Federaltimes.com

Senior Obama administration and federal labor officials met today in the first attempt at forging labor-management partnerships at 200 federal agencies.

A new National Council on Federal Labor-Management Relations is overseeing the effort, and today appointed a four-member working group to review agencies’ plans for how they will create labor-management partnerships. The four are American Federation of Government Employees National President John Gage; National Association of Government Employees National President David Holway; Homeland Security Deputy Secretary Jane Lute; and Veterans Affairs Deputy Secretary Scott Gould.

John Berry, director of the Office of Personnel Management and co-chairman of the national council, said he wants the council to have a complete package of implementation plans ready by its next meeting, April 7.

Berry said plans will be posted on the council’s Web site as they are received.

Most of the council’s initial work dealt with establishing its guiding principles and proposing metrics to measure the effectiveness of the partnerships.

Gage disagreed with one proposed metric to measure improvements in labor-management relations: declines in grievances, bargaining disputes and unfair labor practices filed by employees.

“It’s a false expectation to think that grievances are going to plummet because we have forums that are working on really other issues,” Gage said. “I’m not going to tell my people to stop filing grievances or anything else. Grievance procedure is a good thing.”

Other council members felt tracking grievance declines could provide a useful indicator of the workplace climate. Colleen Kelley, national president of the National Treasury Employees Union, said agencies that have had successful partnerships in the past saw grievances and other disputes drop.

Michael Kerr, the Labor Department’s assistant secretary for administration and management, agreed. “In healthy relationships, people don’t have to rely on rights,” he said. “What we would hope is that over time as the relationship improves, rather than relying on legal recourse or contractual recourse, that the resolution of problems would occur more in an informal way or in a bargaining setting.”

However, the council agreed to strike that metric and replace it with a lower-priority metric that calls for increasing the use of dispute resolution.

President Obama issued an executive order in December establishing the council and ordering it to reinstate the partnerships that operated throughout the federal government during the Clinton administration. President Bush dissolved the partnerships, under which unions and managers routinely met to find ways to make agencies work better, immediately after taking office in 2001.

At the first meeting of a new national council on federal labor-management relations on Friday, participants debated how agencies should structure collaborative projects, and how to measure improvements in federal labor relations.

Under an executive order signed by President Obama in December, agencies must create their own forums for labor-management collaboration. They are required to submit plans for those forums by March 9, and the national council must approve them.

During the meeting, labor and management representatives clashed over the role labor relations and human resources specialists should play in agency-by-agency engagement efforts. Some union leaders argued they could not trust labor relations officers, and that higher-level officials must be involved.

“A lot of our people are gun-shy, and there’s been major obstruction from labor relations in a lot of agencies over the last few years,” said American Federation of Government Employees President John Gage. “If there’s a management team that’s HR and labor relations, we’re not going to play.”

William Dougan, president of the National Federation of Federal Employees, said “we’ve had some very negative experiences in the past where agencies do not send their decision-makers to the table.”

But Scott Gould, deputy secretary of Veterans Affairs and Jane Lute, deputy secretary of Homeland Security, argued that it was important that labor relations and human resources officers not be excluded from engagement efforts. The council settled on a statement of principles that would require agencies to bring decision-makers to the table as well as any support staff they might need.

Council members also debated how to measure the success of new engagement efforts. Gage said he thought individual programs in each agency should have their own metrics. DHS’ Lute said it was important for agencies to do baseline surveys of issues such as employee morale and engagement, so they would be able to measure the impact of the partnerships accurately.

Union representatives objected to the idea that the number of grievances, unfair labor practices complaints and lawsuits filed by employees should be used to measure the success or failure of agency-level engagement efforts. Gage said the forums would largely be concerned with issues other than the treatment of individual employees, and that because the forums were not an alternative dispute resolution tool, they shouldn’t be judged on grievance numbers.

“If employees are being charged [absent without leave] or being denied promotions, that should not be a metric to say …that we are not being successful,” said Colleen Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union.

But Carol Bonosaro, president of the Senior Executives Association, said grievance numbers matter. Even if productivity and morale improves, “no one is going to give a damn if there are twice as many grievances,” she said. “I think it’s just wrong to say we’re not going to look at the data.”

The council eventually agreed that it would be better to focus measurements on improvements in rates of dispute resolution.

Despite areas of disagreement raised at the meeting, Office of Personnel Management Director John Berry, who co-chairs the council with federal Chief Performance Officer Jeffrey Zients, praised council members’ efforts. “The respectful dialogue at this table is heartening and encouraging,” Berry said.

Council members also agreed on a mechanism to select participants in a pilot program to test allowing agencies and unions to bargain over issues that are not ordinarily subject to negotiation in the federal sector, such as the number and kinds of employees assigned to projects. The national council will determine whether there are enough proposals for pilots in the implementation plans agencies are required to submit by March 9. If there are, the council will select the pilots from among those proposals. If not, Berry and Zients will work together to identify appropriate pilots.

Source: FederalDaily.com, February 24, 2010

Labor leaders, members of the administration, and healthcare and industry advocates took their case to the Hill Feb. 23 as they provided testimony on a bill that would increase oversight of how prices are set for prescription drugs provided to Federal Employees Health Benefits Program beneficiaries.

Witnesses testified before the House Oversight and Government Reform federal workforce subcommittee on H.R. 4489, “The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program Prescription Drug Integrity, Transparency, and Cost Savings Act.”

The bill, intended to lower costs of prescription drugs provided through the plan, would give the Office of Personnel Management greater oversight authority, require pharmacy benefit managers—or PBMs—to return money they receive from manufacturers for FEHBP business; and cap prices paid by the health plans to the average manufacturer price. The bill also would keep PBMs from switching drugs without physician consultation, require disclosure of all contract terms to OPM, and forbid companies that own both retail drugstores and a PBM from doing business with FEHBP carriers.

Jacqueline Simon, public policy director of the American Federation of Government Employees, called the proposed oversight of PBMs a welcome start. “Focusing on the operations of the pharmacy benefit managers is an excellent place to being improving the affordability of FEHBP,” Simon said. “PBMs are the middlemen in health insurance. They make their large profits by ‘buying cheap and selling dear.’”

Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., subcommittee chairman and bill sponsor, said a recent study shows that those who have no drug insurance coverage can pay less for generic drugs than FEHBP enrollees. Lynch also noted that within the program, larger plans charge far more for prescription drugs in comparison to smaller plans, despite having a sizable difference in the number of enrollees.

“How can people state that federal employees have the best health insurance in the country when people with no insurance are paying less for their prescription drugs?” Lynch said. “Does the market-based concept of leverage not apply to the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program?”

But, the American Enterprise Institute resident scholar John E. Calfee, in his capacity as a consultant to drug companies, submitted testimony claiming that PBMs in fact generate competition “with each other and with retail pharmacies, large health plans, large employers, and even pharmaceutical manufacturers.”

According to Calfee, “H.R. 4489 would greatly narrow the choices available to health plans and other market participants.”

Source: FederalDaily.com

February 23, 2010

DoD intends to waste little time in moving employees out of the National Security Personnel System, the department’s ill-fated pay-for-performance effort.

The department announced that it was poised to begin moving most of the approximately 220,000 NSPS employees out of the system within a matter months, with the bulk of them moving into the General Schedule. The first transitions could start early this spring, with most of the employees transferred out by Sept. 30—about a year ahead of schedule, according to information posted Feb. 19 on the DoD Web site. Under the FY 2010 National Defense Authorization Act—the law that abolished NSPS—all NSPS employees must be converted by Jan. 1, 2012.

However, certain factors could affect the Sept. 30 timeline for some employees, DoD said—for example, if the transition causes an interruption to mission or hardship to employees; existing processes are not able to classify NSPS positions into the appropriate non-NSPS system; or a legacy performance management system does not exist. Individual DoD components will address those issues, DoD said

News of planned transition timeline comes just after DoD’s launch of a new online program to serve as a primer for those transitioning out of NSPS. The training program, called GS 101, resides on the NSPS Web site and covers broad topic areas, including GS classification architecture and salary structure.

cialis next day Cealis Viagra Dialate Blood Vessels cialis no perscription
Cialis illegal philippines grapefruit and cialis 313. Viagra Cealis cheapest brand cialis

Washington, D.C., Feb. 23, 2010 – In a creative move reminiscent of its 2003 act to charter the first Transportation Security Administration Local, the American Federation of Government Employees yesterday filed a petition to hold a union election that would make way for AFGE to become the exclusive union representative for 40,000 TSOs nationwide.

An AFGE attorney and seven TSA Local presidents delivered the petition to the Federal Labor Relations Authority, which quickly moved to assign a docket number to the case, setting in motion a true path to a union election at TSA. Despite the Bush administration’s assertion that TSOs could not unionize, AFGE has again demonstrated that innovation and hard work are what it will take to deliver bargaining rights to Transportation Security Officers.

“While it would be ideal for a TSA administrator to have granted collective bargaining rights first, the two do not have to go hand-in-hand,” AFGE President John Gage said. “By settling the question of representation first, AFGE will be ready to begin negotiations as soon as the bargaining rights are established.”

Of the TSO workforce of approximately 40,000, AFGE has over 13,000 TSOs who have expressed interest in a union election. This is over the 30% ’showing of interest’ requirement for filing a union election petition.

“The need for these workers to have a voice at work is unquestionable,” Gage told the Feb. 22 press conference announcing the filing of the petition. “We are extremely happy to push the envelope on this issue.”

AFGE filed its first petition for an election with the FLRA in 2003, but the petition was dismissed because the FLRA did not believe it had jurisdiction over TSA. One FLRA member, Carol Pope, dissented from the majority opinion, saying that there are many things a union representative can do for workers without collective bargaining. Pope has been named FLRA chair by the Obama administration.

“AFGE believes the FLRA erred in saying there is no right to union representation without collective bargaining,” Gage said. “The right to a union is a fundamental human right that is not dependent on collective bargaining.”

But even without the election, more than 13,000 TSOs in more than 100 airports in 37 AFGE Locals nationwide have already spoken—declaring AFGE their union of choice. AFGE expects a speedy FLRA decision, so that TSOs nationwide can finally put to rest the question of union representation.

In a huge expression of support to the AFGE petition announcement, union pilots, flight attendants, [http://img.getactivehub.com/08/custom_images/afgerocks/smaller_TSA_rally_2010.jpg]  machinists, airport employees, and other AFL-CIO union members braved the winter cold and took to the streets today to join AFGE in what’s considered the largest labor campaign in the country – the fight for better pay and collective bargaining rights for 40,000 TSOs.

The fired-up union members gathered in front of the AFL-CIO in Washington, D.C, just two blocks away from the White House. To the beat of the drums, the crowd chanted “Ho, ho, hay, hay, Union Rights for TSA!”

“What time is it?” AFGE President John Gage asked the crowd, which responded loud and clear – “It’s union time!”

Gage said TSOs need collective bargaining rights and workplace protections now so they can focus on doing their job of protecting America and don’t have to worry about discrimination and retaliation that are rampant at TSA. Gage said it is an insult to fire fighter and police officer – first responders to the 9/11 crisis – to say that being a union member prevents any worker from doing his or her job.

“It’s time to deliver a message to the senator who played politics with national security that threats are from terrorists, not from labor unions,” said Rep. Nita Lowey, D-NY, to a huge applause. Lowey – who introduced a bill, H.R. 1881, that  would grant TSOs collective bargaining rights and get rid of their controversial pay system – said the work that TSOs do is critical to the country’s fight against terrorism and they deserve a workplace that reflects that. She said it’s not a coincidence that TSA has the lowest morale in the government.

Several union leaders took turns speaking at the rally, including AFL-CIO Executive Vice President Arlene Holt Baker, and AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer Liz Shuler, Association of Flights Attendants International President Patricia Friend, Communications Workers of America President Larry Cohen, National Air Traffic Controllers Association President Paul Rinaldi, International Association of Machinists General Vice President Robert Roach Jr., National Association of Letter Carriers Vice President George Mignosi, Transport Workers Union International Executive Vice President Harry Lombardo, Metropolitan Baltimore Council AFL-CIO President Ernie Grecco, and two AFGE TSOs Kim Kraynak, president of Local 332, and Ricky McCoy, president of Local 777.

net cialis? Comparing Cealis And Viagra geneic cheapest cialis
cialis comments Viagra Cealis India lilly cialis

Transportation Security Agency

AFGE launched several Legal Clinics around the country in an effort to provide immediate legal assistance to our Transportation Security Officers (TSOs). AFGE continues its fight for the collective bargaining rights for our TSO brothers and sisters. For more information, please visit us at www.tsaunion.net.

EEO Attorney Mark Vinson joins in AFGE’s fight by winning $7,500 and $10,000 in TSA settlements. He was also successful in securing a promotion for a TSA member in a confidential case.

PROPOSALS TO terminate EMPLOYEES WERE OVERTURNED, THANKS TO AFGE

An arbitrator recently overturned an agency’s proposal to terminate a Department of Defense (DoD) employee for alleged misuse of government property during official duty time. Thanks to AFGE’s Legal Rights Attorney Evan Greenstein, the termination was abated. Instead, the employee was awarded back pay and placed on a 35-day suspension.

Greenstein defended another member from Local 2367 in West Point, N.Y., who was charged with falsifying an employee document. The arbitrator overturned the proposal to terminate the employee and ordered that the employee be suspended. Not only was the employee permitted to return to work within 11 days of the decision, but the employee was also awarded back pay.

AFGE’s Legal Rights Attorney Hampton H. Stennis was victorious in a case at Local 400 at Fort Drum, in Watertown, NY. An AFGE member was suspended from work for seven days. The arbitrator ruled that the suspension too harsh as this violation was his first offense. The suspension was overturned.

VICTORY IN “NATIONAL ORIGIN” DISCRIMINATION CASE!!

Women’s and Fair Practices Supervisory Attorney Patricia A. Randle won more than $100,000 in a confidential discrimination case. After six (6) days of hearings and discovery disputes, the administrative judge encouraged the parties to settle. AFGE’s Legal Representation Fund will receive $70,000 in attorney fees for the legal services of the Women’s and Fair Practices Departments.

Single Mom from local 2725 Gets Jobs Back, AFGE Prevails Against the D.C. Housing Authority

In November 2009, AFGE won a case against the D.C. Housing Authority regarding the termination of an AFGE member. The member, a grade 4 clerk and single mother of four children, was fired from her position with the D.C. Housing Choice Voucher Program at the D.C. Housing Authority. The Housing Choice Voucher Program provides alternatives to project housing, and because the employee herself had once been a recipient of the program, she wanted to help others who were in a similar situation.

A new supervisor was hired to oversee the program. When the Agency brought in auditors, they began to find problems within the program; these problems were reported in the Washington Post. The supervisor immediately blamed the inconsistencies on the employee as well as other lower grade employees. Although the employee was not responsible for the problems that the auditors found, the supervisor took “corrective action” and fired the employee for incompetence. She said that the employee essentially added some figures incorrectly and sent out appointment letters to program recipients with wrong appointment times.

After AFGE’s Legal Rights Attorney Leisha Self defended the employee, the arbitrator found that not only was the member fully competent but also an asset to the program. He ordered her full reinstatement to her position as well as all back pay.

VA EMPLOYEES GET THEIR JOBS BACK

AFGE union steward Tom Battaglia can go back to work thanks to AFGE Assistant General Counsel Stuart Kirsch. Battaglia was fired in spring 2009 in what AFGE believes was a clear case of retaliation for his union activities. The Local 547 member will receive full back pay and benefits.

AFGE recently won a case in which a respiratory therapist at the Long Beach Veterans Affairs Hospital was removed unjustly. After a judge found that the charges brought against the employee were unsubstantiated, he overturned the removal and ordered that the agency reinstate the employee to his position with back pay and interest. The agency appealed the initial decision, but it was upheld by the Merit Systems Protection Board. The employee is a member of AFGE Local 1203, and AFGE’s Legal Rights Attorney Mike Pazder handled the case.

WE REPRESENT YOU!!

The Legal Representation Fund now refunds to local unions $2,000 from deposited attorney fees, in order to offset the cost of a Local going to arbitration. For more information on the program that provides a free attorney for your back pay arbitrations, email AFGE’s Office of General Counsel at backpay@afge.org.

For a full view of cases published in the Rep Wing, click here or go to Casetrack at https://www.afge-casetrack.org/. To receive printed copies of the electronic Rep Wing for Distribution please email communications@afge.org.

q cialis restrictvalue web Comparison Between Viagra Levitra Cealis cialis patient assistance program
cialis generic pharmacy online Coumadin Cealis cialis en ligne de pharmacie

The Pentagon has tapped a Navy career senior executive to wind down the National Security Personnel System and to design a new performance management system for its civilian employees.

“He’s coming in to a very tough job,” John Palguta, vice president of the nonprofit Partnership for Public Service, said of John H. James, the Navy official chosen to lead the National Security Personnel System Transition Office. “There’s going to be lots of issues to be ironed out.”

Maj. April Cunningham, a Defense Department spokeswoman, said James would oversee the staff formerly responsible for running NSPS, and he was currently assessing the need for additional personnel. On Wednesday, James met some union leaders who represent Defense workers on labor-management partnership, Cunningham said, adding he will work with them during the dismantling of NSPS.

Not only must James figure out how to shift NSPS employees back into their previous pay systems — some of which were personnel demonstration projects that have since been disbanded - he also must ensure they do not lose pay. For employees returning to the General Schedule system who received NSPS raises that lifted their pay above Step 10 of the grade they were assigned to previously, James must figure out how to retain their salaries without simply bumping them up a grade.

James also has been assigned to manage a number of flexibilities that Congress gave Defense in the legislation repealing NSPS. He will be responsible for designing a new departmentwide performance management system for civilian employees and for establishing and administering a bonus program, the DoD Workforce Incentive Fund.

Palguta said even though the Office of Personnel Management has discussed publicly designing a new governmentwide pay and performance management system, having Defense begin work on its initiative could serve as a useful experiment.

“This is a role they’re used to playing. The greatest number of personnel demonstration projects have come in Defense,” he said. “They’re used to being a laboratory; they were under NSPS, and they may well be again.”

James is currently the executive director for logistics, maintenance and industrial operations at the Naval Sea Systems Command. He began his career with the Navy in 1981, and became a senior executive in 2000, winning a Meritorious Presidential Rank Award in 2006.

While much of James’ career has focused on engineering and maintenance of submarines, he also has done substantial work on diversity issues in the Navy. He chairs the Navy African-American Senior Executive Service Advisory Committee, and leads efforts of the combined Naval Sea Systems Command-Office of Naval Research to improve research partnerships with colleges and universities, including those that historically serve minority populations. He also has worked on the Navy’s outreach efforts to college and high school students.

Matt Biggs, legislative director for the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, said James has a good reputation among union members as someone who is sensitive to the needs and concerns of the workforce. Biggs said James’ appointment was a signal of a new approach by Defense.

“Management is to be applauded for doing this,” Biggs said. “It shows the workforce that this is going to be done properly, it’s going to be done seriously; it is not someone from the past who put this personnel system in place.”

A spokesman for the American Federation of Government Employees said the union had received little information on how the office would run, but it was eager to see “NSPS die as soon as it can.”