Search:

Custom Search

Readers' Comments

Total Comments: 5
Page 1 of 1

NLRB Union Continues Picketing As Labor Relations Agencies Continue Their Battle

big terms

Management Atty
One of the Big Ones!
Wed Oct 10, 2007 8:47 AM

Post Reply

Wow...I'm a Management Rep doing Labor and Employment Law and even I am amused at your one-sidedness and use of inflamatory language. To call the Union hyporcits is not remotely justified by the facts in your column. It states that prior to being informed that that cross-unit representation was illegal the Union was using official time for the non-professional unit. It then filed a petition to consolidate the unit. Regardless of whether anyone thinks the GC is violating the FLRA law, the fact is the Union did what it was supposed to. Upon learning that a practice was in violation of the statute it stopped doing cross-representation and attempted to consolidate the unit using the appropriate stautory scheme.

If the Agency thought the Union committed a ULP it could have filed with the FLRA or with and Arbitrator to recover for inappropriately used official time. let's not forget that the grievance procedure and the ULP procedures are there to be utilitzed by Agency's as well.

Re: big terms

Bob Gilson
Fedsmith Writer
Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:08 PM
My point is that the union has been beating up pubicly on the GC for "violations of law" while the case started with them violating the law by using pros in one unit to represent nonpros in a different unit. These folks are hard pressed to claim the high ground in this matter. If you are saying that the union has no responsibilities under law except those they follow out of self interest or are forced upon them by management, you're right. We're miles apart.

Professional/Bargaining Unit

Examiner
occ
Wed Oct 10, 2007 11:39 AM

Post Reply

Many of the recently organized agencies ask their Professional employees if they wish to be represented during in separate unit during the election process. Consequently professionals are asked two questions: (1) do you wish representation and 2) do you wish to be represented in a separate unit. In all of the elections that I am aware of the professionals have voted to be not to be represented as a separate unit.

Your article seems to inaccurately claim that unions are willfully violating the law on this. Maybe there have been some mispractices in the past but that certainly doesn't represent what is currently occurring within the federal government.

Re: Professional/Bargaining Unit

Employee
Govt agency
Thu Oct 11, 2007 7:24 AM
Actually, if you read the article closely, it indicates that the support staff and the professionals are separate units, meaning that at the NLRB they did vote to be separate units.

I have been watching this case as it developed, and the reason it seems to be an issue is not that the consolidated unit certified by the FLRA is a mix of support and professional, but that it is combining the Board side employees with the GC side employees into a single unit. I believe th GC's argument is that unlike the FLRA statutes, the statutes governing the NLRB require the GC to be independent of the board part of the agency to ensure objectivity. and that combining the units will hinder that independence. They basically seem to treat the two sides as somewhat separate agencies, so I guess it would be like two subcomponents of a department being required to bargain together on a single contract.

At least try to get it right

A player
The one that matters
Fri Oct 12, 2007 11:24 AM

Post Reply

Bob: I'm certain that no end of explaining the situation to you would be pointless, but please try to get it right. If I might - up until the point of the FAA decision, cross unit representation was lawful. I don't see how you can claim the Union was violating the law, as cross unit representation was not unlawful at that time. Since the FAA decision, the union has stopped cross unit representation. The fact is, that for years, the Agency and the Union were functioning as one unit, it was just never certified as one unit. The need for a single unit certification was due to the FAA decision.
I believe the Union has the high ground and intents to keep it. It is the GC that is breaking the law, by refusing to bargain. There is no right of appeal of an FLRA decision under the statute. You can backdoor it, by refusing to bargain - but you have to admit to breaking the law to do it. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
The Union simply wants what it is lawfully owed.

Total Comments: 5
Page 1 of 1

Add a Comment about this Article

** All fields are required.
Note: Your comments will not show up right away. FedSmith.com selects the most insightful comments from our readers for posting. If selected, your comments will show up in the comments section after they have been reviewed and approved. See our terms of use for more information.