UWUA AFL-CIO LOCAL 69

DIVISION II NEWS

(Revised 08/19/08) 9:22am

UNION THOUGHT FOR THE DAY;

HOW DOES YOUR BOSS RESPECT OUR CONTRACT? HOW DO THEY RESPECT YOUR UNION? BOTH REFLECT HOW THEY RESPECT YOU !!!

INTERESTING READING

Want some interesting internet reading. Well here ya go…..

Go to Google.

Type in: Toxic Boss.

Then click on: The Toxic Boss Syndrome

See if you can relate to anything

UNION ALLEGES WEINGARTEN VIOLATIONS

There has been one NLRB charge filed by the Union alleging a member was denied his Weingarten Rights at Dominion’s Hope Gas Morgantown City Plant and another pending from an incident at Hope’s Clarksburg City Plant. In Morgantown a member was refused his rights to representation during an investigation though he requested it and in Clarksburg a representative was told he could not caucus with the member being investigated nor could he ask any questions during the hearing. This is the second similar incident at Clarksburg City Plant. “We don’t know what has caused management to take a position that appears to violate individuals’ rights to representation, but we’re certainly going to try and find out. Our members will get the representation they are entitled to.” local president Rittenhouse said.

UNION HAS CONCERN OF TREATMENT OF VETERANS

Dear Union Sisters and Brothers,

On August 14, 2008, I was e-mailed a letter from Dominion Labor Relations Manager, D Davis outlining their conclusion from their investigation regarding questioning of Soldiers and Veteran’s at job interviews by an area manager. Don’t know if Mr. Davis plans to share the letter with you or not, he didn’t say in his e-mail, but I think it’s important to clarify a few things in the event that he does.

1. Mr. Davis alleges, “I abruptly walked out of the meeting after approximately 5 minutes and refused to listen to the results of the company’s investigation.” That is partially true. I did abruptly walk out of the meeting, but only after hearing their chief investigator first say that one of the interviewee's had said he did not recall being ask the question and her changing that statement to , he said he was not ask that question. These two responses have a big difference when being interpreted. Upon confronting her on this change, she told me that; we could argue the point all afternoon and it wouldn’t change.” I then proceed to get up, walk-off, I stopped and ask point blank if the director had ask the question in interviews, the precise point of the investigations, and she responded , “No”. So yes I did walk-off but I did get their results to the question in hand which was;” Did Dominion actually allow its management personnel to use such questioning and guidelines in its hiring process? According to their investigation and response the answer is, “No”. At that point I needed no other information from her or Dominion.

2. One paragraph out of a 6 paragraph letter was dedicated to responding to, as our webpage states; “Concern of treatment of Veterans in job interviews.” No one questioned Dominion’s monetary contributions or donations to soldiers and veterans. No one questioned that after union approval, benefit and pay were extended for our soldiers. The issue questioned was; what was happening in job interviews of Soldiers and Veterans involving a specific area manager. I have no idea why Mr. Davis chose to include all the other information in his response of their investigation, it was not relevant.

3. Last, as I said the concern was over what we were told by one individual and by one relative of an interviewee regarding questioning of Veteran’s during job interviews. Did we get the years of the interviews mixed up, yes we did, big deal. Be it this year, last year or the year before, the concern was there due to what Union Director J Rooney had been told. What was actually the final outcome, I’d say inconclusive. Their investigation resulted in one conclusion; the union’s investigation resulted in another. I say this because the individuals who we talked to were the same ones as the company and their stories differed for whatever reason(s). I don’t think a conclusion can be drawn that the company’s investigation trumps the union’s investigation or vice versa.

Main thing is that Veterans’ aren’t questioned on deployment and I think both investigations have assured that won’t happen.

In Unity,

Charlie

Our Local fully supports our Soldiers, Veterans and their families. They have made countless sacrifices for us and our country. We thank them and respect them for their service and for their willingness to step forward to protect us, our freedom and their aid to others. We thank their families for we know the sacrifices they have to make while their soldiers perform their duties. We know because in some cases we are those soldiers and those family members. Unfortunately some have made the ultimate sacrifice. Our thoughts and prayers are with their families.

MEETING WITH BABCOCK AND BROWN WELL RECEIVED

The Union’s Executive Board and Hope Gas Reps met with COO; M. Cyrus and General Counsel C. Losh on Tuesday, August 12^th for an initial meeting of the parties to discuss concerns and questions regarding the sale of Hope Gas to Babcock and Brown. Overall the meeting went quite well. Although not all questions were answered, which would have been impossible, several major concerns were addressed. Here are just a few; 1. Will the pension for the Hope employees remain whole? Yes all funds identified related to Hope employees’ pensions will either be transferred with the employees or used for current Hope employees. 2. Will Hope employees be considered “terminated vested employees? No. Will all other benefits be the same? They must have the same level of coverage or better. 3. How will union time be handled? Yet to be determined. 4. Will our Contract remain in force? Entirely. 5. Will there be lay-offs? They have no plans for lay-offs. Please keep in mind that this was an initial meeting, no doubt many other will follow and many other questions will arise. It will be a long journey. Many of the additional outstanding issues intertwine within Dominion and their interpretations of the Contract, which may pose problems as they did with the Equitable process. Babcock and Brown, so far have been nothing but open, honest and willing to work with us, but unless we can work out the contractual issues with both them and Dominion, it can and will affect how we approach the sale process and the position we take.

DUPONT SAFETY RESOURCES

I met last Wednesday with a representative of DuPont Safety Resources to discuss what was going on inside of DTI. I expressed our concern that we were not notified by Labor Relations until after the process had started and the worker surveys had started being distributed. I expressed your concerns over how the surveys were handed out and returned. I was very frank with him in defining our working relationship and my opinion of DTI’s Safety program and department. He explained to me how their process works, what they want to achieve and how it takes a “buy-in” by the workers and their union. We discussed the reluctance of any “buy-in” due to the fact that in past dealings we always; “came up on the short end of the stick.” After our first meeting I believe there is potential for a good safety program being designed but with the level of mistrust between the parties and the fact that DTI will not look at us as equal in the process, efforts may be stymied. Still recommend that you approach this process with a good amount of caution. Keep in mind we are NOT being kept up to speed by the DTI of what they are doing and how they are doing it. Remember everything you say has a ripple effect. Be safe and watch your brothers’ and sisters’ backs.

SAFETY REVIEW COMMITTEE

Had an accident? You may be called to stand before the “powers to be” in Clarksburg! Transmission has set-up a “safety review committee”, thought that was what the safety department was for, to appear before. The committee consists of several management personnel including VP J Barger. Now we have ask to be present to protect your rights including those that guarantee you’ll not be intimidate, harassed or reprimanded, but we were refused attendance. The purpose of the meeting is… how did Manager of Labor Relations D. Davis put it; “The purpose of the committee is to identify the causes of accidents, develop measures to avoid reoccurrences of such accidents and communicate the measures across the system.” And that; “the review meeting is not in investigation in the sense that discipline against a bargaining unit employee may be an outcome.” My question to them that has gone unanswered is, “If they have nothing to hide, then why not allow union representation?” We are reviewing our contractual and legal options. Advice to the members who may get the call; Ask at the beginning of the meeting if anything discussed at this meeting can lead to any disciplinary action including in the future. If so demand representation. If at any time during the meeting it becomes apparent to you that you are being disciplined including verbally, demand representation. BE aware at all times during the meeting the direction it is going. Ask if anything being said or recorded at the meeting is going in any file with your name on it. Admit no wrong doing, you should have already had your accident investigated by the safety department and filled out the proper paperwork. Keep your answers to questions as short as possible. You cannot be forced to provide solutions or suggestion…BE CARFUL! Demand copies of all notes, minutes and statements from the meeting. Keep your own notes, including the attendees from the meeting and their remarks. Again; BE CAREFUL! You can’t take back something said in one of these meetings and it can and probably will come back to haunt you if you make a mistake

UNION FILES NLRA CHARGE ON REIMBURSEMENT OFFER

The Union‘s attorney will be filing a charge with the National Labor Relations Board first thing Monday morning alleging Bad Faith Bargaining by Dominion. The charge is a direct result of Dominion’s Labor Relations Manager changing his proposal and “upping” his demands regarding parking reimbursement for union eligible employees at Transmission’s main office.

COMPANY OFFERS PARKING REIMBURSEMENT AT MAIN OFFICE….

WITH STRINGS ATTACHED

Simply put: On Wednesday afternoon the Dominion Labor Relations Manager offered the program with up to $40 reimbursement for employees at the main office who park off site.

(This is a topic subject to negotiations.)

Verbal offer made by the manager to the union president had no stipulations other than how reimbursement would occur.

Via e-mail, that evening the manager put the offer in writing, no other stipulations other than how reimbursement would occur.

Thursday morning the company presents the Union with a proposal defining the reimbursement and an additional paragraph stipulating that the company could delete, modify, amend and pretty well do anything they wanted with the program without negotiating with the Union.

The Union countered by marking the wording out in the last paragraph, signing the agreement and presenting it to the company. The company immediately refused the offer. The Union said that they could not surrender its rights to future negotiations and that was pretty well that.

UNION EXPLORES WAYS TO LIMIT VEBA PAYMENTS

During negotiations the Negotiating Committee explored ways to limit VEBA payments for medical premiums of retirees who come back to work for Dominion as contractors. We got caught up in fighting to keep the medical premiums low for both active employees and retirees (some being the very same coming back to take our work) and got sidetracked. We’re now back to working with the concept and are reviewing possible changes with the VEBA administrators, lawyers and trustees. Our position is we do not need to negotiate these changes with the company because the VEBA belongs to the Union. One of the ideas we are looking at is that if a individual comes back to work for Dominion that had been Union and is having their premiums paid for by the Union VEBA Plan would be penalized by a nonpayment of their premium for the period that they work as a contractor as well as have an additional month of nonpayment assessed for each month of employment. For example: If you retired as a union member and have your medical premiums paid by the VEBA Plan and you come back, work 12 months as a contract inspector/ clerk, whatever, then during that period of time you would not have any medical premiums paid and would not have any paid for the following twelve months for a total; to 2 years by the VEBA. If you contracted for two years it would be for a total of 4 years, and so on and so on. An alternative would be to set up a process whereby the retiree(s) who come back to work could pay dues as well as a certain monthly amount into the VEBA. We’re in the infant stage of researching this and you’ll be kept informed. Some may question why we would do such a thing, its simple; we as a union created the VEBA to help offset the cost of medical for retirees. They see their medical costs continue to climb while seeing no increases in income. Your deferred wages fund that part of the Plan. It was never intended to be used to pay premiums for individuals who retire then come back and in some cases actually help eliminate full time jobs that pay into the VEBA. WE realize it’s controversial, but think about it; we just had tough negotiations. Two tough areas in those negotiations was the need for active employees to pay more out of their pockets to off-set medical premium increases and getting the company to contribute more funds to the VEBA. Do you really want that money to be used to pay premiums for contractors who do your work?

SECURITY CAMERAS BECOMING A REAL CONCERN

Well we were told a first they were installed at entrance ways and parking lots activated by sensors. We were told they were installed at Hastings to monitor process. We were told that they were not to be used to monitor employees…it looks like that has all changed. We currently have one labor charge filed regarding security cameras (process cameras) at Copley Liquid Plant and are looking at the possibility of additional actions due to tapes at Oakford. Reason for concern, company will not agree to shut-off cameras during work hours and will not agree to sign a letter stating that they will not use observation tapes for disciplinary actions. In other words…BIG DOMINION IS WATCHING! In my opinion, if the company has to go to this level of using cameras and tapes against their employees, there’s a much bigger break down somewhere other than in security.

AS A REMINDER

INVOLVED IN A COMPANY INVESTIGATION…..

BEING INTERVIEWED..!?

PLEASE USE CAUTION!!!!!!!!

A startling fact came to light Friday when President Rittenhouse received the conclusions from an investigation that he had requested alleging “breach of confidentiality” by a corporate investigator. His conclusion was that Dominion does not view it as a” breach of confidentiality” for an investigator to discuss incidents and investigations with individuals not associated with an investigation. What lead to the investigation was when it came to Rittenhouse’s attention that the corporate investigator had discussed cases with union officers or members that were not involved in the investigation being discussed. Once requested, corporate security did and investigation of one of their own and..Surprise came to the conclusion that there had been no breach of confidentiality…but of course steps are being taken to prevent it from happening again. Advice; BE very cautious when forced to participate in investigations or interviews. Don’t volunteer Demand representation. Provide no more information than what is required to respond to the questions. Ask what part of your participation will be kept confidential…ask for it in writing.

REMINDER; ENDORSEMENTS/PARTICIPATION-SAFETY

Our Union DOES NOT endorse Dominion’s Employee Assistance Program, Diversity Committee or Six Sigma Program. Nor are you authorized to participate in the Company Safety Committees/Meetings in the capacity of an Officer, Director or Representative. For additional information on our positions on these programs and others please contact your Region Director.

NEW UNION SHIRTS AND HATS AVAILABLE

We have changed vendors for providing us with our Local’s hats and shirts. The new ones are pretty sharp! Please contact Directors C Bradford or W Swiger for information on how to purchase the new clothing. Union/American made of course!!

ANOTHER REMINDER

It is permissible to put our union logo sticker on your hard hats. It is also permissible to put our “PROUD TO BE UNION” bumper stickers on the back bumper of your company vehicle. Use the opportunity to display your Union!!!

EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETING – THERE WAS NO BOARD MEETING IN AUGUST DUE TO LACK OF A QUORUM

REGION REPORTS

Region Reports”

Region I

1. Two labor charges have been filed in Hope Gas and this week I met with the NLRB and discussed both with them.
2. Had the first of the employee meetings with Michael Cyrus from Babcock and Brown at Clarksburg CP on
Friday July 25. I thought he made a very good presentation and was very sincere in his responses to the questions that were asked of him. More meetings are to be scheduled in the near future for the other Hope locations. He talked to Kris and I after the meeting and shared some of his thoughts and visions and he also made an offer to sit down with the Union and to list the grievances that are either in the 1st or 2nd step, or even the ones scheduled to go to Arbitration, look at them all to see if they could be settled as opposed to spending money on fighting them at the next step and try to get the slate clean as soon as possible. He stated that Ken Johnston would be contacting Charlie about this in the near future. Of course he stated that there would need to be some compromise from both sides. If this holds true then this is certainly a different approach then we have been used to since Dominion took over. One of two things will have to take place to make this happen, either a complete new slate of HR folks or they will have to throw the Mark manual out the window. Right now until I have reason to believe otherwise I am remaining cautiously optimistic. ( He was not very happy when I told him of the Two labor charges that had just been filed).
3.Have had several days of 1st steps and have a couple more days to do to get caught up.
4.Have some clerical issues that need to be addressed down in Parkersburg and have a meeting scheduled there on July 29 to try and straightened it out. Ammons left us a mess.

Region II I had two First Step grievances on the 16th of July with Craig Bradford. they were for Michael Duckworth #8214 and Patrick Nichols #

8214 B, C, D.

The M. Duckworth grijevance was denied. The comp[any says he was not avable to do this work

TDhe Patrick Nichols they agreed to pay 30 hrs. of upgrade. We asked for 84hrs.

I have not been able to get in contact with Henry Boggs. He is the rep. for the two cases

Region III -- Southern Area is paying upgrade for IMS inspections at So.

Area Support at the moment

2. Grievance at Salem 24hr. on call out.

Region IV ==

Old business:

1. Oakford Warehouse call out issue/ waiting second step.

2. Informal held (Oakford)- Management performing Union work (Warehouse duty’s)/waiting second step.

3. Oakford- Improper assignment of work/waiting second step.

4. Gilmore- Management trouble shooting valve problems/ waiting 2^nd step

5. Groveport- Management changing technology to troubleshoot valves and not providing equipment and training/ first step held waiting second step.

6. Leesburg unjustified disqualification of OQ’s 2nd step heard waiting answer.

7. Oakford/ Management discriminating against Union steward waiting first step.

8. Gilmore/ management performing Union work Waiting second step

9 Lebanon/ Management not paying overtime for employees to attend meetings while on a rest day waiting first step.

10. Lebanon/ callouts being performed by bargaining unit employees waiting second step.

11. Luthersburg/ Inspectors told they will not be paid an over time meal for a ten hour day

12. Groveport, Beaver/ Employees assigned to perform OQ task they are not operator qualified for. Waiting first step

13. Oakford/ improper call out waiting second step.

New business:

1. Oakford/ bargaining unit employee performing management and bargaining unit work on the same day. Waiting first step.

2. Oakford/ Improper inspection selection waiting first step.

3. Oakford/ bargaining Unit employee performing bargaining Unit and non-bargaining Unit work same day (X2).

4. Leesburg Area disciplinary meeting

5. Oakford management denying the right for a steward to file a grievance.

6. Oakford management refusing to pay shift change perimium.

Questions;

Q: When should an over time meal be charged?

A: An over time meal should be charged

1. When you work 2 (two) hrs. passed your normally scheduled time and one meal for every 4 (four) hrs. worked there after.

2. If you are called out an over time meal should be paid for 2 (two) hrs. worked and every (4) four hours there after.

Q: Can employees use the prescription safety eyewear program now?

Yes the program is available now, ask your supervisor for the web site and application. If your supervisor does not know, have them call Labor relations for any clarification needed.

Region V -- No Report Provided

Region VI

Region VI Report for July

Grievances:

8642-A B. Quinn – holding in true abeyance pending U-100.

8642-B B. Quinn – withdraw grievance without prejudice.

Sale:

Going to attend employee meetings with M. Cyrus starting Friday, July 25 @ Davisson Run

PERSONALS

Stephanie’s site address has changed please make note of the change below;

(Note: Jeff has left the service of the company but I ask that you continue to visit Stephanie’s Site at:

Stephanie Ott’s Angels For Aplastic Anemia

www.stephaniesangels.net

You can possibly contact the family through this site to continue to send your Safety Cards