THE INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY OF “COVERED-BY” ADVOCATES
There is an ALJ case lingering in the FLRA decision pipeline that will once again put the “covered-by” (CB) defense up for review. (See DoD and NEA) Having watched the CB defense come into being and judicially mutate into nothing short of a near-total extermination of mid-term collective bargaining, my opinion has been that it is built atop unsupportable assertions. This becomes obvious when they are isolated and examined individually. To do so, I have focused on the reasoning of the primary, and most accomplished, CB activist, Judge Harry T. Edwards, of the D.C. Court of Appeals. Like me he spent his formative years learning about language, reasoning, sentence structure, fallacies, and syntax in a little place called Uniondale. True story, but for another time. Hopefully, this analysis will enable unions to sharpen an attack on the concept. Continue reading →