To the staff of this university: If a problem arises at work, do not wait – file a grievance right away. Don’t try to work out the problem first and don’t bother following the steps of the grievance procedure set up in the 2010 Memorandum that states before filing a grievance, an informal discussion must take place between both parties and both must try to work out a solution at the lowest possible level. Also don’t be fooled by its name; Staff Relations is not here to help staff.
In 1988, I was hired to work on this campus. Beginning in 2005, I was assigned to more and more hours at the Central Maryland Research and Education Center in Ellicott City until reaching full-time during the last two years, since, as my department chairman stated, “that is where the department needs you.” Until last August, I was reimbursed for the extra mileage. Last July, I was notified by the chairman that I was being “reassigned” to CMREC (even though I had been working there full-time for more than one and a half years), and since CMREC would be my “permanent” work place (to be reviewed every six months), I would no longer be reimbursed for the extra mileage. Increase in mileage without compensation amounts to a pay decrease. I emailed my department chairman four times from July 14 to Aug. 12 stating my objections, including the fact that both my mileage and commuting time had more than doubled – not a trivial amount with soaring gas prices. He did not reply until Aug. 12, stating again that there would be no mileage reimbursement. On Aug. 25, I filed a formal grievance. The next day, my step one grievance was denied, and I filed a step two grievance request. I emailed Staff Relations several times but did not hear back from them until Nov. 16, only after I emailed Human Resources Director Dale Anderson.
You may have noticed the university mails out yearly reminders of its policies regarding discrimination and sexual harassment to protect itself, but I have never received a copy of the MOU, which states a staff member’s rights. A staff member has 30 calendar days to file a grievance upon “reasonable knowledge of the act.” My 30 days ended Aug. 11, and coincidently, the next day my chairman finally responded to my emails. The MOU also states Staff Relations has 10 work days to respond to a step two grievance request and “Any question concerning the timeliness of a grievance or whether a complaint is subject to the grievance procedure shall be raised and resolved promptly.” I didn’t receive a response from Staff Relations for more than two months. Once they finally did reply, they filed for a dismissal filled with untruths, such as stating that each of the four times I emailed the chairman, he replied there would be no mileage reimbursement even though elsewhere in the same letter they admit the chairman only replied to one of my emails on Aug. 12. Or else they tried to deliberately confuse the issue, stating staffing issues and fringe benefits are not subject to grievance procedures, knowing mileage reimbursement is neither a staffing issue nor a fringe benefit.
Staff Relations dismissed the grievance, and I filed for a step three grievance hearing, my final option in the grievance procedure. The trial was scheduled for March 27. Again, Staff Relations requested a dismissal, and it was granted. During both requests for dismissal, not once did Staff Relations cite a policy that would allow the stoppage of the seven year precedent of mileage reimbursement. They only cited the fact that I did not file a formal grievance within 30 days, even though I had tried, as it states in the MOU, to have an informal discussion with my chairman and work out a solution at the lowest possible level. Until the chairman finally replied to my emails, I could not have “reasonable knowledge” of the fact that my mileage would no longer be reimbursed. I find it ironic that I was “late” by 13 days and my case was dismissed, but Staff Relations was late responding to my grievance by more than two months and didn’t try to resolve the issue of the timeliness of my grievance promptly as required. At no time was I allowed a trial to state my case, unless you count a meeting held after I had already received a signed denial during the step one procedure.
Since the university doesn’t have to follow the rules it requires staff to follow, remember to protect your rights and file a grievance as soon as a problem presents itself: Don’t waste time and try to work it out first – that could always come back and hurt you.
Timothy Shellem is a research specialist with the Department of Avian and Animal Sciences. He can be reached at tshellem@umd.edu.
