Posted on May 12, 2016 by AdminUN

FSIP CHOOSES EMPLOYEES’ OPINIONS OVER NTEU’S

NTEU took a bargaining dispute over salaries to the Panel recently arguing that the performance appraisal system driving pay decisions “… is broken beyond repair in its current form which, in turn, leads to employee dissatisfaction over pay.” However, the agency put some hard evidence on the table arguing that employees disagreed with the union. It pointed to the annual employee survey (FEVS) showing that “nearly 72% of the surveyed employees believe that ‘considering everything,’ they are satisfied with their pay,” and that 73% of them agreed that their performance appraisal accurately reflected their performance.” Faced with the union employees saying one thing and their negotiators another the Panel decided to go with the statistical evidence. This case is yet another in a growing line where … Continue reading →

Posted in EEO/Discrimination | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posted on May 12, 2016 by AdminUN

WHEN YOUR RELIGIOUS EXPRESSIONS OFFEND CO-WORKERS

Federal employees’ rights to practice their faith is broadly protected, but in an era where more and more employees feel free, if not compelled to proclaim and preach their religious views to other employees questions are arising about just how far the right to express one’s religion goes. There is a great piece in the blogosphere about this from the folks at LAW.COM that we advise you to read. Here is a key passage. “Take this hypothetical: Richard works in a regional office of a large, multinational corporation with thousands of employees worldwide. He’s worked there over 20 years with a solid record. He would call himself a ‘devout Christian’ and believes that homosexual behavior is a sin because the Bible says so. One day, Richard comes to work and sees several new posters around the office as part of a company-wide diversity initiative. Each poster depicts a fellow employee with the slogan ‘Diversity is Our Strength.’ One also had the caption ‘Gay.’ In protest, Richard posts two passages from the Bible that condemn homosexual behavior right above his cubicle.”

Posted in Religion | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posted on May 12, 2016 by AdminUN

NEW RULES ON LEAVE AS A REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION

EEOC has just published some very helpful to advice for those of us on either side of the bargaining or litigation tables who wrestle with the question of when employees must be given leave to accommodate a disability. Most of us should know by now disabled employees, whether permanently or temporarily, can be entitled to more leave than the FMLA gives them. The folks at FMLA Insights did a very good job of summarizing the key parts of the EEOC advice. We recommended you make this information widely known to colleagues. (See “EEOC Issues New Resource Document Addressing Leave as a Reasonable Accommodation under the ADA. What’s the Impact on Employers?”)

Posted in Disability | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posted on May 9, 2016 by AdminUN

MSPB PANDERS A TINY BIT LESS TO AGENCIES

One of the most disappointing precedents to ever roll out of the Board established that agencies need not meet the tough standard of proof required to fire an employee for falsification, namely, that the employee intentionally gave false information or intended to deceive. It told agencies that all they need do to avoid that long-established standard is change the wording of the charge from “falsification” to “lack of candor.”   That, the Board said, “is a broader and more flexible concept whose contours and elements depend on the particular context and conduct involved.” In other words, even an unintentional false statement in an interview or on a form was enough to fire an employee. That triggered the adverse action equivalent of a third world blood bath across government. According to Cyberfeds.com, Continue reading →

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

Posted on May 9, 2016 by AdminUN

CONGRATS TO CAROL AND ERNIE!

There is another very good piece of good news coming out of the FLRA these days, and it is thanks to Carol Pope and Ernie Dubester. (Sorry for the “Dis” Patrick, but we are pretty sure you would zero out the budget and turn out the lights if Koch Headquarters so signaled.) For years the FLRA had one of the least productive ALJ corps imaginable—precisely the kind of mess the Heritage folks wail about. But thanks to some quiet changes from the Authority’s top leadership, it has had an almost 400% increase in productivity. Here are some hard numbers. Continue reading →

Posted in FLRA | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posted on May 9, 2016 by AdminUN

EEOC PAYS EMPLOYEE FOR DAMAGED RELATIONSHIP WITH DAUGHTER

Employees victimized by illegal retaliation, harassment or other violations of the Civil Rights laws unrelated to compensation often do not have back pay claims. That could lead the victim to decide that fighting the matter is not worth the effort. But, as we have said before, “compensatory damages” can be awarded up to $300,000 on top of any back pay or even without a back pay order. We won’t cover all the grounds for claiming these damages. Even though we have touched on examples in other posts, any employee considering a claim for damages needs someone to thoroughly research all possibilities. Nonetheless, we believe it is worth passing along some of the more surprising precedents in any field of employment law because the memory just might ring a bell in someone’s future. This week’s EEOC releases contained a case where a woman claimed damages from her discriminatory treatment by management for the harm done her relationship with her daughter. We thought that was one of those cases unusual enough that it should be stored in a few memories around the blogosphere. The following is an excerpt from the decision that gave the employee $35,000 in damages. Continue reading →

Posted in EEO/Discrimination | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posted on May 3, 2016 by AdminUN

WHEN AN ORDER TO TELEWORK VIOLATES LAW

While the Telework Act clearly prohibits agencies from ordering employees to participate in telework, that is not the only liability an agency has if it orders an employee to work from home. EEOC pointed that out in Levi S. v. Dep’t of the Navy, EEOC Appeal No. 0120151301 (November 25, 2015).  In that case management ordered an employee to work from home because of its concerns about his repeated physical seizures which it said scared others and made them uneasy. When the agency argued that an order to telework was not an adverse employment action, the EEOC wrote, “We find that the change in Complainant’s work location described in his complaint constitutes a viable allegation of harm to a term, condition or privilege of Complainant’s employment.” Unlike an alleged violation of the Telework Act prohibition against forcing employees to telework, a violation of the civil rights laws would make the employee eligible for tens of thousands in damages, not to mention back pay and attorney fees.  

Posted in Telework | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posted on May 2, 2016 by AdminUN

UNONS WATCH AS IRS REPORTS UNPAID ANNUAL TAXES RISE TO $458 BILLION

The title of this posts comes from a simple but powerful New York Times story that recently explained why the federal government is understaffed, its employees often underpaid, its work largely undone, and its reputation less than stellar. The money that law says should be paid into the US Treasury is not being deposited thanks for a very healthy dose of tax cheats living among us. (This figure does not even include all the companies doing business in the US who rent lofts or just mailboxes in off-shore tax havens to “legitimately” avoid paying what they would owe if they operated as US companies.) If even half this was collected each year there would be far, far fewer worries about Medicare shortfalls, the cost of universal health insurance, crumbling bridges, unsafe drinking water, and zika-like plagues. On the other hand, the tax cheats would be very unhappy, and cut their political contributions to Congressional front men drastically. If an ISIS-connected syndicate was stealing this money from Americans each year, ships would be launched, drones fired up, and boots put all over the ground. But thanks to a few Congressional hitmen who almost daily blame the underfunded IRS for this, Americans move along unaware that this theft cheats every man, woman and child out of about $1,500 a year in federal benefits. So, what can unions do about this? Continue reading →

Posted in Lobbying | Tagged | 1 Comment

Posted on April 29, 2016 by AdminUN

A NEGOTIATOR’S WAKE UP CALL

Every once in a while a case comes along that is just loaded with teaching moments for both sides and the Authority’s newest decision is one of them for negotiators on either side of the table.  In this case the parties had to go to the FSIP to resolve their bargaining dispute, which the Panel did on May 9 via a final and binding order. The union then refused to sign or implement the agreement alleging that the following ground rule language entitled it to delay signing for at least 14 days, ”At the completion of negotiations, the Employer will assemble a legible form of the completed Agreement within five (5) working days for both parties to review.  Execution will take place no later than fourteen (14) days after completion of negotiations.” On May 14th the union also announced that it was going to submit the contract for ratification after that review. The agency tried to convince the union to sign immediately, but gave up on July 9, when it submitted the contract for agency head review. The agency head disapproved the agreement on July 11.  The bargaining agency then filed a ULP charge against the union for a refusal to sign the agreement. Continue reading →

Posted in Bargaining Law, Bargaining Tactics | Tagged | Leave a comment

Posted on April 27, 2016 by AdminUN

WHEN THE DENIAL OF TELEWORK COULD VIOLATE LAW

Just a few weeks ago, Judge Rosemary Collyer, the judge who declared the proposed DHS collective bargaining rules illegal, issued an interesting decision that gives employees suspended or removed from telework a chance to overturn the decision and earn some compensation for the discomfort that caused. The agency had argued that the court’s precedent was that, “[T]he denial of an employee’s request to work from home on a few occasions, without more, does not constitute an adverse employment action under Title VII, even under the seemingly broader standard applicable to retaliation claims.” Typically, employees need to suffer some significant loss or harm to have a basis for filing an EEO complaint; it is called an “adverse employment action.” Collyer acknowledge that, but then recognized an exception.  She said the cases the agency pointed to, “…involved the denial of an initial telework request, as opposed to the suspension of an existing telework arrangement. The suspension of an existing privilege or condition of employment (i.e., telework arrangement) could dissuade a reasonable worker from filing or supporting a charge of discrimination against the employer because the worker could feel that the charge will result in further adverse actions and retaliation. The fact that the suspension was temporary and that Ms. Saunders could still telework on an ad hoc basis does not change the analysis. SBA fails to dispute this point substantively. At the very least, there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the suspension was materially adverse.” See Karla Saunders, Plaintiff, v. Karen G. Mills, Administrator, Small Business Administration, Defendant , D.C.D.C. No. 11-486 (RMC) (March 24, 2016)

Posted in Telework | Tagged | Leave a comment