Win/Win outcomes are rare in legal disputes, but that’s what Karey got for Christmas from Federal District Court Judge Lasnik.
TTI’s lawyer got what he wanted, Karey’s Small Claims Court claim was dismissed by the Federal District Court, but the way the case was dismissed is beautiful, and gave Karey insight to accessing the grievance procedure in a way that no one that I know of ever has.
TTI opened the door for individual longshoremen to bring grievances under Section 17.124 against their employers.
Pay specific attention to page 3, lines 15 – 26, and say thank you to Bob Frazier and Karey Martinez for standing up for your rights.
It is common knowledge that longshoremen who are “invited” to attend JPLRC Meetings, and/or longshoremen who chose to attend on their own, do not get paid. It is a courtesy extended to the Employers, by the Union. It has been that way since 1934.
Pay for attending JPLRC meetings is not covered by the PCLCD, and neither is what happens when an Employer abuses the courtesy by intentionally keeping a longshoreman waiting, so he misses dispatch, despite his request to attend to his business so he could get to the dispatch hall in time to get a job.
Usually the Union will make sure that their member’s business gets conducted so as to allow them to NOT to miss dispatch. That is unless the Union does not like you, and in this case they do not like Karey.
To rub it in Karey’s face, the Foremen’s LRC (including the Union) granted another longshoreman’s request to have his business conducted so as to allow him to get to night dispatch on time. They did it right in front of Karey so he could see the other longshoreman was going to get taken care of, so he could get to the dispatch hall in time to get a job.
Check out the 8-year-old’s attempt to persuade a Federal Judge that Karey is required to file his “claim” with the Foreman’s LRC, the very people who abused him and caused him to miss dispatch in the first place.
The following document is somehow supposed to support TTI’s claim that they will be stripped of their collective bargaining rights, if Karey’s Small Claims Court case is even allowed to proceed.
Here are the lies and half-truths used in the TTI lawyer’s put on:
#1 Page 1, lines 15-17: “His arguments and authorities, however relate to the union grievance process and have nothing to do with removal or jurisdiction.”
TTI’s lawyer claims Karey is required to use the grievance procedure and when Karey points out that individuals do not have the right to process the kind of grievance that he filed in Small Claims Court, the lawyer claims that his arguments and authorities have nothing to do with removal or jurisdiction. Really? Then what the fuck do they have to do with?
#2 Page 1, lines 20-21: “Mr. Martinez’s assertion that his case will not deprive TTI of its bargained-for rights because it is over a small amount of money misses the point.”
TTI’s lawyer claims Karey made an assertion that he never made, ignoring the fact that Karey cannot file a grievance over something not covered by the Agreement. Also, TTI did not bargain for their rights, their rights come from the Arbitration Award that settled the 1934 Strike, something they had nothing to do with.
#3 Page 1, lines 22-23: “TTI will be deprived of that benefit if its employees may circumvent that process.”
TTI will not be deprived of the benefits of the grievance process if 1 longshoreman is allowed to process his Small Claims Case over a matter not covered by the PCLCD. TTI does not explain how will be deprived, they just make their wild ass claim even though it is completely baseless.
#4 Page 1, line 24: “Mr. Martinez’s arguments present an inaccurate legal theory.”
The legal theory TTI claims is inaccurate comes from a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Decision, where in the Court agrees with the Union’s conclusion: “There are two kinds of grievances or complaints that an individual longshoreman is explicitly authorized to bring – a discrimination grievance under 17.4, and a grievance regarding job dispatching under 17.17.”
TTI failed to recognize or address the 9th Circuit Court Decision. westlaw-frazier-case
#5 Page 2, lines 7-9: “Indeed, the very authority Mr. Martinez supplied with the Letter recognizes that union-represented employees must take their grievances to the union, which will decide whether to pursue the grievances agains the employer.”
TTI’s lawyer failed to mention that Letter he is referring to is a 19 page Appeal submitted by Pacific Maritime Association, who is his Companies collective bargaining agent as it pertains to both the PCLCD and the PCWB&FA. PMA’s argument pertains to 1 worker filing a grievance against another, and PMA was appealing on behalf of an individual longshoreman.
PMA states only parties to the agreement have access to the grievance procedure, and the parties are the Union and the PMA.
Contrary to what TTI says, PMA stated “Individual workers generally cannot advance a grievance to arbitration.”
Why in the world would someone agree to file a complaint using a procedure where they do not have access to an arbitrator, over something not covered by the Agreement?
#6 Page 2, footnote (2): “TTI’s counsel is unable to locate the entire document from which Mr. Martinez excerpted the page attached to his letter.”
Here is the BIG LIE. TTI and SSA were both given copies of PMA’s Appeal as directed by the Small Claims Court Judge. If TTI lost their copy they could have asked SSA or PMA for a copy. Maybe TTI forgot PMA’s phone number?
#7 Page 3, lines 2-4: “Thus, Mr. Martinez must use the grievance process provided by the collective bargaining agreement that cover him.”
TTI fails to identify exactly what contract language would “cover” this situation, because there is none, because this situation is not “covered” by the collective bargaining agreement.
#8 Page 3, lines 5-7: “The requirement that union-represented employees take their grievances to their unions is not a flaw of collective bargaining, but rather a feature encouraged by Congress through the Labor Management Relations Act: …”
TTI’s quotes half a page of the LMRDA in support of his claim that Karey is required to submit his grievance to the Union, but he failed to notice that he said the feature is “encouraged” by Congress, not “required” by Congress, as he is claiming.
#9 Page 3, footnote (4): “Mr. Martinez’s Letter attaches a copy of his email to my firm and SSA’s counsel. Mr. Martinez, however, omitted the final sentence of his email to my firm and SSA’s counsel. He added: ‘ps Go f[*]ch yourselves.’ (See Email from Mr. Martinez (Declaration of Thomas A Lenz, Exh. 1).)”
TTI’s 8-year-old mentality lawyer submitted this exhibit, even though it has nothing to do with the case because he wanted to include the “final sentence” as he call it, or the “ps” as I wrote it, which was as he claims omitted from the email to his firm and SSA’s counsel, just so he could “tell” the Judge that Karey said go fuck yourselves. Funny thing is, it was me that put it in an email I sent to Karey as a haha moment. Ha ha….
The Judge has yet to rule on the Motions, as far as we know.
Local 19’s Chief Ball Washer Rich Austin and his PMA buddy Doug Stearns.
On September 27, 2016, the original Section 13.3 discrimination complaint against the Local 19 dispatchers, for putting names on dispatch slips prior to the start of dispatch, was stopped by Rich Austin who refused to allow his member to be represented by another American/Mexican member, from Local 13.
On September 27, 2016, 2 letters were given to Doug Stearns; one asking for a copy of the 30-day rule for filing complaints in Seattle and one thanking him for agreeing to research the question of representation at discrimination hearings and providing him with CLRC Minutes from 1963 and 1984 as well as notes from the 1979 Arbitrators Conference.
To-date both Rich and Doug have refused to respond to the member regarding the question of his representation by another A-man during his Section 17.4 hearing, for his Section 13.3 discrimination, despite being assured by PMA that they would be getting back to him with an answer.
If a discrimination complaint filed under Section 13.2 allows a member to be represented by a Class A-man of his choosing, what possible reason could there be for denying members the right to be represented by a Class A-man of their choosing for their discrimination complaints, filed under Section 13.3, other than racism and a desire to frustrate members activity for or against the union?
Rich Austin and Doug Stearns intentionally failed to notify the member regarding the question of representation by another A-man during his Section 17.4 hearing, prior to rescheduling his hearing, and intentionally failed to notify him in a timely manner of his rescheduled hearing, and now they get to explain why to the NLRB.
If you think that slowed down the lawyers with the big underwear, you would be mistaken.
The day after the Judges’ denial they filed the following paperwork, doubling down on trying to pressure the little guy into dropping his Small Claims case.
Check it out, 15 witnesses, none of whom were in Small Claims Court, and all of whom may or may not have anything to say.
This is a classic lawyer put-on; a mixture of word fogging and half truths with the illusion of relevancy, pretending to have what they lack.
According to Sydney C. Schweitzer, in his book Winning with Deception and Bluff; “To manipulate the ordinary so it looks extraordinary, is the highest form of deception.”
The lawyers with big underwear are taking an ordinary Small Claims case over $515, and trying to make it look extraordinary by claiming their clients will be “stripped of their collective bargaining rights” if the case is even allowed to go forward.
They are well aware of the Robert K. Frazier, an individual v. ILWU Local 19 and PMA, [westlaw-frazier-case] where it is clearly spelled out that an individual only has the right to file 2 kinds of complaints under the PCLCD: Discrimination grievances under Section 17.4, and a grievance regarding job dispatching under Section 17.73 related to individuals returned to the dispatch hall by the Employer.
The Small Claims Court case is neither a claim of discrimination nor a claim that someone was improperly returned to the dispatch hall by the Employer, and therefore not covered by the grievance procedures of the collective bargaining agreement.
If you think that the ILWU are the only thugs on the waterfront, you are wrong.
TTI and SSA are going all in to beat down a longshoreman from Local 19, Seattle, who dared to file a $560 Small Claims Complaint for wages lost because of the actions of the Employer, and by all in I mean lying like rugs.
TTI’s Representative on the Seattle JPLRC decided to help Rich Austin’s buddy Local 98 President Scott Reid beat down a Local 19 member, who dared to question his actions and decisions, by making sure that they did not process his grievance until after the afternoon dispatch so he would miss a job.
TTI’s Representative on the WB JPLRC, and Reid, rubbed it in his face by granting another longshoreman’s request to have his case heard so he could get to the 3 PM dispatch, while he was made to wait.
Rich Austin has stated to his members that he will not process any grievances that he does not want to, and there is nothing they can do. He is right, the Union owns the grievances and the individual filing the grievances can do nothing about it once they give it to the Union, with the exception of Section 13 discrimination complaints.
The Local 19 longshoreman knew that if he filed a regular grievance Rich would just kill it, so he did something that has not been done since Harry Bridges ran the Union, he educated himself and got creative.
Karey found a Washington State Law that allows employees to file claims for lost wages against employers who are responsible for the loss, and he filed a Small Claims Court suit against TTI and SSA for causing him to miss dispatch and lose wages.
TTI and SSA responded to the $560 Small Claims complaint by filing their own lawsuits claiming the matter needs to be moved to Federal District Court, and threatened Karey claiming he will have to pay all their court costs and lawyers fees.
Here is where the big time lies start to fly, because in order to get an injunction TTI and SSA have to show that if the Small Claims case does not get moved to Federal Court they will suffer irreparable harm.
Here is the big fat lie of Robert Johnson, Vice President of Labor Relations for TTI;
The Employers cannot bring their lawyers into Small Claims Court so they decided to use their lawyers to file an Injunction in Federal Court claiming, TTI will be stripped of their collective bargaining rights if the Small Claims case is allowed to go on.
According to PMA; “Like most collective-bargaining agreements, the PCL&CA generally allows only the parties to the agreement access to the grievance and arbitration process. Individual workers generally cannot advance a grievance to arbitration.”
Individual workers do not have the right to file a grievance like the one Karey filed in Small Claims Court.
TTI’s and SSA’s collective bargaining rights will not, and cannot, be “stripped” by one longshoreman filing a Small Claims Court case related to something not covered by an agreement he is not party to.
Robert Johnson is a lying sack of shit, and his declaration is proof.
What kind of assholes file in Federal Court, naming someone else as plaintiff, then threaten to bill them tens of thousands of dollars unless they drop their $560 Small Claims case?
Rich Austin’s buddies at TTI and SSA, that’s who.
Is the Judge they are trying to dupe going to allow TTI and SSA to move Karey’s Small Claims case to Federal Court, using flat out lies?
Local 13 had 2 no-quorum Executive Board meetings, rumor has it President Bobby O Jr. decided to put out an attendance sheet at last weeks E-Board that he failed to attend. He was at the Union meeting in Tacoma telling Local 23 members that Local 13 lost 800 jobs to the 2 robot docks in LA/LB, so far.
Local 13 members have not seen the “Agreements” negotiated by Bobby, nor have they been told that they have lost 800 jobs to the robots, so far.
That explains why the casual cards have been so slow in coming, there is not going to be any more longshore registrations for a long time. There is no need. The employers have a guaranteed source of labor that they do not have to pay benefits to. Why would they agree to hire more longshoremen? So they can pay them PGP?
While Bobby was here he could have explained to both Deano and Rich that in LA longshoremen are allowed to attend JPLRC meetings, and they can have any longshoreman they want represent in front of the JPLRC.
Thanks Deano and Rich for the free publicity. Keep telling your members not to read this stuff.
If you want to work as a longshoreman, you had better become a mechanic.
After the robots take over, they will be the only longshoremen left on the docks.
The only thing missing from yesterday’s Seattle JPLRC meeting was the white sheets and those pillow cases with eye holes cut in.
Grand Wizard Rich Austin Jr., and his boy toy Dougie Stearns from PMA, told 2 members form Local 19 that they could not attend the JPLRC meeting, and that they could not help represent each other, then locked them out of the PMA offices to wait in the parking lot, all day, until their grievances were discussed.
The way they did what they did, makes it racist behavior.
The way little white guys like Rich Austin treat others, others that they are supposed to be representing, that determines whether or not their behavior is racist or not.
When little white guys like Rich Austin refuse to allow you into meetings you have a right to attend, and refuse to explain their reasons, or put what they are saying in writing, while aggressively and with anger, forcing you out of a room and slamming the door on you, it becomes obvious that they are racists.
Rich, you are a pathetic little racist, who doesn’t know shit from shineola when it comes to labor relations.
Rich you are an embarrassment to Local 19 and the entire ILWU.
How do you square your behavior with the ILWU motto; an injury to one is an injury to all?
When Union member Eric Aldape showed up in Seattle last Friday, to help a Union Brother by representing him in his Section 17.4 hearing related to his Section 13.3 claim of discrimination, Local 19’s President, Rich Austin said he was not going to allow it.
Rich turned white as a ghost when he saw that Eric was standing outside his Local, then told Eric that he had been disrespected because Eric did not call and tell him he was coming to Seattle.
The rest of the boys were pretty wigged out as well. One actually came over to Eric and asked why he was touching the truck he happened to be standing next to while he was waiting outside the Local. Nice guy.
The fun really started when they sat down to begin the hearing and Rich told Karey to sit next to the court reporter, which is where the person who will be doing the talking sits.
Eric said no, he would be sitting there as he was Karey’s representative and would be doing the talking.
Rich said no, stood up, said he wanted to caucus, and left the room.
Rich told Eric and Karey that only Karey could present his case, that Section 13.2 allows for representatives but not Section 13.3, because 13.3 claims are processed under Section 17.4 and that language says, “the man” may present his case.
Rich and others told Eric and Karey that the Green Book does not apply because this is a Section 17.4 hearing.
Eric provided CLRC Minutes regarding representation and a copy if the argument he made when he represented 2 Local 13 A men at their Section 17.4 hearings, and was told the CLRC Minutes don’t apply.
After about an hour, and a lot of phone calls, PMA said that they were going to cancel the hearing to research whether or not Karey can be represented by another A-man in his Section 17.4 hearing.
Once again, PMA protected a longshoreman from his “Union.”
Longshoremen have been representing their brothers since 1934, but Rich Austin said NO, he will not allow that to happen.
What kind of pathetic Union leadership is that, Rich?
Looks like Eric will be getting another flight to Seattle, but he won’t be flying First Class like Rich Austin does.
To be continued….
What I would like to know is, why did it take so long for someone to do what Eric is doing?
and
Is he the only one that walks the walk, when it comes to; an injury to one is an injury to all?
