EEOC has just ruled on yet another case where an agency tried to skirt a employee’s right to a sign language interpreter. We thought it would be helpful to highlight the Commission’s simple statement about when an employee is entitled to an interpreter. Continue reading
While abuses are not rampant, they are there. One lawyer will charge five times what another does to win the same kind of case. Hourly fees are based on seniority rather than the level of skill needed to do the work. Bills are padded easily by adding several time-consuming arguments to a case that needs only one. Arbitrators order back pay in group-wide grievances for all work—even the work done on behalf of those grievants who did not get back pay. Unions are allowed to keep secret from members and the public how they spend their attorney fee profits, which makes them all potential slush funds. We said it before and we will say it again, a few greedy attorneys are going to kill this goose that lays golden eggs for federal employee. But is it FLRA’s role to correct the situation? Continue reading
An interesting ruling came out recently in a case known as Stanton v. Brennan, USPS, EEOC No. 0120172696 (2019). The employee, a Methodist, claimed that his religion prohibited him from working on a Sunday. While his employer found someone to work his Sunday assignments, it required him to attend three training sessions on a Sunday. When he refused to attend, it fired him. EEOC reversed the firing finding the employee made a legitimate religious accommodation claim. Here is how it analyzed the facts and applied the law in its own words–with some highlighting of critical passages by us. Continue reading
Given the anti-employee bias, if not contempt, built into the DNA of the current FSIP many employers are taking the opportunity to terminate negotiated performance award programs, e.g., annual awards based on performance scores or gainsharing programs. There is not much unions can do to stop that, but there is something they can do to make employers regret it. Continue reading
We would. An arbitrator found that an agency failed to follow the contract obligation about the background of those on a promotion “rating panel” and gave two grievants priority consideration. It did not take a genius to make that call because the agency admitted in its written grievance response that did not follow the contract requirement. Moreover, the “rating panel” members did all those things rating panels do. They interviewed candidates, they evaluated their response to pre-determined questions, and they gave the candidates scores. Those scores where used to determine who was highly qualified versus best qualified. It was going to be an “easy-peasy” decision against the agency if the agency reps did not do something. So, as best we can tell, the agency reps decided to tell a big fat lie. Apparently, the horrors of having to give two employees priority consideration and the threat to government, if not the free world, priority consideration creates, justified in their mind making up stuff. Continue reading
Jim Abbott came out hot in a new FLRA decision condemning the foul, racist-tinged language used day in and day out by our President. Shedding his unofficial title as the Administration’s most notorious moral hypocrite, The Jimbo let fly with both fists stating unequivocally that “There is no place for boorish, insulting, and demeaning language…” in the federal government. Specifically targeting several of Trump’s favorite words such as “fat,” “retard” and “loser,” Abbott let it be known that he would suspend the President for 14 days for such behavior. Jim would do that without even considering “you know whose” predisposition to engage in “assault and battery” of women, nor is he willing to accept the defense that this kind of language is “within the scope” of a president’s duties to the people he represents. He then dumped yet another big bucket of shade on the president saying leaders “should be able to comport themselves appropriately” when operating as government officials. Oops, wait a minute; we misspoke. We must have been dreaming. Jim wrote all his outrage only applies to a union president, not the President of the United States. Jim did not blame Trump’s constant verbal abuse of others for the fact that this kind of robust exchange might occur today between federal employees; rather he blamed the two dozen or so people who served on the FLRA before him for allowing this to happen. He also blamed… Continue reading
The media carried a story today about how an AFGE rep from the TSA went to see a Georgia Congressman about issues important to his members and the Congressman’s constituents. As the AFGE rep was waiting to be seen he noticed an open book displayed in the Congressman’s waiting room that was opened to a page referring to African-Americans in the most vile and racist way. Continue reading
That’s a tough question to answer when you know so many totally honest and honorable mediators, but the hard lesson we learned was that there are some who will. So, negotiators, especially union negotiators, need to keep that in mind when dealing with them and protect themselves. Here is an only slightly hypothetical set facts that showed us how easy lying can come to a mediator. Continue reading
About 20 years ago FLRA ruled that the statutory cap on how much overtime compensation a Customs and Border Protection Officer may receive did not bar paying the employee more than that cap amount pursuant to an arbitration or grievance settlement. But the U.S. Court of Federal Claims just ruled to the contrary in a case two Customs and Border Protection (Border Patrol) Canine Officers hired private lawyers to pursue outside the collective bargaining process. This is terrible news for CBP officers. See Michael C. Bailey, et al. v. U.S., for the January 2019 decision. Continue reading