National UPS-Teamster Agreement   |   Atlantic Area Supplement   |   Local Rules of Procedure

"Contracts are negotiated rights agreed to, which, when ratified, are law."

It was UPS' turn to depose Dan O'Shea, after Teamsters Local Union 639's counsel finished.

Marty Wald, UPS' big corporate attorney out of Philadelphia looks over, up, down and around, in the typical manner many UPS employees encounter from some managers when called into the office, and Wald asks, "Mr. O'Shea, are you saying that there is some Maryland law that prevents UPS from doing what you're saying they shouldn't be doing?"

"No, I didn't say that at all." Dan O'Shea told him.

In so many words, he responded, "What I'm saying is that UPS and the Teamsters agreed to a contract, a contract that was ratified by the membership."

"That ratified contract is the law. Everytime UPS violates that contract, they break the law. Everytime a Union fails to represent a Union member, the Union breaks the law."

Never forgotten at the end of that sentence. When Dan uttered "law". Marty Wald blinked.

He knew Dan knew.

Our contract is the law and that's what this lawsuit is about. UPS breaking the contract, thus breaking the law. The former Union officers (yes, former) retaliating against Dan O'Shea and refusing to represent him. That's breaking law.

On August 19, 2003, Dan O'Shea was terminated after a 24-year career. No cardinal rule was broken as he was awarded full back pay.

Full back pay. Yet, against the very contract itself (which states progressive discipline in non-cardinal infractions, MUST occur,) he was summarily dismissed! No cardinal infraction yet no warning notice.

No warning notice in his file, no progressive discipline.

The contractual right of Dan O'Shea and every Teamster member tossed away.

UPS discriminated, Teamster Local Union 639 refused to represent and it was the membership that lost.

The case can now be referred to again and again nationally against any Teamster member, at any Panel hearing. The clause that progressive discipline must exist for an employee to be terminated is now made obsolete.

Some questions.

Where is the National Teamsters in allowing such a violation to exist?

Is arbitrator David Vaughn, who made this decision still sitting on Panels against Teamster members?

If he is, where's James Hoffa, to allow such an arbitrator to continue to sit on Panels and rule against Teamster Union members.

The new slate that was elected after campaigning on Dan O'Shea's unjust discharge? The Members United Slate? They're now helping UPS fight the contract violation that denies Union members the right to a warning notice in non-cardinal violations.

More questions will arise during this lawsuit as documents and revelations unfold. They will be posted throughout as they are filed.

The purpose of this website is to bring knowledge to Teamsters concerning our contract and hopefully help Teamsters not only protect their rights, but to properly prepare to fight for them.


This site is dedicated to all Teamster UPSers, Union employees, working Americans and their families who have experienced situations similar to. . .The Darker Side of Brown. | The Darker Side Of Brown | Email Dan O'Shea
The intent of this site is to provide public discourse of the current landscape and climate of the rights of the common American Worker with respect to the political, corporate, union, government and judicial entities that affect those rights. Each reader must form his or her own beliefs, ideas and opinions after reading the opinions, exhibits and documents that now exist on this site and in the public domain, including govenment records such as the NLRB and judicial records of written opinions.

Disclaimer: Any and all writings herein of the Darker Side of Brown are opinions by this site contributed by individuals.