Your Weingarten Rights Turned 44 Today!

Forty-four years ago, on Feb. 19, 1975, the Supreme Court ruled that an employee has the right to request union representation in any meeting that she or he feels could result in discipline or termination.

You Are Being Asked Questions That Might Lead To Disciplinary Action: What Do You Do?

If you believe that discipline will result from a meeting with management/administration (in legalese, “an investigatory interview”), you can insist that a union representative be present during this interview. This is part of your “Weingarten Rights,” which references the 1975 United States Supreme Court case NLRB vs. Weingarten. Weingarten Rights apply only to members of a collective bargaining unit and are among the many benefits of having a union.

When an investigatory interview occurs, the following rules apply:

Rule 1) – You must make a clear request for effective union representation before or during the interview. Often an employee may not know at the outset that a meeting with management could lead to discipline. If such a meeting is or becomes an “investigatory interview,” you should assert your right to have a union officer of your choosing present. You cannot be punished for making this request. (Note: If the union representative of your choice is not available in a reasonable time period, it may be necessary for an alternative union officer to represent you.)

A typical Weingarten request would be: “If this discussion could in any way lead to my being disciplined or terminated, or affect my personal working conditions, I respectfully request that my union representative be present at this meeting. Until my union representative arrives, I choose not to participate in this discussion.” Or you may simply say, “I want my union representative here.”

Rule 2) – After you make this request, the interviewer has three options:

a. Grant the request and delay the interview until your union representative arrives and has a chance to consult privately with you. (Note: The right to representation is the right to effective representation, which translates in this rule as the right to consult privately with the representative before the interview. The union representative should also know what the meeting is about ahead of time so that he/she can effectively advise you.)

b. Deny the request and end the interview immediately; or

c. Give you a choice of: (I) having the interview continue without representation or (II) ending the interview. (Note: It is not wise to choose the first option.)

Rule 3) – If the interviewer denies your request and continues to ask questions, this is an unfair labor practice. You have the right not to answer any questions until you have union representation. You cannot be disciplined for refusing to answer the questions, but you are required to sit there until the supervisor terminates the interview. Leaving before this happens may constitute punishable insubordination in some cases.

The AAUP-UC represents all members of the bargaining unit, both those who pay dues and those who do not, and is obligated to come to your aid without prejudice. If you are summoned to a meeting with a member of administration and discover that it is an “investigatory interview,” assert your right to have a union representative present.

Download a printable PDF of this information here

Samuel Gompers On Labor Day

No day in the calendar is a greater fixture, one which is more truly regarded as a real holiday, or one which is so surely destined to endure for all time, than the first Monday in September of each recurring year, Labor Day. With time, this day of the year is taking deeper hold in the respect and confidence of the people. It is regarded as the day for which the toilers in past centuries looked forward, when their rights and their wrongs might be discussed, placed upon a higher plane of thought and feeling; that the workers of our day may not only lay down their tools of labor for a holiday, but upon which they may touch shoulders in marching phalanx and feel the stronger for it; meet at their parks, groves and grounds, and by appropriate speech, counsel with, and pledge to, each other that the coming year shall witness greater efforts than the preceding in the grand struggle to make mankind free, true and noble.

  – Samuel Gompers, President of the American Federation of Labor.
“Labor Day. What It Portends.”
American Federationist.
September, 1898.

Congratulations to the 2018 AAUP-UC Scholarship Winners!

From a number of very qualified submissions, the Scholarship Selection Committee is proud to announce the following 2018 AAUP-UC Scholarship Winners, which were awarded at the AAUP-UC General Membership Meeting on May 7, 2018:

The Virgil C. Crisafulli Scholarship for leadership and service in the spirit of the AAUP was awarded to Hermina Garic, nominated by Helen Blouet, Associate Professor of Anthropology and Luke Perry, Professor of Government and Politics.

IMG_6996

Pictured here with Lawrence Day, Associate Professor of Physics and member of the nominating committee.

The Robert W. Millett Scholarship for Academic Achievement was awarded to Marissa Faroni, nominated by James Smith, Professor of Physical Therapy.

IMG_6989

Congrats to our winners!

Read more about the AAUP-UC Scholarships and see past winners here.

Congratulations To Our New Board Members!

Congratulations to our newly elected president, Adam Pack, our reelected treasurer, Xiao Xiao, and our newly elected at-large board members: John Cormican, Amy Lindsey, and Chris Tingley, who will take office on July 1. Paul MacArthur will serve as Immediate Past President effective July 1.

The AAUP-UC Governing Board for 2018-2019 is:

Governing Board Officers:

  • President: Adam Pack, Professor of Biology
  • Vice President: Kirstin Walker, Assistant Professor of Therapeutic Recreation
  • Treasurer: Xiao Xiao, Associate Professor of Mathematics
  • Secretary: Jim Smith, Professor of Physical Therapy
  • Past President: Paul J. MacArthur, Professor of Public Relations and Journalism

Governing Board Members At Large:

  • John Cormican, Professor of English
  • Lawrence Day: Associate Professor of Physics
  • Amy Linsdey, Associate Professor Psychology
  • Jeff Miller, Associate Professor of Communication Arts
  • Denise Nepveux, Assistant Professor of Occupational Therapy
  • Chris Tingley, Assistant Professor of Marketing and Strategy.

We also want to take a moment to thank Leonore Fleming, Ralph Craig and Tom Rossi, whose terms end on June 30, for their service on the Governing Board. We really appreciate their dedication to the union and their efforts to make our union stronger.

 

Your Weingarten Rights Turned 43 Today!

Forty-three years ago, on Feb. 19, 1975, the Supreme Court ruled that an employee has the right to request union representation in any meeting that she or he feels could result in discipline or termination.

You Are Being Asked Questions That Might Lead To Disciplinary Action: What Do You Do?

If you believe that discipline will result from a meeting with management/administration (in legalese, “an investigatory interview”), you can insist that a union representative be present during this interview. This is part of your “Weingarten Rights,” which references the 1975 United States Supreme Court case NLRB vs. Weingarten. Weingarten Rights apply only to members of a collective bargaining unit and are among the many benefits of having a union.

When an investigatory interview occurs, the following rules apply:

Rule 1) – You must make a clear request for effective union representation before or during the interview. Often an employee may not know at the outset that a meeting with management could lead to discipline. If such a meeting is or becomes an “investigatory interview,” you should assert your right to have a union officer of your choosing present. You cannot be punished for making this request. (Note: If the union representative of your choice is not available in a reasonable time period, it may be necessary for an alternative union officer to represent you.)

A typical Weingarten request would be: “If this discussion could in any way lead to my being disciplined or terminated, or affect my personal working conditions, I respectfully request that my union representative be present at this meeting. Until my union representative arrives, I choose not to participate in this discussion.” Or you may simply say, “I want my union representative here.”

Rule 2) – After you make this request, the interviewer has three options:

a. Grant the request and delay the interview until your union representative arrives and has a chance to consult privately with you. (Note: The right to representation is the right to effective representation, which translates in this rule as the right to consult privately with the representative before the interview. The union representative should also know what the meeting is about ahead of time so that he/she can effectively advise you.)

b. Deny the request and end the interview immediately; or

c. Give you a choice of: (I) having the interview continue without representation or (II) ending the interview. (Note: It is not wise to choose the first option.)

Rule 3) – If the interviewer denies your request and continues to ask questions, this is an unfair labor practice. You have the right not to answer any questions until you have union representation. You cannot be disciplined for refusing to answer the questions, but you are required to sit there until the supervisor terminates the interview. Leaving before this happens may constitute punishable insubordination in some cases.

The AAUP-UC represents all members of the bargaining unit, both those who pay dues and those who do not, and is obligated to come to your aid without prejudice. If you are summoned to a meeting with a member of administration and discover that it is an “investigatory interview,” assert your right to have a union representative present.

Download a printable PDF of this information here

Wednesday Wisdom: Louis Brandeis On The Need For Strong Labor Unions

“Strong, responsible unions are essential to industrial fair play.  Without them the labor bargain is wholly one-sided.  The parties to the labor contract must be nearly equal in strength if justice is to be worked out, and this means that the workers must be organized and that their organizations must be recognized by employers as a condition precedent to industrial peace.”

—Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, 1934

Wednesday Wisdom: Albert Einstein on Academic Freedom

By academic freedom I understand the right to search for truth and to publish and teach what one holds to be true. This right implies also duty: one must not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true. It is evident that any restriction on academic freedom acts in such a way as to hamper the dissemination of knowledge among the people and thereby impedes rational judgment and action.

– AAUP Member Albert Einstein, 1954