System Board results

 

Date: March 31 2019   TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From:  CWA Local 3645   Subject: System Board Hearings   

                                                                    

On March 27th, 2019 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT.  

An agent from CLT was appealing a Level 2 for work performance. After reviewing all the facts. The board determined that the level 2 was excessive and reduced the level 2 to a level 1.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a Termination for work performance. After reviewing all the facts, the board determined the company followed progressive discipline. The company also showed that this agent was given multiple opportunities to avoid termination. The termination was upheld.

An Agent from CLT was appealing a level 2 for work. After reviewing all the facts, the board determined that the agent was given a repeat level 2 which was no progression in discipline. Repeat level 2 was upheld.

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 1 for work performance. After reviewing all the facts. The board determined the company did present evidence which that supported the level 1. The level 1 was upheld.

An agent from CLT was appealing a level 2 for work performance. After reviewing all the facts. The Board determined the Level 2 was excessive and the  level 2 was reduced to a level 1.

In Solidarity,

Anthony Barden - President CWA Local 3645                                                                  Darryle Williams PhD - Executive Vice President CWA Local 3645                         Donielle Prophete  - Vice President CWA Local 3645                                                Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer  CWA Local 3645 

 Date: December 15, 2018   TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From:  CWA Local 3645   Subject: System Board Hearings   

   On December 12, 2018 CWA Local 3645 held System Board of Appeal in CLT.  

An agent from CLT was appealing a termination for violating the Zero Tolerance policy. After reviewing all the facts. The board could not agree, and this case will be sent for review to be presented for arbitration.

 

An agent from CLT was appealing a termination for work performance. After reviewing all the facts, the board determined that the company did present evidence that supported progressive discipline including 3 repeat level 3’s for work performance before the termination was issued. Termination was upheld.

An agent from CLT was appealing a termination for work performance. After reviewing all the facts, the board determined that the company did present evidence that supported progressive discipline including 2 repeat level 3’s for work performance before the termination was issued. Termination was upheld.

An agent from CLT was appealing a termination for violating the Zero Tolerance policy. After reviewing all the facts, the board determined that the company did not present evidence that supported the termination. The Termination was removed, and agent will return back to work.

An agent from CLT was appealing a termination for violating the travel policy by calling out for a shift and getting on a flight operated by American Airlines. After reviewing all the facts, the board determined that the company did present evidence that supported termination. Termination was upheld.

Date: November 15 2018 TO: CWA Local 3645 Members From: CWA Local 3645 Subject: System Board Hearing Summary On November 14th, 2018 CWA, Local 3645 & Piedmont Airlines held the System Board of Adjustment Hearings, as required by Article 20 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, in CLT.

All cases heard were from Charlotte agents.

An agent from DAB was appealing a level 3 for work performance. The agent received a level 3 for a security violation. A TSA agent was able to sneak on the aircraft and leave a toy gun and the agent doing the RON did not see the gun. The Company incurred an $11,500 fine for such incident. After reviewing all the facts, the board determined that the violation was too serious to take lightly. Security is a very important factor and all agents must be responsible. The level 3 was upheld.

An agent was appealing a termination. Agent apparently had two beers while traveling non-rev. Gate agents reported the agent for being intoxicated while traveling in uniform. Agent had on a piedmont shirt. The agent claimed they had been traveling for over 24 hours and was not intoxicated but was indeed fatigued. After reviewing all the facts, the Board determined that the evidence presented did not actually prove the agent was intoxicated. The Board did however have concerns about the agent wearing a company item and consuming alcohol. The Board agreed to reverse the termination and bring the agent back on a level 2 with no back pay, for non-rev travel violation, be coached and sign off on the non-rev employee travel guidelines and have their travel suspended for 4 months.An agent from GNV was appealing a level 3 for work performance. A TSA agent was able to sneak past the agent while boarding and access the AOA. The agent had previously had their probation extended because the Company felt they needed more training. The agent felt they were still being trained because there were multiple agents at the gate assisting with the boarding. The Company claimed the boarding agent was fully responsible. After reviewing all the facts, the Board determined that the agent was still basically being monitored as OJT even though they were just out of probation 2 days prior. Security is everyone’s job and the agents that were standing by should have also caught the security. The Board ruled to reduce level 3 to a level 1 with OJT style re-training of how to prevent access to the aircraft. It was also recommended that the station brief all agents on security.

An agent from HSV was appealing a level 1 for work performance. The Company claimed the agent failed to work together as a team and because of this, they violated the Piedmont Policy and Procedures personal conduct code. After reviewing all the facts, the Board determined that the company did not have any evidence to support this violation. Level 1 was overturned.

An agent from HSV was appealing a level 1 for work performance. The Company claimed the agent failed to work together as a team and because of this they violated the Piedmont Policy and Procedures personal conduct code. After reviewing all the facts & video’s the Board deadlocked on its decision. This case will be forwarded to the CWA staff rep for arbitration consideration.

An agent from HSV from appealing a level 2 for dependability. The agent was An agent from HSV from appealing a level 2 for dependability. The agent was given a level 2 without being presented with a level 1. The Company argued that the agent was given a counseling at the appropriate time but the agent only had 23 points. A level 1 is warranted at 24 points. The agent called out and received 3 points now placing the agent at 26 points which requires a level 2. After a review of the facts, the Board ruled that the 26 points does warrant a level 2 according to the dependability policy. The level 2 was upheld.

In Solidarity, Anthony Barden - President CWA Local 3645                                                                              Darryle Williams PHD - Executive Vice President CWA Local 3645                                                                      Donielle Prophete - Vice President CWA Local 3645                                                                                                  Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer CWA Local 3645

Date: November 10 2018   TO: CWA Local 3645 Members

From:  CWA Local 3645   Subject: System Board Hearing Summary   

On November 8th, 2018 CWA Local 3645 & Piedmont Airlines held the System Board of Adjustment Hearings, as required by Article 20 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, in CLT.  All cases heard were from Charlotte agents.

 An agent from was appealing a coaching for work performance. The agent received a level 1 for a PR0, was reduced to a coaching during the step 1 but still felt that they didn’t deserve the coaching in their file at all because of the circumstances that surrounded the PR0. After reviewing all the facts, the board determined that the agent did warrant a coaching but not for a PR0. The agent will be coached on the importance of following the documented boarding procedures, protocol, GFAR and to never sacrifice safety for an on-time departure. An agent was appealing a level 1 for work performance for PR0. The agent was doing a quick turn and the flight attendant trainee had boarded the flight and agent did not pre-scan the boarding pass causing a miscount. The agent claimed they caught the miscount within seconds and the PR0 was not due to that miscount. After reviewing all the facts, the Board determined to reduce the level 1 to a coaching for proper flight attendant- in training boarding AC procedures. All agents will be reminded to always scan all boarding passes when someone boards the AC or reprint the FA trainees boarding pass for scanning at the original boarding time.

An agent from was appealing a level 2 for work performance. Agent left the work area without checking out with the manager. After reviewing all the facts, the Board determined that the performance issue did warrant a coaching but the agent already had a level 2. The company repeating the level 2 which caused no progression in discipline was the same as a coaching. The repeat level 2 was upheld.

An agent was appealing a level 1 for work performance. The Company said the agent left a A/C panel open and the plane had to return to the gate before taking off. Agent did the walk around, so the Union argued that the panel door could have popped open during the taxi out. After reviewing all the facts, the Board determined that the company did not have any evidence that the panel door being open was a result of the agent leaving it open. The Company also admitted to the agent doing the walk around. The level was removed.

An agent was appealing a level 1 for work performance. Agent was moving the jet bridge and hit the stairs of the window washing ground equipment. The Company claimed that the agent did not go all the way down the steps to do her 360-degree check before moving the equipment. The agent argued that they did do a check and never went all the way down the steps because they weren’t trained to do that. The Union rep also noted that this jet bridge does not allow you to see under it at this gate, so the agent would still not have seen the ground equipment. The stairs were in the sterile area but in a blind spot which made it hard for the agent to see because there was no mirror visual on this jet bridge. After reviewing all the facts, the Board determined that the level 1 would be reduced to a coaching and agent is required to complete the jet bridge learning hub again. The Board also recommended the training dept. in CLT specifically indicate what process is necessary for the 360 degrees walk around when the jet bridge is different from gate to gate.

In Solidarity,

Anthony Barden - President CWA Local 3645                                                                                                    Darryle Williams PHD - Executive Vice President CWA Local 3645                                                                Donielle Prophete - Vice President CWA Local 3645                                                                                          Shaquelle Baker - Secretary /Treasurer CWA Local 3645