ABBOTT & KIKO PANTSED
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals just pantsed the two Trumpian toadies by not just overturning their decision in AFGE v. FLRA, Civ. No. 19-1069 (6/9/20), but also engaging in what amounts to a public disrobing by a federal judicial panel. The three judges unanimously stripped the Abbott & Kiko decision for all to see that the two Trumpettes not only lacked elementary legal writing skills, but also even minimal legal integrity. This is the FLRA decision that held–over Dubester’s strong and wise objection– that while unions were entitled to negotiate over changes in “conditions of employment,” they could not bargain changes in “working conditions.” Given the distinction between the two terms was and is vague, you would have thought Donald’s dupes would have explained to agencies how to practically distinguish between the two. But as the court pointed out “…the Authority fails to explain the differences between the terms or how the alleged differences matter….” What Abbott & Kiko did is like a grammar school student tasked with homework to explain the difference between a coat and a jacket and simply turning in a paper declaring that they are different because the letters in the two words are mostly different. But the Abbott-Kiko blunders did not stop there as the court went on to write that – Continue reading