It is not enough to cite contract
provisions and present evidence; it
is necessary to explain why the facts
indicate a violation of the contract.
Grievance Handling
In most instances the first association
official with direct involvement
in the usual grievance will be the
building AR. This person may or
may not be the building’s grievance
representative .
The initial responsibility of the
building-level representative is to
investigate the facts regarding the
alleged violation, make a review
of the nature of the problem, seek
out similar or past problems, and
under certain circumstances make
an attempt at resolution. The representative
has to know what to look
for, how to keep confidences, and to
whom the grievance must be reported
if it cannot be resolved easily or
will have larger ramifications in the
district.
Even if the grievance can be resolved
informally at the building level, the
problem and its resolution should
still be cleared by the association’s
grievance committee or whatever
body serves as the grievance handling
agency for the association
since it may establish a precedent.
Additionally, attempts to resolve a
dispute informally will not relieve
the association of the necessity of
meeting the time lines specified in
the grievance procedure.
Any departure from contractual
timelines must be mutually agreed
to in writing.
The grievance committee is designated
and recognized by the association
to receive, evaluate and pursue
grievances. The committee is usually
notified of all complaints. Some
complaints may not be classified as
grievances and should be referred
36 – AR Handbook
to other appropriate committees or
individuals for action. Complaints
which fit the definition of grievance
should be analyzed, and a strategy
for handling them should be determined.
Most associations that are
successful in grievance handling
have established as a minimum rule
that the representative consult the
grievance committee chair prior
to filing any written statement of
grievance.
The grievance committee may
designate one of its members to
handle grievances of a certain type
or those which occur among certain
members (elementary, specialists,
custodians, etc.) or those
which occur in certain buildings.
The committee would decide who
handles the grievance at various
levels: record keeping, liaison with
the negotiations committee or other
association committees, publicizing
grievance activities, and reporting to
the leadership and membership. The
number of persons involved and the
degree of complexity of the system
developed for grievance administration
will depend upon the size, resources
and degree of sophistication
of the local association. Although
the system for grievance administration
should be clear-cut and routine,
it should not be so inflexible that it
could not be modified to effectively
handle a unique case.
A sample of a grievance record
keeping form is included at the end
of this section.
The responsibility of the grievance
committee for handling grievances
is generally all-inclusive with one
major exception. That exception is
the decision to arbitrate a grievance.
To Arbitrate?
Who decides to submit an unresolved
grievance to arbitration is a
question which most sophisticated
associations in N.J. have faced and
resolved. However, some associations
are either still wrestling with
the question or have not yet faced it.
In an effort to be democratic, some
associations leave the decision to the
individual grievant; others ask the
entire membership to vote on every
case. Neither of these options is
desirable; the best approach seems to
lie between these two alternatives.
The associations which win and
maintain the confidence of their
members through effective grievance
handling generally operate on
the premise that through the ratification
of the contract the membership
has established the policy
that grievances should be identified
and pursued to a reasonable conclusion.
The duty to carry out this
policy is incumbent upon the elected
leadership, usually the Executive
Committee. Although the Executive
Committee could grant the authority
to make such a decision to the grievance
committee, it usually does not
do so because the responsibility of
the decision rests with the Executive
Committee. The decision to pursue
the grievance to arbitration means
that dues money will be spent, the
association is taking a position on
the issue as a matter of policy, the
prestige of the organization is on the
line, and the duty of fair representation
must be maintained. Although
the grievance committee after deliberation
should make a recommendation
with reasons on the question,
the Executive Committee should
make the decision. Should a decision
not to arbitrate be made, the grievants
affected should be notified and
their rights to an internal appeal and
access to arbitration be explained.
Local associations should examine
the decision to arbitrate very carefully.
In the past years, the courts
have narrowed the scope of bargaining
and arbitrability very severely.
The result is that boards of education