This column is devoted to a simple message that is valuable at all stages of the grievance procedure. When you go into a grievance meeting with the employer, go in with another union officer. In law, this tactic is sometimes referred to as the second chair.

Lawyers will often take a paralegal into a hearing to serve as the note-taker or the second chair. You should too. 

Chiefly, the second chair will take the union notes at a grievance presentation or a disciplinary hearing.  This practice allows for the union advocate to question witnesses, present information, object to employer questions or actions, and generally follow the union strategy at the meeting.

Note-taking has been the subject of a few of these columns. What is most important is that by having a second chair present, the union advocate is freed of the task of keeping an accurate record of the meeting while trying at the same time to take an active role in the meeting. The union advocate may come into the room with a checklist of questions that she/he wants to ask. During the course of the meeting, she/he may need to ask other questions that arise out the evidence presented. It is a lot to ask of one person to do all of this and keep a written record of the proceedings. That is why if a grievance officer must perform both roles, he/she is always advised to slow the meeting down.

I have often heard of alternatives that have been suggested by the company. Chief among them is their proposal to share their notes with the union. The problem with “their notes” is that there is no guarantee of the accuracy of the notes. And by accepting “their notes” as a record of the meeting, the union may put itself in a compromising posi•tion over what was really said and how it was said. The second point of tone is also important because how a phrase is said is equally as important as the words chosen.

In railroad disciplinary hearings, some employers bring in someone to take down an official transcript of the meeting. The hearing officer will then present the record of proceeding to the union for verification. Even in these cases, you want to be able to take your own notes just in case the reporter misses something such as a union objection or the hostile way a question was asked. 

A company may offer to tape record the meeting. Such a suggestion may be illegal in some states or may present other problems in case of a mechanical failure of the machine. Try to rely on the note-taking process. It is safer. 

Some of our contracts already provide for a second chair. On the American Airlines system, the 2001 contract has language guaranteeing that the union can bring in an individual, to act solely in the capacity of a “scribe.” Other contracts allow for more than one union representative at grievance and disciplinary meetings. Under those circumstances, the union should take that opportunity to assign note-taking to the other individual. 

Even in cases where contract language is silent, the union should try to take that second chair into the meeting. Some employers may object, but others have been unfazed by the union bringing in a note-taker. A strong case can be made to the employer that it is in the employer’s interest to make sure the meeting has the appearance of fairness. 

The second chair has three roles, most prominent of which is note-taking. The second chair should also act as a buffer between the grievant and the advocate. The grievant should not distract the advocate while he/she is talking. If there is to be communication, it should be via notes so there is always only one chair of the union committee. That brings up the third role. You should bring pads and pens to the meeting and lay the ground rules out among the union team ahead of time. Once everyone is sure of their role and the means of communicating with each other at the meeting, the union will present a strong and efficient team.