NCJ Number
96983
Date Published
1985
Length
23 pages
Annotation
This paper characterizes the Teamsters' joint grievance committees and considers whether the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the courts should give legal weight and credibility to the committees' decisions.
Abstract
A joint grievance committee typically consists of 25 members appointed by each side. On the union's side, the members are normally paid union officials appointed by the State or international officers of the union. On the employer's side, the members are officers of various trucking companies appointed by the employer's association. A joint grievance committee meeting is held to dispose of outstanding grievances, and the hearing of cases is the committee's principal activity. Hearings are structured as truncated adjudicatory proceedings; however, the hearings fail to meet the standards for an adjudicatory process in five areas. First, the hearing does not provide adequate opportunity to present relevant evidence and give it careful consideration; second, decisions are not based on the evidence presented at the hearing, but on information and direction obtained outside the hearing; third, the trading of grievances is almost inevitable; fourth, the grievance committee and its procedures are politically controlled; and fifth, the panels are inherently lacking in neutrality. Examples of political bias are illustrated in several litigated cases, including Early v. Teamsters Local 82. Devices facilitating arbitrariness, including the lack of a readily available record of the hearing, are discussed. The Teamster joint grievance committees' decisions are believed to fall short of arbitration on all counts. Fifty-two references are listed.