophete - Vice President

Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer CWA Local 3645

CWA LOCAL 3645

Date: Oct 21, 2020   TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From:  CWA Local 3645   Subject: System Board Hearings

 

On October 21, 2020 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT. An agent from CLT was appealing a termination for job performance. The Company said the agent failed to service an aircraft that was parked on the gate for 4 hours. The agent said they received a call to service the aircraft at 11:20. After reviewing the facts, the Company admitted that the agent did get the call at 11:20 and did not show evidence that they aircraft was sitting for four hours and wasn’t changed to this agent’s gate. Agent arrived at the aircraft 5 minutes after receiving the call. After reviewing the facts, the board overturned the termination, and the agent was returned to service with 180 hours of backpay.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a termination for failed drug test. The agent said they were on prescription medicine and the medicine causes a false positive. The Company argued that it was the agent’s responsibility to tell the MRO and the agent had under 5 years of service. After reviewing the facts presented, the board ruled to uphold the termination.

 

An agent from EWN was appealing a termination for performance. The Company claimed the agent disrupted the operation by having a cursing outburst. The agent said they only questioned the manager about releasing by seniority. The Company presented witness statements and the Union presented witness statements. The Union argued that this was a10-year agent and the Company was exaggerating the facts of the alleged discussion. After reviewing the facts, the Board ruled to overturn the termination because the evidence did not prove the alleged violation of the zero-tolerance policy. The board agreed that something happened and believed voices were elevated, so they ruled to overturn the termination and return the agent to work with the learning hub course on professionalism and a read and sign on the Company’s expectations of the zero-tolerance policy and any future proven violations would result in disciplinary action.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 1 for performance. The agent had an accident and claimed the brakes went out. The Company claimed the tug was

 

examined by the GSE and checked out that the brakes did not fail. The Union argued that agents continued to report unsafe equipment, and nothing is being done about it. The Company argued that if the agents are continuing to use said equipment, how are they to know it is malfunctioning. The Company claimed they report all malfunctions to GSE. After careful discussions, the Board ruled to uphold the level 1 because the agent admitted to continuing to use the tug the rest of their shift.

 

An agent from CLT was grieving a level 3 performance for having an accident. The Company claimed the agent lost situational awareness. The agent claimed the brakes went out and they did not have enough time to pull the emergency brake.

After considering all the facts the Company and the Union board members did not agree. The Union board members argued that this agent did not continue to use said equipment and that the Company did not show the history of maintenance to said tug. The Union board members also argued why did the Company not let the Union steward or agent see the video of the incident which could have brought more evidence about whether the incident was a lack of situational awareness or MTC malfunction. The Company board members argued that the steward never asked for the video. The board deadlocked. This case was forwarded to the CWA staff representative for arbitration consideration.

 

A ramp agent from CLT was appealing a level 2 performance for delivering bags to the wrong gate. The agent said their route told them to go to said gate. The Company presented the GPS tracking of the agents said route which showed that the agent did drive to the wrong gate. The Union rep nor agent presented evidence that the route told them to go to said gate. The Board ruled to uphold the level 2.

 

A ramp agent from CLT was grieving a level 1 performance for having a tug accident. The Union rep argued the tug locked up and the agent could not turn the wheel and it ran into the wall. The Union also presented a personal video trying to show evidence of a tug locking up. The Company argued that the tug was checked out by GSE and it was found that nothing was wrong with the tug. The Company also argued that agents constantly say the equipment is not good but they don’t have any logged safety reports and the agents continue to use equipment. The Board could not agree on whether the tug did not malfunction, and it was noted the tug was not driven by the agent the remainder of the day. The Company board members argued that the Union’s video was supposed to show the tug

 

malfunctioning but it didn’t because the steering wheel was actually turning. Again, the Company did not present MTC records for the hearing and the Company Board members also stated the Union rep did not request it for their presentation. The Board could not agree so the case deadlocked. This case was forwarded to the CWA Staff representative for arbitration consideration.

 

 

 

 

In Solidarity,

Anthony Barden - President,

Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President Donielle Prophete - Vice President

Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer CWA Local 3645

 

Date: August 5, 2020   TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From:  CWA Local 3645   Subject: System Board Hearings   

                                                                    

On August 5, 2020 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT.  

 

 

A Ramp agent from CLT was terminated for violating the American Airlines Travel policy. The agent had only one year seniority. The contract Article          Section   states agents with less than 5 years seniority  with a a travel violation  the board could only deliberate if the agent committed the infraction. The agent admitted to the infraction.

 

A Ramp agent from CLT was appealing a level 1 for work performance. The agent was not wearing a seatbelt on the tarmac. The company presented two eyewitnesses that observed the agent not wearing a seatbelt. The company argued that a safety infraction of not wearing a seatbelt could have resulted in a automatic level 3. After reviewing all the facts, the board agreed that the level 1 was given for just cause.

 

A ramp agent from CLT was appealing a level 1 for work performance. The agent reported to their work area late.  The company investigated and found that the agent had clock in in plenty of time to get to their work area in a timely manner. During the investigation the agent admitted they had parked their car in the hourly deck then clocked in. The agent then moved their car to the employee lot and then came back to work. After reviewing all the facts, the board agreed the level1 was given for just cause.

 

 

A Ramp agent from CLT was issued a level 1 for work performance. The ramp agent was driving a tug that made contact with a catering truck. As a result, the caulking devices for the catering truck were broken.  The company argued that the accident could have resulted in an automatic level 3 for an accident involving damage. The agent admitted to the accident and felt the punishment was too harsh. After reviewing all the facts, the board agreed the level1 was given for just cause.

 

 

In Solidarity,

Anthony Barden - President,

Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President

Donielle Prophete  - Vice President

Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer  CWA Local 3645 

CWA LOCAL 3645

Date: July 15, 2020   TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From:  CWA Local 3645   Subject: System Board Hearings   

On July 15, 2020 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT.  

 A CSA agent  from GSP was appealing a termination for falsifying documents (Discripency Report:  Agent stated their badge was taken and they were escorted off the premises before ther shift ended. After review of all the facts the board determined the company did not prove the agent  falsified company documents. The agent filled out the section of the report that asked for their scheduled shift time. The agent was not allowed to finish her shift so the rest of the report was not filled out.  Agent will return back to work with 5 weeks of back pay.

A CSA agent from CLT was terminated for having 35 dependability points. The company proved they  had given counseled the agent including point reduction. After considering all the facts board determined that he termination was for just cause.

A Ramp agent from CLT was appealing a level 1 for work performance due bags shifting in bin causing the aircraft to return to the gate. The company made the agent load bags under the supervision of a supervisor as a result of this incident for one week. After considering all the facts the board agreed to reduce the level 1 to a coaching. The agent was already disciplined by having to load bags under supervision which was a coaching. agents should not be disiplined twice.

A CSA from CLT was grieving a zero-tolerance violation.  The company stated the agent was given a level 1 and the zero-tolerance document but after agreeing to a mediation the level 1 was removed. After reviewing all the facts the board agreed that the zero tolerance documentation will be removed and replaced with a review of the mediation session.

A ramp agent from CLT was appealing a level 3 for zero tolerance violation. The company presented statements saying the agent threw their back pack at another agent. The union presented statements saying the agent did not throw the bag at another agent. The Union board members did not fell the company proved its case due to the contradictory statements that were submitted. The company felt the company did. Due to the board not agreeing the board deadlocked. This case was forwarded to the CWA national staff representative for consideration for arbitration. Arbitration.

A ramp agent from CLT was grieving a level 1 for work performance for not meeting an aircraft. The union argued that “GET and Aeroban” are not always accurate and do not update frequently. The agent provided examples of contradictory information from both systems that ramp agents are told to use to monitor flights. After reviewing all the facts, the board agreed the company did not prove the agent intentionally missed their flight and the level 1 to a coaching.

A CSA agent  from CLT was issued a level 3 for work performance after boarding an aircraft with out a crew on board. The union argued the agent was the boarding agent and the other agent that was working the gate took down SSR passengers to aircraft and it was their responsibility to verify if the crew was on board.  After reviewing all the facts, the board agreed the company did not prove the agent deserved a level 3 and reduced it to a level 1 because the boarding agent should have confirmed with the other agent that the crew was on board.

A Ramp agent from CLT was issued a level 1 for damage to property after pulling the charging cable away from the charging device after the cable was caught on the back of his tug. After reviewing all the facts, the board determined that the level 1 was given for just cause. The agent had failed to do a 360 walk around. If the agent had done so they would have discovered the charging cable was entangled in their tug.

 In Solidarity,

Anthony Barden - President,

Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President

Donielle Prophete  - Vice President

Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer  CWA Local 3645 

Date: June 29, 2020   TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From:  CWA Local 3645   Subject: System Board Hearings   

                                                                    

On June 20, 2020 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT.  

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 1 for work performance due to the agent not being able to get a radio before providing lavatory service. Agent stated that they were told to service aircraft without radio by manager. Additionally, manager provided with a radio when one became available. After review of all the facts the board determined radios were not available for agent because of shift change. Also, company did not prove agent was not following managers orders. The level 1 was reduced to a coaching. 

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 2 for work performance for using their phone on the tarmac. Agent stated they used their phone after not be able to contact manager two times to inform them of a faulty tug they were driving. Agent also had statements from other agents stating they could use their phones if not able to contact manger by radio in addition to what number to call. After considering all the facts Union determined the use of the phone was reasonable due to the safety hazard and risk of injury to agent and coworkers. The Company disagreed and felt agent company was lenient because not wearing a seat belt is an automatic level 3. Due to the board not agreeing the board deadlocked. This case was forwarded to the CWA national staff representative for consideration for arbitration.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 3 for work performance due to not acknowledging an aircraft assignment and not meeting an inbound aircraft ten minutes prior.  The agent stated they did not get a flight assignment via rove and did not receive a paper with flights to work. Agent also stated when they did receive a flight they had to wait for a tug. After considering all the facts the Union did not feel the company proved their case. The company felt the company did. and the Union board members did not agree. Due to the board not agreeing the board deadlocked. This case was forwarded to the CWA national staff representative for consideration for arbitration. arbitration.

 

An agent from ILM was appealing a termination based on multiple SIDA badge violations. The Company stated agent had been trained on these safety items multiple times. The Union argued that the agent could still work in the non SIDA badge area but the Company stated that information was false. All areas had to have SIDA privileges.  The Board ruled to uphold the termination.

 

A CSA from CLT was grieving a level 3 performance for zero tolerance violation. The Company stated the agent cursed and the agent said they did not curse. After a review of the facts, the Company did not meet their burden of proof and the Level 3 was overturned.

 

A ramp agent from CLT was appealing a level 1 performance for not checking out with their manager before leaving. The Company stated the agent left early and a flight had to be assigned to another agent. Agent said they asked permission to leave and the reports manager approved them to go. After reviewing the facts, the Company’s step one grievance notes showed a time difference in when the manager said they didn’t approve the agent to go. The corrective said the agent left at 14:30 without permission and the investigation notes from management said that the manager didn’t approve the agent to leave at 22:00. The two different times showed that the Company couldn’t prove the claim that the agent did in fact leave without permission on the day in question. The Board ruled to overturn the level 1.

 

A ramp agent from CLT was grieving a level 3 performance for going to lunch without the managers permission. The agent stated they did get the managers permission because the agent wasn’t feeling good. After reviewing the facts, the Company did not prove the agent left without permission. The Board ruled to overturn the level 3 final.

In Solidarity,

Anthony Barden - President,

Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President

Donielle Prophete  - Vice President

Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer  CWA Local 3645 

 

CWA LOCAL 3645

Date: June 16, 2020   TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From:  CWA Local 3645   Subject: System Board Hearings   

                                                                    

On June 10th, 2020 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT.  

An agent from ILM was appealing a termination for dependability while on an OJI. The company did not prove agents new schedule with restrictions was documented and communicated to agent. The company also failed to thoroughly investigate prior to terminating agent. After reviewing all the evidence presented the board ruled that termination was not justified. The termination was overturned, and agent got their job back with back pay.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 3 for violating the company’s Zero Tolerance policy in the breakroom. The company produced multiple statements from agents collaborating that agent did violate Zero Tolerance policy in the breakroom. Agent failed to attend, and union presented in agents’ absence. After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled the Level 3 was justified.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 3 for work performance. The company presented multiple documents including agents schedule, detailed flight information and agents bag scans. Agent failed to attend, and union presented in agent’s absence. After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled Level 3 was justified.

 

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 3 for work performance. Agent failed to yield to airplane. The company presented multiple documents including briefing, tower report from the Captain identifying agent as cutting his aircraft off. After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled Level 3 was justified. Please note Aircrafts always have the right of way.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 3 for work performance. After reviewing all the facts, the board determined there was no progression of discipline. The level 3 that agent was appealing was a repeat level 3. Level 3 upheld.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a Level 1 for work performance. After reviewing all the facts, the board determined that the company did not present evidence that showed the Level 1 was justified.  The Level 1 was reduced to a coaching.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a Level 3 for work performance. The company admitted that they could not prove agent worked the flight in question.After reviewing all the facts, the board determined that the company did not present evidence that showed the Level 3 was justified.  The Level 3 was removed.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 1 for work performance. After reviewing all the facts, the board could not agree, and the board ended in a deadlock. This case will be sent to the CWA District 3 Staff

Rep for review for arbitration.

 n Solidarity,

Anthony Barden - President,

Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President

Donielle Prophete  - Vice President

Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer CWA Local 3645 

 

Date: April 22, 2020   TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From:  CWA Local 3645   Subject: System Board Hearings   

                                                                    

On April 22nd, 2020 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT.  

An agent from HHH was appealing a termination for Violating company Travel privileges.  The Company accused the agent of using their travel benefits to fly to another business in which he owned in addition to manipulating a reservation while at work. The company provided testimony and extensive documentation from Corporate security.  After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled the company proved the reason for termination was justified. The termination upheld.

 

 An agent from CLT was appealing a level 1 for causing damage to a Tron by hitting it with a jet bridge. The testimony and evidence presented showed the agent did not follow protocol prior to moving the jet bridge which included looking out the window prior to moving jet bridge. If vision was obstructed  and a clear path to the aircraft could not be determined then jet bridge should not have moved. A manager should have been  called.. After reviewing all the facts, the board ruled that The level 1 was justified. The level 1 was upheld.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 3 for not obeying a stop sign and turning directly into the path of an aircraft that was taxing. As a result the taxing aircraft had to make an emergency stop to avoid hitting the tug.  After reviewing all the facts, the board determined that the Level 3 was justified. The level 3 was upheld.

 

In Solidarity,

Anthony Barden - President,

Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President

Donielle Prophete  - Vice President

Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer  CWA Local 3645 

CWA LOCAL 3645

Date: April 8, 2020   TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From:  CWA Local 3645   Subject: System Board Hearings   

                                                                    

On April 8  2020 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT.  

An agent from CLT was appealing a termination for falsifying Doctors notes. The agent admitted to falsifying their doctor’s notes. After reviewing all the facts, the Board determined the company presented enough evidence to justify termination.

Termination was upheld.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a termination for falsifying Doctors notes. . After reviewing all the facts, the Board determined the company presented enough evidence to justify termination.

Termination was upheld

 

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a termination for falsifying a doctor’s note. The board determined that the Company did not terminate the agent in a timely manner. The termination was overturned and agent will return to work with back pay.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a Coaching for work performance for leaving work area during a mando. After reviewing all the facts, the board determined the agent was aware there was irregular operations and did not follow the policy and procedures for checking out at the end of their shift. Coaching was justified.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a Coaching for work performance for leaving work area during a mando. After reviewing all the facts, the board determined the agent was aware there was irregular operations and did not follow the policy and procedures for checking out at the end of their shift. Coaching was justified.

 

In Solidarity,

Anthony Barden - President,

Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President

Donielle Prophete  - Vice President

Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer  CWA Local 3645