|
Can
Employers Change the Rules in the Middle of the Game?
For years, your employer has
allowed you and your co-workers to play radios while sorting packages.
But, one day, your boss says: "No more radios!" Your contract does not say
anything about radios. Can your boss make this change?
Until recently, your boss has allowed you to stop work a few minutes early
so you can wash up. Now, she says you have to stay on the job until your
finish time. The contract is unclear about whether you have "wash-up
time." What can you do?
You've always been allowed to use three sick days each year to stay home
with your children if they are sick. Now your boss says you can't stay
home unless you are sick. The contract specifically says sick days can
only be used if you are sick. What happens?
In some situations like these, you can fight the actions of employers who
change the rules on their own -- thanks to a legal principle called "past
practice."
You won't find mention of past practice in any labor laws. The tradition
of giving weight to how things were done in the past has been developed by
arbitrators who rule on disputes over the interpretation of union
contracts.
What makes something a past practice? The practice must be a customary way
of doing things in your workplace that, while not spelled out in the
contract, has been done for a long time, has been done consistently, and
has been done with the knowledge and acceptance of both your boss and the
union.
In the "radios" and "wash-up time" examples, the employer knows about and
has allowed those activities for years. There's nothing about playing
radios, one way or the other, in the first contract. In the second
example, the contract is unclear as to whether or not wash-up time is
allowed.
In both these situations, you would have a strong case if you filed a
grievance against your boss.
It would be much more difficult to win this kind of grievance if the
contract clearly prohibited the activity.
Take the third example listed above -- the practice of using sick days to
take care of sick children. Here, the contract was clear. It specifically
said you could only use sick days for your own illnesses. So, it would be
hard to win a past practice grievance.
Cases involving employee benefits or privileges make for strong past
practice grievances. But, in most situations, it's much harder to argue
"past practice" when employers change methods of operations or introduce
new technology. Other contract language may be helpful (like a requirement
to give the union notice about changes), but the argument that "we've
always done it that way" probably would not work in those cases.
Being aggressive--and timely--in defending your contract can help stop
management from using past practice as a defense against a union
grievance. If workers wait years to file a grievance against a new
management policy that isn't directly addressed in the contract,
management may argue that it has become a past practice. This is why it is
very important to challenge management actions right away when you think
they may violate your rights.
Many situations aren't cut and dried, and this area of labor law can be
very complex. But this should not stop you from discussing the problem
with coworkers and seeking advice from your steward or local union
officials if you think your employer has violated your rights by changing
the rules in the middle of the game.
Past Practices Victories
Examples of past practices not written in a contract but enforced by
arbitrators because employers had allowed them for a long time include:
lost time pay while seeing the company doctor
the right to swap shifts
the right to receive sick pay during layoffs
the right to use company vehicles to commute to work
yearly company picnic
discounts on company products
free meals and coffee
pay for travel time
considering the lunch period as paid time
Christmas bonus
|