WHAT THE “H” “E” DOUBLE HOCKEY STICKS IS THIS FLRA?

The Authority just dismissed a union’s claim that management had unilaterally implemented a change and, in the process, jumbled 40 years of labor law precedent. I am talking about the case law rich concept that when bargaining breaks down, the agency (1) must serve notice on the union that it believes there is an impasse and (2) that it intends to implement on a specified date.  That gives the union the opportunity to invoke impasse services, which delays any change until there is agreement. Continue reading

Posted in FLRA | Tagged | 7 Comments

CONGRATS TO NFFE FOR ORGANIZING YELLOWSTONE

Everyone is out there trying to convince unorganized workers to join their union.  In the federal sector, some unions have directors of organizing with budgets, organizing staff, and IT support–and still do not succeed.  Yet, we just heard that NFFE, which has limited organizing resources, pulled off a major success in the National Parks Service. Continue reading

Posted in Organizing | Tagged | Leave a comment

HOW TO RIG A NATIONAL OR REGIONAL UNION ELECTION

I can think of more than half-dozen tricks that incumbents or those favored by the “powers-to-be” can use to get a large advantage in multi-local elections.  But I want to focus on a new age one that involves e-mail addresses.  Continue reading

Posted in Elections/Voting | Tagged | Leave a comment

FEDERAL COURT HIGHLIGHTS ANOTHER WAY UNIONS CAN OVERTURN EMPLOYEE TERMINATIONS

An arbitrator blundered, a federal court spotted his blunder, and unions should make sure arbitrators give their members the full benefits of the law. In this case, an agency terminated an employee on two charges, but the arbitrator only upheld one of them.  Nonetheless, the arbitrator… Continue reading

Posted in Discipline/Adverse Action | Tagged | Leave a comment

THERE IS SOMETHING ROTTEN AT DODEA

I once worked at the DoD Education Activity (DODEA) as a management official and to this day have enormous respect for its top leader’s integrity and values. But between the EEOC decision covered in this post and the post immediately below, it looks like it is time for an agency-wide DoDEA stand down to focus on civil rights. This is not how those who teach the children of military members around the world should be treated. Continue reading

Posted in Promotion/Hiring | Tagged | Leave a comment

YOU’RE PROTECTED WHEN YOU JUST SPEAK UP FOR A DISCRIMINATION VICTIM

Iris, is an employee at DoD’s Education Activity (DoDEA) which manages its elementary and high schools around the world. In fact, she was a school principal.  When she raised issues of racial mistreatment of a co-worker to her manager, that manager directed Iris to request a transfer.  Iris believed her supervisor’s order was in retaliation/reprisal for her opposition to the discrimination against a co-worker, and filed a complaint. Here’s is what happened, but . . . Continue reading

Posted in Retaliation | Tagged | Leave a comment

THE ACTRESS JOAN CRAWFORD ON PROGRESSIVE DISCIPLINE

The next time some top manager proposes termination rather than uses progressive discipline on an employee think about showing the oral reply official the wire hanger scene from Joan Crawford’s Mommy Dearest film. It is a spot-on visual description of precisely what the CEO-as-executioner is doing. If you have seen the film, you will remember a wild-eyed Joan rampaging and ranting through her house destroying thousands of dollars because her child violated one of Joan’s peccadilloes, i.e., she used wire rather than wooden clothes hangers. Obviously, in Joan’s world what she wants is not only more important than anything else, but deserves termination with extreme prejudice, the guillotine, the full Vlad-The-Impaler package, etc. if slighted. Given the harm “termination without previous discipline” does to the employee, their family and sadly at times our communities, this CEO preference for extermination is more than the executive’s ego or even hubris.  It is far closer to a megalomania, i.e., a delusional obsession with self-importance. Continue reading

Posted in Discipline/Adverse Action | Tagged | Leave a comment

IS THIS DISCRIMINATION? WHAT WOULD YOU DO?

Assume that a CEO of some organization decides that he no longer wants a minority woman, who held a supervisory position, on his staff.  She has somehow upset him.  Consequently, he has her marched out the door one day without any severance pay–despite more than a decade of service–to the organization. So far, the CEO has done nothing illegal, but what if when the organization terminated five previous White men from the staff they got thousands in severance pay and/or months of notice to find a new job.  Continue reading

Posted in Associational, EEO/Discrimination | Tagged | Leave a comment

THE AGONY OF TERMINATION, NEPO BABIES AND PAYING IT FORWARD

During my career as a union rep, I defended more than a handful of feds who were terminated by their agency. While I could talk about them, I want to focus on one person who I did not represent, but who came to me for help. If you remember the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO), you probably remember how an illegal 1981 strike against the FAA their leaders took them on resulted in the biggest catastrophe in American labor history.  They never got the fat raises FAA was offering them, 13,000 controllers (mainly veterans) lost their jobs, the strikers were barred from working anywhere else in government, and President Reagan’s successful crushing of that union encouraged  private sector employers to crush their own unions. It made the labor’s 1914 Ludlow Massacre seem like a mere paper cut.  I want to talk about one of the PATCO union leaders who lost his job. Continue reading

Posted in Discipline/Adverse Action | Tagged | Leave a comment

IMPORTANT FLRA “SCOPE OF PROPOSALS” DECISION

Last month, FLRA decided a POPA case that all negotiators should read closely. (66 FLRA 247)  Management made a mid-term proposal to change one part of a performance awards program and the union responded with proposals addressing the full range of award program issues.  Management answered by stating that most of the union’s proposals were outside the “scope” of its change and therefore management was not obligated to bargain over them. When POPA refused to limit the bargaining to just management’s change, management unilaterally implemented the change and the union filed a ULP grievance challenging that. Continue reading

Posted in Bargaining Law | Tagged | 1 Comment