Dea,
I think your heart and mind is in the right place, and you have a talent for seeing both sides of the equation.
No employee should voluntarily go in to the Company's EAS (Employee Assistance Services). There is no assurance of confidentiality and NO assurance that the Agents of the company who act as behavioral health social workers whose only scope of practice in that role is to assess/ and refer, will do only that. The unions OFFER their own EAP (Employee Assistance Program) and there you will have confidentiality and your job will not be in jeopardy. If any emotional probem is assessed to be more complex, then they will be refered to the behavioral health vendor.
There is a case where a f/a recently was terminated who was a self-referral in company program of EAS. With that said, one should always be vigilant and cautious what you are signing when you take any medical leave of absence, any "letters of understanding" or anything you sign. If you are not sure how to sign either a) call your local union rep. first or B) sign and write
"under protest", and then call your rep. Any "letters of understanding" should never be signed.
You are correct in your assessment of the membership...its damned if you do; and damed if you don't. But nonetheless, someone has to be called to do it.
As far as "slackers", there is "professional Standards" committee in each local, however, it is a volunteer position and you can't always pick those who have talent for this kind of thing. Its kind of a "learn as you go along" with very little training. Its more of a nurturing, good- listening- skills kinda of person. There is some training, but with the environment we have been in for two years, problems that arise, run much, much deeper than that, and folks don't have money to spend on co-pays for therapy 2 x per week or more to a vendor.
Also, its not a question of putiing in contracts that folks should be treated with respect. But rather, that is a "culture" (or should be). At present, words don't mean a thing....it's what folks do by their actions.
Reasonbility and acting rational is not fostered by this mangement. Most supervisors and managers have no authority or "leeway" to make those kinds of decisions. What is fostered by the "powers that be" is hardline is good and rewarded. It has been my experience that supervisors and managers are more worried about losing their jobs than the rank and file, and middle and upper management does not tolerate supervisors using judgement that may create an inconsistency to the "hardline", no mitigating circumstances allowed, to deviate from policy, specifically, the new ones that have been implemented.
I believe, you, Dea, really need to run for office.