Dan O'Shea


Contact: Dan O'Shea

Next Update by: October 30, 2003

TDU | Teamster.net | Forum New!

The Truth of the
Discharge of
Dan O'Shea

For UPS Teamster members under Local Union 639
(and the CMS Slate),
the Contract is Obsolete.


"Other drivers are surprised Dan O'Shea put himself in that position."
- Mike Hicks, Trustee candidate on the Teamsters Local 639 CMS slate

What position is Mike Hicks talking about?

Dan O'Shea was fired from UPS after 24 years. For over a year, he was forced to return to the building with almost 2,000 packages in that time to avoid being disciplined for working over the 9.5 hour cutoff.

On May 12, 2003 Dan O'Shea as usual notified UPS at 2:30 p.m. that he would not be able to service all of his packages. On his second day of a new route, reading a map all day, he was loaded with 135 stops. The prior driver, knowing in detail the route for two years, normally had 110.

By 5:30 p.m., no message was sent to Dan O'Shea from UPS that he could stay out past cutoff. As usual, Dan O'Shea left his route to return to the building, punched all of his missed packages in the board, service crossed 50 of 58 packages before rushing to the clock to punch out to avoid discipline.

On May 13, 2003, the next day, Dan O'Shea was fired for missed service and failing to place 8 service crosses on his packages. (Remember the old adage, 'Damned if you do, damned if you don't? In this case it's, 'Disciplined if you do, disciplined if you don't.')

"In reading the provided link on O'Shea, its not hard to see that he was just another malconstructed termination because he wasnt fired for the tape recorder and it was known for over 15 yrs that he carried it.

Nor was he fired for the packages not sheeted up as missed. The company I contend has trumped up a basis for his discharge then the union served him up on a platter.

Its shameful that the union has recieved his dues for as long as he was a member and then in the hearing when he asked to have the message sent to the company relating to his not making service the union failed to attain it in his defense. That in my opinion meets the failure in duty to fairly represent him effectively." - BadMF
- At the UPS Forum

So what kind of position is Mike Hicks talking about? All Dan O'Shea did was notify the company as was procedure, recorded all of his packages in the DIAD as was procedure, and punched out before cutoff as procedure.

Dan O'Shea on August 20, 2003 lost his case at the panel. What did he do to put himself in that position? All he did was follow UPS instructions as he always did. No warning notice in his file for the past 9 months despite almost 2,000 missed pieces.

So what position is Mike Hicks talking about? Obviously now it wasn't a Dan O'Shea position. So what's UPS' position and the Local Union 639's (CMS Slate- Catlett/Steger/Hicks) postion?

The source can be found in the AAPGC decision of the 'Discharge of Daniel O'Shea', Item 1:

The Company proved Grievant guilty of material violations of methods, procedures and instructions in failing to notify the Company of undelivered stops in a timely manner, thereby resulting in service failures.

Dan O'Shea requested Local 639 President John Catlett for ALL of the DIAD messages showing O'Shea did message into UPS at 2:30 p.m. Catlett (CMS Slate) refused to get the 2:30 p.m. DIAD message for the Panel.

Item 2:

The Company proved Grievant guilty of recording meetings with the company in violation of Company Policy and instructions, rendering his conduct insubordinate.

Dan O'Shea has carried a tape recorder in his shirt pocket for 15 years. Management and drivers throughout the College Park center and Burtonsville building had years of knowledge about this. Dan O'Shea asked Local Union 639 President Catlett to acquire the written UPS company policy against tape recording.
Catlett (CMS Slate) refused

UPS never produced a company policy against tape recording at the Panel. How did the company prove anything? Dan O'Shea asked Catlett to have ex-management employee supervisors over Dan O'Shea and Buddy Robson, a 21-year shop steward to testify at the panel that they had a 15-year knowledge that Dan O'Shea used a tape recorder.
Catlett (CMS Slate) refused

Even with UPS' knowledge in that entire time of Dan O'Shea using a tape recorder, he was never called into the office with a shop steward and informed or shown he was violating company policy and would be given a warning notice.

While both UPS and Local 639's CMS Slate member Hicks (CMS Slate of Catlett, Steger, Hicks, etc.) were publicly stating "Dan O'Shea shouldn't have been tape recording, it's against the law", the Unemployment Commission of Maryland, which knows their own laws, awarded O'Shea unemployment benefits:

“The claimant was discharged from United Parcel Service on 05/12/03 because he allegedly recorded a meeting when he was told not to. Insufficient information has been presented to show that the claimant’s actions constituted misconduct in connection with the work. As a result, it is determined that the circumstances surrounding the separation do not warrant a disqualification under Section 8-1002 or 8-1003 of the Maryland Unemployment Insurance Law.
Benefits are allowed. If otherwise eligible.”

Under the Unemployment Provisions of the Law regarding Benefits, claimants must be totally or partially unemployed through no fault of his/her own to collect benefits. The Office of Unemployment Insurance determined that Dan O'Shea (Who acknowledged to the Commission he's been using a tape recorder for 15 years) violated no law in taping and was unemployed through no fault of his own.

Item 3:

The Company proved Grievant guilty of violation of the clean-in/clean-out policy by his refusal to allow search of his bags prior to his departure.

Here's the actual occurrence at the Guard House as Dan O'Shea was escorted out of the building immediately after termination:

Dan O'Shea was instructed to return to his package car and collect his belongings. While UPS’ manager John Pinnock stood by O'Shea's bags, Dan O'Shea cleared out both his delivery and tractor-trailer (feeder) lockers. Escorted by manager John Pinnock, Dan O'Shea was instructed to turn his identification card in. While the security guard checked his bags, Dan O'Shea searched for his identification card and found it was missing. Dan O'Shea informed manager Pinnock of the missing card. Manager Pinnock’s reply was, “I need your ID card.” Dan O'Shea said it was either torn off the strap or fell off. Again manager Pinnock’s reply was, “I need your ID card.” Dan O'Shea stated he could go and see if it’s in an area he was at in the building. Manager Pinnock told Dan O'Shea he could go look for it. Dan O'Shea went into the building and searched back past his walk path to both locker rooms and package car and could not find it. Dan O'Shea returned to the Guard House and stated he could not find it. Again, manager Pinnock said, “I need your ID card.” Dan O'Shea again went into the building to search and again could not find it. O'Shea went back to the Guard House and stated he could not find it. Again, manager Pinnock said, “I need your ID card.” Dan O'Shea, believing at this time that manager Pinnock was harassing him, suggested, “John, I can go into Human Resources, tell them my ID was lost or stolen, have a new one made and come back out here and hand it to you.” John Pinnock stated again, “I need your ID card.” Dan O'Shea collected his bags and left what he saw as an abusive situation.

Item 4:

The Company thus had just cause to discipline grievant. Discharge is appropriate penalty. Grievant should have been kept on the payroll pending resolution of this grievance; and he shall be made whole for wages and benefits lost for the period from the date of his discharge letter through the date of issuance of this decision. The grievance is otherwise denied.

How is it that the AAPGC discharged Dan O'Shea without it being a cardinal infraction, awarding him full back pay, and ruling to make him 'Whole', yet then states that "Discharge is the appropriate penalty," ignoring the fact this 24-year employee didn't even have a warning notice as the contract requires in Article 50?...

The Employer shall not discharge nor suspend any employee without just cause but in respect to discharge or suspension shall give at least one warning notice of a complaint against such employee.

It's not Dan O'Shea's position Mike Hicks should be questioning, he should be questioning why Local Union 639 President John Catlett refused to investigate UPS' false allegations against Dan O'Shea.

It's not that "The Company proved Grievant guilty", it's that Local Union President John Catlett (and the CMS Slate) refused to properly defend Dan O'Shea and his contractual rights that all teamster members supposedly had.

In effect the CMS Slate (Catlett, Steger, Hicks, et al.) protected the non-contractual issues for UPS than the contractual rights of Teamster Local 639 members!

What Mike Hick's should question is not "Dan O'Shea's position", but parts of the members' contract that Local Union 639 President John Catlett (and the CMS Slate) has now made obsolete.

Now it's all on the record, it's now a panel ruling that can be used over and over.

An employee can now be fired for carrying a tape recorder, despite the fact no UPS policy has ever been seen against it. (Want to bet that UPS will still be video taping teamster members?)

In non-cardinal infractions, UPS no longer needs to progressively discharge a teamster union member.

A warning notice is no longer needed. It is now a case UPS can cite over and over, in any panel hearing, in the Metro D.C. district or any district in the country.

What Teamster Local Union 639 President John Catlett did (and Local Union 639's current officers, the CMS Slate) was make the members' contract obsolete.

Now no one is safe. Everyone is affected.


Vote for the


All opinions and expressions stated herein are open to public opinion in an election year of Local 639 members.