Re: What?

Of course we all work for the dollar--have to if we expect to put bread on the table--but I'd disagree that it's "almighty." It becomes "almighty," in my estimation, when it is the primary--or perhaps only--reason for working at a particular job for a particular employer. You and all the other feds could work for those dollars--often a lot more of them--elsewhere.

So why work for Uncle when you could likely earn as much or more elsewhere? Obviously, as with most things human, there are a variety of reasons. But I remain convinced that high on the list is the deep-seated commitment to public service that most feds feel, but few talk about--at least in public. :-) Dennis Reischl

Re: What?

To retired IRS,
Restoring the sick leave retirement credit for FERS people is a union achievement. CSRS people have had it for years. It was abolished for FERS people when FERS was established, by ronald Reagan and his cronies. I do not know why, but wish I did. The unions have lobbied to have this credit reestablished. Therefore, it is a union achievement.
Your comments about the negative comments toward the author have no place.
Additionally, the unions represent (defend) workers accused of something. Just because you had no interest or a negative interest in them, that does not make them a joke.

Re: Abolish Federal Unions

I think you have said this before. We all know your opinion on this issue. Nothing new was presented to support your position except you still hate dissent from your position.
I would have hated to have worked or you even though I produce good work with my technical and research skills. The unions must have aggravated you.

Re: Abolish Federal Unions

It doesn't surprise me that an executive would think this way. Inflexable as always, the executive fails to see that they may be doing things in an incredibly inefficient way. The cat bathes itself every day, management may be too ignorant to see the end result of the cat's labor since it wasn't done the way they expected. Frustrated functionaries that rule by fiat regardless of the chaos that ensues, executives like this are the reason we need unions in the federal workplace!

Re: Abolish Federal Unions

Retired Exec Treasury/Workers don't like being made into speed bumps and road kill. That is why unions exist.

Re: Abolish Federal Unions

Ascribing sinister motives to the comment and speculating negatively about the author does nothing. Nationally, federal unions achieve very little, and locally, they are a joke. The cost to taxpayers is significant. The suggestion is reasonable and reasoned. If unions were necessary, employees in non-union agencies would suffer. They do not.

Re: Abolish Federal Unions

Frank Ferris needs no defense from me, but I can't help but notice that the retired Treasury exec seems to have an obession about Labor unions, NTEU in particular. I don't mean this in a disparaging way, but if you felt the urge exec, I would be very interested in
learning what from your past caused this view.

Did you have a bad experience with NTEU when you were in the bargaining unit? Did the union prevail in some matter later in your career as a manager? Do you just dislike unions on principle?

I simply cannot imagine what the workplace would be like without NTEU. I have witnessed the difference the union has made in hundreds of situations. Very often, everyone (members and nonmembers) profit from the union's efforts. We are fortunate to have NTEU around to represent the BU employees.

I recognize that not everyone agrees with me, but I am genuinely curious to learn of what has shaped retired exec's perspective. Please share, if you will.

Re: Abolish Federal Unions

Did someone say "new law crediting accumulated sick leave"?

The Union "achieved little" there did they?

Oh sure.

Re: Abolish Federal Unions

Restoring a benefit to FERS employees that all employees had 25 years ago (and CSRS employees retained all along) is hardly a union "achievement".

Re: Ferris Rebuttal

It is not clear to this casual reader.

Re: Yes: Effective Service to American Taxpayer

The Union reports to it's member constituents as elected officials. Management reports to the taxpayers.

We need to accept reality as baseline for serious discussion.

Re: Yes: Effective Service to American Taxpayer

Union VP, that's where you are wrong. ALL Federal employees report to the taxpayer, whether a bargaining unit member or not. The taxpayer pays our salaries; and yes, I know, we are taxpayers too. But, your comment would lead one to believe that employees that belong to the union derive their salary dollars from somewhere other than the taxpayer. Not a true statement.

Re: Yes: Effective Service to American Taxpayer

No, my comments do not suggest that union members derive their salaries from unions. What I said, and will reiterate - is that Unions (ie. Union officials) are elected and thrown out of their union executive offices by the members (who are the constituents). Taxpayers do not elect Union officials, union members do. Therefore, as a practical matter, it behooves the Union official to consider themselves accountable to the membership.

Now, separately, when a Union Official is not acting in their capacity as a union official, but are instead fulfilling their job as a federal employee, then they are accountable to the taxpayer and to management. It's a dichotomy. But make no mistake, Unions are only accountable to their constituents - the members who elect them.

Management has the responsiblity to ensure mission delivery and efficiency. Unions exist to get the best possible working conditions and benefits out of the employer, for their members. That's called collective bargaining.

Re: To the Union VP

While admirable, that mindset is at the root of where agency's go wrong and find themselves in a constant, fruitless tug of war with their local Unions.

If Agency managers could have the foresight to pursue a relationship with their Union counterparts that is both pragmatic and realistic in expectation (which requires a sober assessment of intentions) they'd find a vastly more successful bargaining process.

When I go into negotiations, I always begin by reminding managers that my job is to facilitate management concessions not to satiate their budget concerns; and that their is a cost of doing business built into the process. I also remind them that I can wait "until hell freezes over" on official time in order to extract acceptable conditions so they need not waste time with "non-starters."

You'd be surprised how many managers appreciate my approach. I do not waste their time with empty rhetoric about partnership and mutually-interested outcomes.

My constituents love me for it.