Free Email Newsletter
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| G | $13.2114 | +0.0012 | +0.70% |
| F | $13.6201 | -0.0062 | +2.14% |
| C | $13.8116 | -0.0706 | +4.49% |
| S | $17.9282 | -0.1903 | +8.91% |
| I | $18.5079 | -0.0782 | -0.16% |
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| L 2040 | $16.1968 | -0.0789 | +3.59% |
| L 2030 | $15.9593 | -0.0673 | +3.23% |
| L 2020 | $15.7365 | -0.0532 | +2.72% |
| L 2010 | $15.4595 | -0.0197 | +1.57% |
| L Income | $14.0856 | -0.0155 | +1.48% |
Collaboration or Co-Management: A Look at Section 2(c) of the Proposed Obama Executive Order on Labor Relations
Home | About Us | FAQ's |
Site Map | Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
RSS 
|
Twitter 
| Mobile
© 2010 FedSmith Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Collaboration or Co-Management
Federal Union
Wed Aug 19, 2009 8:53 AM
Post Reply
One thing that pre-decisional involvement doesn't mean is collective bargaining. So don't worry Bob, issues involving clear management rights won't be considered by the Federal Services Impasses Panel. Relax and stick to gratuitously bashing union reps and members. You seem to enjoy that.
Collaboration not co-management
fed
Wed Aug 19, 2009 9:02 AM
Post Reply
Again Gilson makes a big deal about good management practices in a negative way. He also makes his anti union feelings felt.
He objects to the predecisional involvement of the workers. It appears that management is required to tell the workers about issues and solicit their opinions. Maybe someone will come up with an idea that management did not think of. Mnagement is not required to accept the responses according to the article. Thus this is not co management. This is good management.
Good management will provide enogh information to inform the reader instead of feeding baloney. Much of this is logical and not a hard fast rule. I do not think Gilson realizes this.
This article is very slanted and is an attempt to rail against unions.
Why is this a negative?
DHS/ICE
Wed Aug 19, 2009 9:07 AM
Post Reply
This can be a positive thing. Despite what the consummate company man (Gilson) thinks, employee and union involvement early on can reduce problems later.
Employees and their reps do often have good ideas and usually a better understanding of the work than the managers who never did it or have not done it in years.
But, since Gilson thinks he and his elite cronies in managment are the only ones with a good, original thought, he will never understand my statement.
Dues Payer
IRS
Wed Aug 19, 2009 9:10 AM
Post Reply
I pay dues, and I'm not disgruntled, disappointed or unhappy.
Gilson might have taken Singer's advice himself.
More obama BS
Xaxax Analytics, LLC
Wed Aug 19, 2009 9:23 AM
Post Reply
Federal employees have too many "protections" as it is. If you believe the federal government is poorly managed and unresponsive now you will really love this one. I spent ten years in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and testify that OSD is just as moribound as other agencies. obama has never had a job and does not have the ability to runa lemonade stand, much less force a executive order such as this. The solution is impeachment, conviction, and removal from office.
Re: More obama BS
fed
Fri Aug 21, 2009 8:40 AM
You sound like you are bitter because your guy and gal lost the election. We had to put up with Bush and his cronies for 8 years. You can put up with obama for how long he works in the White House.
My view
DLA
Wed Aug 19, 2009 9:45 AM
Post Reply
Here is my view on the whole thing. I really don't care how much the Unions are involved in decision making, as long as they don't degrade, or limit the mission and the overall performance of an Agency. I am not naive or blind, and I know that there are bad managers out there, and they need to be held accoutable. However, I have seen the Union protect the worst employees. Bottomline, incompetence and laziness runs on all levels of government. If the Union can realize that the mission comes first, then I am okay with their involvement. But the second the Union wants to dictate counter-productive policy ahead of the mission, then they are out of line. This goes for management as well. I believe that all parties can be happy as long as everyone is respectful, and mindful not to cross any lines.
Re: My view
Consultant
Wed Aug 19, 2009 9:30 PM
Re: My view
fed
Thu Aug 20, 2009 10:38 AM
Re: My view
FAA
Fri Aug 21, 2009 10:23 AM
Wrong, worker. I have been a Union Rep for ten years. Unions are not required to "defend all employees". Unions are required to REPRESENT all employees, not defend them all.
My job as a Union rep is to ensure that workers are treated in accordance with rules and policies. I want bad workers gone more than Managers do- and I do that by ensuring that management follows the rules. If there is a problem employee, I have to look for root cause- did the system fail to train them, or is it really that they employee is the problem? If it is an employee problem, then I only have to make sure the correct process is being followed- and I will work very, very hard to ensure that.
I defend what is THE RIGHT THING TO DO, not "all employees at all costs". More than once, I had to steer a manager to the correct process to ensure they did the right thing.
I
Re: My view
fed
Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:46 AM
Please excuse the wrong choice of words. I understand represent to mean defend. Perhaps I am wrong.
Hypothetical-A manager accuses the worker of doing something wrong. The evidence is not conclusive. There are arguments going both ways that are reasonable. Will you defend or just represent? Are your statements going to be neutral or what?
Second hypothtical-You believe that the employee did something non criminally wrong and management files administrative charges, but fouls it up. Are you going to correct management so that the administrative discipline goes through, or are you going to defend the employee? Your statement appears to indicate the latter, but aI would rather be clearer about it.
Permissive v Non Permissive
IRS
Wed Aug 19, 2009 10:17 AM
Post Reply
What I understand the issue to be about is whether this Executive Order will require pre-decisional involvement of the bargaining unit representatives in those areas that are non-permissive and not subject to negotiation. Mr. Gilson's question is not unreasonable and raising that question does not make it anti-employee or anti-union.
Whether or not pre-decisional involvement is of value depends on the information that is shared and the willingness of BOTH parties to act in good faith and pursue an interest based approach. Despite the unhappiness of the union reps responding here I would suggest, based on my own experience, that union chapter presidents are no more capable than the people in management. Pot meet kettle.