Readers' Comments
Total Comments: 16
Page 2 of 2
Page 2 of 2
« Previous | Next »
HR'S Station Stop Called "Disapproval"
Total Comments: 16
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% |
November 21, 2009
Search:
Custom Search
Home | About Us | FAQ's |
Site Map | Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
RSS 
|
Twitter 
| Mobile
© 2009 FedSmith Inc. All Rights Reserved.
He's Kidding, Right?
FedSmith
Thu Jul 2, 2009 9:41 AM
Post Reply
This article, claiming the FLRA is around as a safety net if an Agency gives too much, is by the same writer who wanted to abolish the Authority just last year. Agency Head review is limited to provisions which, upon review, are determined to violate the law. Not be unpleasant, not be costly, not be stupid or even not be merely mistaken, but violate the law. I think the author, a frequent visitor to the FLRA over the years, has picked another silly point to press. In the incredibly complex world in which managers operate and which, by the way, the author's employer helped create through endless litigation to explore the meaning of the statute, it would literally be crazy to let an NTEU agreement, 100s of pages in length, go into effect without some review. You answer the question, did the Congress intend that Federal unions run the place or bargain working conditions? I think the author has lost sight of his organization's place in the process. But that's not a new thing.
Mr. Ferris Knows More Than He Says Part II
Department of Defense
Thu Jul 2, 2009 9:44 AM
Post Reply
Mr Ferris fails to discuss key points that he surely knows:
(1) Severability provisions essentially say…once the agreement goes to agency head review and the agency head identifies any specific provision as non-negotiable, the rest of the agreement becomes effective (minus the non-negotiable provision). If they have this…they are okay…the entire agreement is not held up. If they don’t have it, then yes, the entire agreement can be held up but this is driven by the law. Frank conveniently fails to discuss this as an easy solution. We encourage management negotiators all the time to use severability provisions to avoid delays in implementing the negotiable parts of their new agreement.
Mr. Ferris Knows More Than He Says Part III
Department of Defense
Thu Jul 2, 2009 9:45 AM
Post Reply
Mr. Ferris failed to state that disapproval is not necessary because illegal provisions are void and unenforceable is only partially correct. The FLRA looks at disapproved provisions with a different legal standard than provisions deemed unenforceable, particularly provisions dealing with management rights. It is far more difficult to get a non-negotiable provision thrown out for being unenforceable after a contract becomes effective than getting it thrown out because it was disapproved before the contract became effective.