USGW-GC-L ArchivesArchiver > USGW-GC > 2006-02 > 1139310489
From: merope <>
Subject: Re: [USGW-GPC] Procedures
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 06:08:09 -0500
References: <000001c62aae$a76fb5b0$3a281b41@D51XKD11> <00e901c62b86$eb461ad0$7301a8c0@scott>
Sure, why not? I don't actually see anything in the current wording
that would prevent the NC or any Board member from going after a Project
member. Section 5A allows any member or former member to file a
grievance and in section 5C provisions 3 & 4 would not exclude the NC or
Board members. If you intend to include "the Board" as an entity
[meaning the Board as a unit would be the plaintiff], that should be
simple enough to add, but it might be a bit problematic unless you
intend to also allow other "groups" of individuals to band together and
file a grievance [eg, an entire state project vs. the Board, state vs.
state, Archives vs. a CC, etc.]
Scott Burow wrote:
> Something that has come to mind as I was reading through things.
> We have a provision that the GC would hear grievances against the
> Project, AB, NC, and the particular subdivisions of the project
> thereof filed by a member, etc.
> What about grievances filed BY the AB or NC in his/her official
> capacity, or the particular subdivisions against a member or state
> project. It's within the realm of possibility, and may help to deal
> with some issues that usually end up a mess if the AB has to deal with
> it. Shouldn't we give the AB and NC the same authority to file a
> grievance as any other member?