Intake
Record the requestor, summary, channel, source, category, impact, urgency and case-specific configured information.
Grievance tracking software for unions
UnionStack connects the requestor, participant roles, assignments, organizational context, progress, evidence, email, meetings, outcomes and awards in one configurable case record.
Configurable case management
A grievance is more than a status and due date. Representatives need to know who raised the concern, who is involved, what agreement or entity provides context, what evidence exists, who owns the next action and why the matter was resolved.
UnionStack supports distinct case types for grievances, inquiries, incidents and other union work. Each type can use its own intake fields, participant roles, progress model, categories, channels, sources, impact, urgency and configured fields. Parent and child cases, organizational relationships, agreements, articles, tags and assignments make the surrounding context explicit.
That structure helps a team follow a repeatable procedure while leaving room for professional judgment, unusual facts and escalation paths.
Feature evidence
Record the requestor, summary, channel, source, category, impact, urgency and case-specific configured information.
Connect people and UnionStack users with explicit roles so involvement and representation are understandable.
Assign the authorized users responsible for moving the matter forward and distinguish ownership from participation.
Use configured stages and subtypes that reflect material changes in the procedure rather than a generic task list.
Keep notes, documents, tags, agreements, articles and related cases connected to the decision they support.
Relate email conversations, senders, recipients, attachments and meetings instead of reconstructing the history from private inboxes.
Record outcomes, awards, completion conditions and remaining follow-up before applying the final status.
Review workload, status and patterns using the case structure teams maintain during everyday work.
Hands-on workflow
Select the configured grievance type and confirm that the intake fields, participant roles and progress stages match the procedure being tested.
Identify the requestor, affected member, employer or workplace context, agreement and article where they apply. Record a concise issue statement.
Add representatives, witnesses or decision-makers with explicit roles and assign the user responsible for the next stage.
Move through the configured stages, adding material notes, documents, related conversations and meetings at the point they become relevant.
Capture the outcome, award or obligation, confirm final documents and assign any follow-up that continues after closure.
Ask another authorized representative to explain what happened, what evidence mattered and why the result was reached using only the case record.
Buyer guidance
Give the vendor a redacted version of one grievance procedure. Ask them to model participant roles, material stages, required information and closure conditions.
Change the assigned representative mid-case. Confirm the new owner can understand the current stage, evidence and next action without an inbox handover.
Attach a document, relate an email thread and create a meeting. Verify each remains discoverable from the grievance and from its connected record.
Run an urgent or unusual case through the configuration. Look for rigid automation that hides judgment or optionality so broad that the procedure disappears.
Use two users with different responsibilities. Confirm sensitive records and configuration controls are limited to the intended audience.
Produce a workload or outcome view from the records created in the demonstration. Confirm the result does not depend on manual recoding.
Operational control
Good grievance tracking reduces ambiguity: the team can see the stage, responsible user, participants, connected evidence and outstanding obligation. It does not replace the collective agreement, legal advice or representative judgment.
During implementation, define who can create each case type, what minimum intake is required, how deadlines are governed, when escalation occurs and what must be true before closure. Test those decisions with realistic but non-sensitive data before migrating active work.
Plan the migration of active and historical cases →From the UnionStack blog
Learn how to evaluate configurable grievance workflows, participant roles, evidence, communication, outcomes and operational reporting.
Read the article →Related implementation guides
Use these maintained UnionStack 2.0 guides to evaluate the workflow in detail.
Move from intake through participants, progress, evidence and outcome.
Support Team · UnionStack 2.012 min read → Case designConfigure fields, participants and progress around a repeatable representation procedure.
Support Team · UnionStack 2.013 min read → ParticipantsMake involvement, representation and responsibility explicit throughout a case.
Support Team · UnionStack 2.08 min read → EvidenceKeep relevant files identifiable, protected and connected to the decision they support.
Support Team · UnionStack 2.010 min read → ContextAdd context without turning the case record into an unsearchable collection of duplicate text.
Support Team · UnionStack 2.08 min read → ClosureComplete the record so the result, reasoning and remaining obligations are clear.
Support Team · UnionStack 2.010 min read →Built for connected work
Use a representative case during the trial and follow it from intake to closure.