Search:

Custom Search

Readers' Comments

Total Comments: 6
Page 1 of 1

Bargaining Impact and Implementation: Get the Agreement Right

I&I Bargaining

Specialist
DoD
Wed Jun 25, 2008 9:15 AM

Post Reply

While I have a great deal of respect for the author's expertise, it's not impact and implementation bargaining, its bargaining over "appropriate arrangements." Our mouths should be washed out with soap every time we use the I&I term. Let's pledge not to use that term ever, ever, again. Also, the author should addressed the issue of signing the agreement as to how do you handle the issue if one party just wants a verbal agreement when the other desires a signed agreement?"

Re: I&I Bargaining

Bob Gilson, Author
FedSmith
Wed Jun 25, 2008 12:46 PM
If we want to do it right, we should call it "procedures and arrangements bargaining". But do you really thing PAB is likely to replace I&I in the hearts and neural synapses of the faithful?

I hit the topic of reducing the agreement to writing at the beginning of the article. If either asks, then it must be put in writing. To refuse to do so, in my opinion, would be a prima facie unfair labor practice. Now I really should wash out my mouth with soap for using a latin phrase without a law degree. However, I did go to a Jesuit college so I think that should get me some slack. Latin erupts from me at the oddest moments. Fellow alumni have complained about similar symptoms.

Re: I&I Bargaining

LER Specialist
DHS
Wed Jun 25, 2008 1:27 PM
The Labor Statute places the power to compel with the party who wants to have a written MOU. If one party wants the agreement to be only verbal but the other party wants it written, the Statute reuires that the agreement be written - see 5 USC 7114(B)(5).

Many Long Hours

Engineer
DoD
Wed Jun 25, 2008 9:41 AM

Post Reply

The article is good. It covers the basics on what an agreement should look like. Obviosly, there is a lot of work that leads up to that point and it requires both parties to respect each side enough to reach an agreement. I like the recognition that both sides do spend many long hours. Maybe people will understand the effort each side must take.

Good Article Bob

Labor Employee Relations Manager
VA
Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:57 AM

Post Reply

Sorry DoD specialist, the term of I&I bargaining is here to stay. You even use it in your title.....opps!

A good questions as to whether the union refuses to sign......bargaining in bad faith?

The good LERS would also keep a record of the events that lead up to the MOU. Training supervisors on the MOU is also important.

Covered By

Retired
SSA
Wed Jun 25, 2008 12:58 PM

Post Reply

Agency representatives should check with their labor relations staff to ensure that they not bargain over matters that are covered by or were otherwise disposed of during contract negotiations. Skillful use of the covered by doctrine will ensure that unions not get two bites at the apple by resurrecting proposals at the mid term that they traded away at term bargaining.

Total Comments: 6
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.