Sertus vs Union365: AI-Powered Grievance Management

Operations platform vs. grievance specialist

Union365 covers the full breadth of union operations — membership databases, dues collection, elections, strike coordination, and communications. Grievance tracking lives inside that broader suite as one workflow among many. For locals that need a single system for everything, that breadth is the point.

Sertus starts from the opposite end. Grievances are the product. Every workflow, model, and dashboard is designed around the grievance lifecycle — intake, investigation, step meetings, arbitration preparation, and settlement. When a business agent opens a new file, Sertus reads the collective agreement, surfaces the relevant articles, and drafts a first response that the agent can edit instead of write from scratch.

Both platforms store data in Canada. The difference is what each platform does with the data once it's there. Sertus turns grievance records and collective agreements into actionable intelligence — strengths-and-weaknesses analysis, precedent search, and meeting preparation briefs that would take hours to compile manually.

Can they work together?

Many locals already run separate tools for membership and grievances. Union365 handles the operational side — membership records, dues collection, communications, and elections. Sertus handles the caseload — grievance intake, collective agreement analysis, AI-powered case assessment, and arbitration preparation. The two solve different problems and coexist naturally.

If your grievance caseload is small and straightforward, Union365's built-in tracking may be enough. But when cases get complex — multiple articles in play, extensive evidence, tight step deadlines, and the possibility of arbitration — a purpose-built tool with AI-powered analysis pays for itself in the first case it handles.