Posted on July 2, 2014 by AdminUN

WHEN ADVOCATES COMPLAIN TOO LITTLE

Although this is hardly something new, it is worth repeating.  If an arbitrator sustains a grievance, but denies the union’s desired remedy on three different grounds, it is not enough to file exceptions attacking only one of those grounds.  FLRA will not even consider an objection to a single basis for the remedy denial unless the union challenges all three grounds.  The union must remove all valid reasons for denying the remedy before FLRA will seriously consider imposing the remedy or even remanding. Continue reading →

Posted in Arbitration Exceptions | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posted on July 1, 2014 by AdminUN

AFGE SEALS 6101 SHIELD AGAINST SHADDY SHIFT SCHEMES

Here is how FLRA described the scheme, “The Agency planned a seventy-fifth anniversary celebration on a Saturday at the Shenandoah National Park (the event). Several weeks before the event, the Agency scheduled all of its employees to work that day, but gave each employee a day off earlier in the week so that the Saturday shift constituted part of the employees’ scheduled tours of duty.” (AFGE, 67 FLRA 489 (2014))  Because the Authority has held the substance of shift changes non-negotiable and a one-time change might not qualify as a unilateral change in past practice, unions have only one way left to protect their members from shift scams—and AFGE just made that shield bigger and stronger. Continue reading →

Posted in Hours of Work | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posted on July 1, 2014 by AdminUN

PIZZELLA AGHAST OVER 76 YEAR OLD PRECEDENT

An ALJ found an agency discriminated against an employee when it denied her request to telework from home while she recovered from a broken ankle.  When the judge failed to require the agency to restore any leave the employee took to cover the two days a week she was to come to the office, FLRA overruled him.  It gave the employee to right to submit leave restoration claims during the compliance stage.  The case is significant because it reinforces the Authority’s message that if an agency breaks the law there will be a tangible (preferably back pay) penalty, not just posted paper, unless barred by law.   Continue reading →

Posted in FLRA | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posted on June 25, 2014 by AdminUN

THE FORWARD-LOOKING NEGOTIATOR

Federal employee unions have been bargaining for over 35 years now—and a few for over 50 years.  So, it is reasonable to ask when all the reasonable issues will have been addressed and there is little to need for further bargaining. In fact, it is critical that unions keep focused on what issues to bargain over next because once members conclude they have all been addressed there is a lot less need for collective bargaining. Continue reading →

Posted in Bargaining | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posted on June 19, 2014 by AdminUN

THE AUTOMATED FORMAL DISCUSSION

The statute has been in place for over 30 years now, but FLRA case law guidance on what is and is not a formal discussion is still next to useless for practitioners.  (Check out “FLRA FUBAR: The Formal Discussion Mess.”) But, as bad as it is today after more than 200 FLRA formal discussions decisions, it is about to get worse thanks to automation. Continue reading →

Posted in Bargaining, Formal Discussions | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posted on June 19, 2014 by AdminUN

UPDATE ON BARGAINING OVER WORKLOAD CHANGES

Two years ago we pointed out what we believed to be the error in FLRA’s thinking when it held that an agency can stand by and watch employee workloads skyrocket out of sight due to increased public demand, know that the increase is vastly changing employees’ working conditions, yet have no obligation to notify the union and bargain. Check out Bargaining Over Workload Changes.  The D.C. Circuit court has ruled on NTEU’s appeal and the news is not good, but neither is it devastating. Continue reading →

Posted in Bargaining | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posted on June 13, 2014 by AdminUN

MANAGEMENT LIABLE IF PUBLIC HARASSES EMPLOYEE

What can an employee do if a member of the public regularly sexually harasses her?  For example, suppose the person regularly makes sexually suggestive comments, perhaps touches the employee on the arm or shoulder, or even bumps against her.  Is the employee’s only alternative to demand her supervisor protect her?  Nope! Continue reading →

Posted in EEO/Discrimination | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posted on June 13, 2014 by AdminUN

CONGRATS ON AFGE’s VA SCANDAL RESPONSE (How Scandals Are Planned In Advance)

Congress may not pass any laws, budgets, treaties or other legislation, but it sure does have a guaranteed way to generate scandals in federal agencies.  Since the media seems to be ignoring the formula for whipping up Executive Branch scandals, we thought we would shine a light on it after reading a Huffington Post story entitled, “Here’s the Simple Reason Congress Hasn’t Fixed the VA.”   It is a great piece that every fed should read when considering political action activity.  But here is what it left out. Continue reading →

Posted in Lobbying | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posted on May 21, 2014 by AdminUN

ADVOCATES’ ALERT: AT LEAST MAKE THE ARGUMENT

The Authority just posted a new decision and the lesson for advocates on either side of the arbitration table is that they should get all their arguments on the record, even if they are not among the best or primary arguments.  A lot of practitioners will argue that it’s wrong to load up the record with alternative or only potentially useful arguments, but one agency learned the hard way the shortcomings of that approach. Because it failed to at least put an argument on the record with the arbitrator, FLRA would not consider agency exceptions raising the argument for the first time. Continue reading →

Posted in Arbitration | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posted on May 19, 2014 by AdminUN

TELECOMMUTING CAN BE A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION

Just a few weeks ago another federal circuit court held that a disabled employee’s request to telecommute can be a reasonable accommodation.  If an employer wants to deny the requested accommodation, it has the burden to prove that granting it would cause it an “undue hardship.”  If you are dealing with this issue, take a look at what a management-side law firm is telling clients about telecommuting as a reasonable accommodation.  Note particularly the court’s criticism of the company for trying to restate the position’s essential duties to include arguments why telecommuting would be an undue hardship and the court’s rejection of the tired old management objection that employees cannot telecommute because their work requires teamwork with others, “we are not persuaded that positions that require a great deal of teamwork are inherently unsuitable to telecommuting arrangements.”   FEDSMILL has written about this before, e.g., “Want to Telework As A Reasonable Accommodation?”

Posted in ADA/ADAAA | Tagged | Leave a comment