The Steward RE: Case 32-CA-15881 (UPS)
Dear Mr. Ko:
This letter is in response to your correspondence of March 16, 1998 (copy attached). Please be advised that I am not prepared to withdraw the NLRB charge in my case. The underlying matter has not been resolved as you erroneously stated in your letter or March 16, 1998. It is necessary to seek clarification. It is impossible to determine what has been won until someone can show me, in black and white, what it is. I don't know the nature of the settlement! Do you know the terms of the unanimous grievance panel decision that was won? The formal panel decision, instructing my employer to adhere to the contract, did not convey the detailed contract interpretation and directive that was verbally issued to United Parcel Service at the conclusion of the grievance hearing. I have an official copy of the panel hearing on tape but no one in authority will put it in writing. What is the purpose of deferring NLRB charges to a grievance procedure when the procedure can not or will not render decisions that are acceptable or enforceable?
Although you mention the March 6, 1998 letter from Steve Mack to me (copy attached) you did not mention my letter of March 6, 1998 to Dan Varela (copy attached). I clearly stated my concerns in that letter. Did you receive your copy? Mr. Mack was not present at the grievance panel in Sparks, Nevada. Dan Varela, Teamster Local 78 Business Agent, was present and did an exceptional job of representing me. Mr. Varela is aware of the full details of the grievance panel decision and directive that was issued to UPS.
I do not know what Steve Mack is referring to in his March 6, 1998 letter in which he states that we have won. Steve Mack was not present at the grievance hearing nor is he aware of the details of my case. Just because Mr. Mack states that we won that does not constitute proof that we have won. Until both parties agree in writing or the NLRB makes a determination, there is no agreement. I was informed, in the letter of March 6, 1998, from Steve Mack, "The Company agreed to return your pass, and allow you to come to the UPS hub on Union business even though you are still off work on stress leave." This is still discriminatory because all employees, except specially selected stewards, are allowed to enter company property for personal, company and union business without being questioned. I know of no employee that is questioned as to why they are entering the property except "targeted individuals" including my-self.
UPS Operations Manager, Gary Medeiros, is still implementing this illegal, discriminatory and bad faith policy. Mr. Medeiros again refused entry, on March 4, 1998, to a shop steward on disability. Randy Olson was denied entry while attempting to campaign for reelection as steward for Local 70 while on disability. (Please refer to my letter of March 6, 1998 to Dan Varela.) Mr. Olson filed a protest with the I.B.T. Election Officer in Washington D.C. on March 6, 1998, regarding this matter (copy attached).
Mr. Medeiros is also the UPS representative that intentionally ignored the grievance panel ruling by refusing to give back my employee pass and disallowing me to enter the company property on September 17, 1997 (see attached copy of letter to Dan Varela). Mr. Medeiros participated in the panel decision that I won regarding this issue. He is fully aware of the details. Would you call this a victory and a resolution to the problem?
Gary Medeiros said that I misunderstood the panel decision and that UPS had won. That essentially is the problem. UPS claims to understand the settlement differently. Therefore it is absolutely obvious that there is no resolution. If there was resolution everyone would be agreeing. You stated in your letter of March 16, 1998: "For what it is worth, I also think your characterization of what I told you, as set forth in your March 2, 1998 letter to the Executive Board members of Joint Council 7 of the Teamsters, is not entirely accurate." In your letter, Mr. Ko, you have essentially pinpointed the problem. How do we know what is accurate if it isn't in writing? Is the law based of hearsay and innuendo or actual facts?
WORKERS COMPENSATION
I have filed a workers compensation claim for injury that the company has intentionally inflicted on me. Significant elements of my case hinge on whether UPS's actions in not allowing me on the property were either discriminatory, in bad faith or illegal. I have alleged that in fact their actions were illegal, discriminatory and in bad faith. Therefore, the Workers Compensation Judge is going to ask me to prove that. What is it that I can present to the judge that will show that UPS's actions were illegal? Who at the NLRB is prepared to answer a subpoena and testify and show evidence as to whose actions were legal or not legal? What documentation, when subpoenaed, will the NLRB be able to produce that will clearly define whose allegations are true?
FELONY INVESTIGATION BY THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY
Article 1, Chapter 12 of the Workers' Compensation Laws of California relates to the Insurance Fraud Prevention Act. Regulation 1871.4 pertains to penalties for making false or fraudulent written or oral statements. Regulation 1871.4 states: "Any person who makes or causes to be made any knowingly false or fraudulent material statement or material representation for the purpose of obtaining or denying workers' compensation benefits or payments is guilty of a felony." The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Judge, Christopher Hamilton, has instructed the Liberty Mutual / UPS attorney and myself that I have the right to file felony charges with the District Attorney. Said charges would allege that United Parcel Service's actions were illegal, discriminatory and in bad faith and that United Parcel Service made knowingly false statements to deny my workers' compensation. United Parcel Service has alleged that their actions have all been legal, nondiscriminatory and in good faith. If I have won the grievance, who at the NLRB is willing to state and provide evidence to the District Attorney regarding whose actions were legal or illegal? What document of resolution will the NLRB present? This felony is punishable by up to five years in prison and a $50,000 fine. I take this situation very seriously and I shall presume that the NLRB will too. If the NLRB was to fall short in the determination, and a felon was to go free without penalty, would that not be obstruction of justice?
I demand a complete and thorough investigation of the entire grievance process as it is administered by Teamster Joint Council 7. This process has reached such a level of absurdity that it is impossible to receive justice. If the NLRB does not have the authority then who does? I request that my demand be forwarded to the appropriate agency, group or organization that has that authority. I have heard that money is a problem. What is the cost of justice denied?
Therefore, please consider this letter to be a formal notification that I am not willing to withdraw my charge in this case. The underlying grievance has not been settled. The reasons are outlined above. I am prepared to submit further documentation, if needed, to keep this claim open until all relevant issues have been resolved.
Thank you for your assistance.
Charles R. Engel
Shop Steward, Teamster Local 78
Cc:
The Honorable William J. Clinton, President of the United States (Certified
#P 195 619 864 RRR)
Alexis M. Herman, United States Secretary of Labor
The Honorable Barbara Boxer, United States Senator
The Honorable Dianne Feinstein, United States Senator
The Honorable Ellen Tauscher, Congresswoman, 10th
District
James Scott, Regional Director, NLRB (Case # 32-CA-15881UPS)
Benetta M. Mansfield, I.B.T. Interim Election Officer
John J. Sweeney, President, AFL-CIO
Tom Sever, I.B.T. General Secretary-Treasurer
Ken Mee, I.B.T. West Coast Vice President
The Executive Board, Teamster Joint Council 7
Steve Mack, Vice President, Teamster Joint Council 7,
Secretary Treasurer, Teamster Local 78
Dan Varela, Business Agent, Teamster Local 78
Matt McLoone, Alternate Shop Steward, Teamster Local
78
Randy Olson, Teamster Local 70
The Steward Web Page @ http://thesteward.hypenet.com/
Attachments:
09-17-97 – Charles Engel to Dan Varela
03-06-98 – Charles Engel to Dan Varela
03-06-98 – Randy Olson to I.B.T. Election Officer
03-06-98 – Steve Mack to Charles Engel
03-16-98 – Kenneth Ko to Charles Engel
Certified Mail No. P 195 619 865 RRR
