Readers' Comments
Total Comments: 9
Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 1
Evidence in Negotiability Cases? The FLRA Greases a Slippery Slope
Total Comments: 9
Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 1
Free Email Newsletter
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| G | $13.2022 | +0.0012 | +0.63% |
| F | $13.5899 | +0.0037 | +1.91% |
| C | $13.6954 | +0.0597 | +3.61% |
| S | $17.9490 | +0.0599 | +9.04% |
| I | $18.4015 | +0.0123 | -0.73% |
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| L 2040 | $16.1183 | +0.0405 | +3.09% |
| L 2030 | $15.8887 | +0.0354 | +2.77% |
| L 2020 | $15.6748 | +0.0291 | +2.31% |
| L 2010 | $15.4271 | +0.0128 | +1.36% |
| L Income | $14.0583 | +0.0103 | +1.28% |
March 12, 2010
Search:
Custom Search
Home | About Us | FAQ's |
Site Map | Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
RSS 
|
Twitter 
| Mobile
© 2010 FedSmith Inc. All Rights Reserved.
The Bozos at the FLRA
CBP
Mon Jun 1, 2009 9:16 AM
Post Reply
The FLRA has simply been too political for too long. I agree with you - the velvet hammer of the court system should be used to beat them out of existence. They truly are incompetant and unethical at best.
Re: The Bozos at the FLRA
Fed
Mon Jun 1, 2009 9:39 AM
The word evidence is not listed because it is a procedural document. It does say that if the agency does not respond to the union proposal, then the agency agrees with the union. This is reasonable as preponderence of the evidence rules. If the agency submits nothing, it loses.
This ties in to the cited case. Allegedly unsubstantiated emails beats nothing. Therefore the agency loses.
I would like more elaboration about unsubstantiated emails. Based on the writings of the writer, I do not trust his assertion that these were unsubstantiated. I would like to see the case sending the issue back to FLRA. I cannot download it on my computer.
Takes Too Long
Oaklandon
Mon Jun 1, 2009 9:27 AM
Post Reply
But if the FLRA were to gather facts, evidence, hold hearings etc., it would take too long to decide cases and mess up their track record for timeliness.
Any dunce should be able to figure out that when it comes to internal security, protective gear, etc. there needs to be expert testimony. It's my guess that the closest any on the FLRA has come to protective gear is half-heartedly watching the flight attendant demonstrate the mask on takeoff. That must make them experts on deciding these matters.
FLRA
USPS
Mon Jun 1, 2009 11:22 AM
Post Reply
While I'm not all that familiar with the workings of the FLRA, I am familiar with the requirement for the proper use of respirators. It seems to me that there should be sufficient doumentation available to address the question of beard length. Bottom line - the respirator must protect the wearer from inhaling potentially toxic fumes.
How this issue got beyond the first stage of collective bargaining is beyond me. The agency involved clearly did a poor job of presenting their case. Decisions should be prepared with the idea that they will go to the top in the collective bargaining process.
Facts make cases
usepa
Mon Jun 1, 2009 12:15 PM
Post Reply
OH my goodness!!! Its the Big One Elizabeth. I must be ready to go, retire, die, lobodomy. I actually agree with Bob Gilson, what is happening.
FLRA and Evidence?
DOD
Mon Jun 1, 2009 12:50 PM
Post Reply
So: The FLRA decision-making process is much like that of the Supremes?
Union Buster
AFGE
Mon Jun 1, 2009 6:04 PM
Post Reply
Robert:
Why not just hang out a shingle offering your services to agencies as a hired gun, union buster? You'll get more seminar requests for sure! What's all the opinion about anyway? Your's is consistently 100 % anti union. (My opinion)!
Richard Fitch
The obvious answer...
SSA
Wed Jun 3, 2009 7:31 AM
Post Reply
is to beat both the FLRA and the unions out of existence.
Both are a huge waste of human effort and a drag on efficiency.
Then add some system protections and rights, and 360 degree evaluations of managers and everybody else, and things will improve dramatically.
May not be great, but certainly a dramatic improvement and a good start.
Re: The obvious answer...
Fed
Wed Jun 3, 2009 11:16 AM
"...add some system protections and rights..." Who is going to protect the protection and rights? It certainly will not be management people. They are too busy protecting their turfs and authority. That is why we need unions and appeal rights to an unbiased entity. Thus the FLRA and its equivilent.
"...360 degree evaluation of managers and everyone else..." Again it sounds great. Who will evaluate these evaluations? It will be management. They protect themselves and their collegues. An unpopular, incompetent manager is given a free pass or transferred iunless he(she) is not liked by management. A competent manager can also be removed by management if he(she) is not liked.
Your system is good on paper, but will not work in reality.