Readers' Comments
Total Comments: 27
Page 2 of 2
Page 2 of 2
« Previous | Next »
A Dispute That Could Only Arise Between Public Employees and a Governmental Agency
Total Comments: 27
Page 2 of 2
Page 2 of 2
« Previous | Next »
Free Email Newsletter
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| G | $13.0760 | +0.0011 | +2.63% |
| F | $13.4554 | -0.0007 | +6.95% |
| C | $12.9082 | -0.0394 | +23.71% |
| S | $15.5321 | -0.0625 | +27.24% |
| I | $18.2310 | -0.1403 | +27.89% |
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| L 2040 | $15.2768 | -0.0566 | +22.32% |
| L 2030 | $15.1461 | -0.0487 | +19.99% |
| L 2020 | $15.0617 | -0.0401 | +17.13% |
| L 2010 | $15.0897 | -0.0155 | +9.09% |
| L Income | $13.7765 | -0.0111 | +7.76% |
« Previous | Next »
A Dispute That Could Only Arise Between Public Employees and a Governmental Agency
« Previous | Next »
A Dispute That Could Only Arise Between Public Emp
US Coast Guard
Wed Jun 17, 2009 2:44 PM
Post Reply
To the IRS Agent, if you don't think cronyism still exists, you are fooled. It's still there.
Sooner or later our President will pull us out of the wars and then the rif's will come. Then the Agencies will be looking for every dollar they can find.
Waste, Waste and more Waste...
Re: A Dispute That Could Only Arise Between Public Emp
IRS
Fri Jun 19, 2009 10:12 AM
Re: A Dispute That Could Only Arise Between Public Emp
DOJ
Sat Jun 20, 2009 9:49 AM
Think Again
Observer
Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:38 PM
Post Reply
Here is what management could have done, but did not:
1- Struck an interim deal that allowed for retroactive effect for the final deal.
2- Agreed to bring in a private neutral immediately to mediate or settle the dispute with an informal agreement to live by the terms of that recommendation.
3- Settled the case back before arbitration when the cost of settlement would have been much, much lower and without attorney fees entitlement.
4- Agreed to settle the case as part of the final deal on compensation.
5- Settled the case as part of settling the other multi-million dollar decision it lost on this compensation system.
6- Announced its last best offer and forced the union to the FSIP, which surely would have found against the union during the Bush years.
So, who in management should take the blame for failing to do any of those things and costing taxpayers lots of bucks?
only 7 years to implement?
Immigration & Naturalization / DHS now
Wed Jul 15, 2009 3:50 PM
Post Reply
Back in 1995 - 96, pushing for Congressional support for law enforcement (20 year) retirement for border inspectors, the old INS detailed permanent "part time" inspectors to "basic academy training" despite the fact many were 50 and 60 years old with 15-35 years of service. No consideration of age / disability / or other common sense factors was provided. AFGE/NINS grieved, arbitated, successfully confronted the appeal. The award to return to employment with full back pay was final in 2000. It has yet to be implemented. Recertification of the bargaining unit meant inspectors now pay NTEU leaving AFGE no incentive to do anything. The list of 125-250 claiminants is now reduced to between 2 & 4. No hope for salvation on the horrizon. (Under DHS fresh waves of 'basic training' for old farts, mostly Customs legacy eliminated many more hopes for retirement.)