Search:

Custom Search

Readers' Comments

Total Comments: 16
Page 1 of 1

The New Federal Labor Relations Authority: Ten Suggestions that Might Really Improve Federal Collective Bargaining

Your tone

Labor Relations Specialist
DHS
Thu Nov 5, 2009 10:17 AM

Post Reply

The more and more I keep reading your articles, the more and more I see what side of the fence you are on. Why do you insist on attacking every govt official under the Obama administration. Just like the rest of the world of republicans - you are never satisfied. What happened to giving people a E for Effort!!! Can you do me a favor and post some of your past articles on these very same topics durinig the Bush administration; I'm curious and would like to compare your views.

Re: Your tone

worker
fed
Thu Nov 5, 2009 4:14 PM
You do not want to read it. He is very supportive of management and very anti union. Once in a while he says something valid, but overall, take his words with a pound of salt. he admits that he leaves out facts that do not support his position.
Today's article was pretty good because decisions should be available for others to use.

Re: Your tone

Author
Fedsmith
Thu Nov 5, 2009 5:15 PM
This is for Fed Worker who keeps repeating a claim that I leave out facts that do not support my view. Beside the reality that most facts support my views :), I've never knowingly misled the readers of Fedsmith. You make this comment on each article as if it gives you some form of credibility.

Pat Sajac said ""It seems there is something about anonymity which brings out the worst in us. If you doubt that, come with me into the often-weird world of Internet chat rooms and message boards." My name is on my articles unlike you who never tell us yours in your posts. Fear the light of day, Huh?

Re: Your tone

worker
fed
Fri Nov 6, 2009 8:55 AM
This is for the author
yes, I keep on repeating the statement that you leave out facts that do not support your position, because you admitted it in the past.
This does not support my position one bit. I gain nothing by it.
I would like you to present your position with the facts that support your position and admit to the facts that do not support your position. Then state why the facts that support your position outweigh those facts that do not. This way your column would not be propaganda, but a valid argument. Thisis what I do in my job.
I doubt that the bulk of the facts support your position. Otherwise you would not be afraid to recognize the facts that do not support your position.

Re: Your tone

worker
fed
Fri Nov 6, 2009 9:02 AM
Sorry I forgot to comment about the last paragraph concerning names. Look at the titles and tell me the number of names vs. pseudo names. That should answer your question. Again, you support my position that you leave out facts that do not support your position. Hope I have shed light into your day.

Re: Your tone

admin asst
noaa
Fri Nov 6, 2009 4:11 PM
What's the problem fed worker?

You take positions on this website without supporting facts (only your opinion) all the time.

Re: Your tone

Ret Exec
None
Sun Nov 8, 2009 7:12 AM
Bob - It is annoying when someone misquotes and lies about you. Take heart, all frequent readers know that fed, worker (and worker. fed - same person) is of low character, limited intellect, and no vision. The amout of time he wastes blogging identifies him for what he is. Ignor him, we do.

Re: Your tone

worker
fed
Mon Nov 9, 2009 8:51 AM
I will first respond to retired exec. Fed worker and worker fed are not the same. I am worker fed. Someone else is fed worker. I do not know why he took that title, but you can ask him or her. Again, know what you are talking about before you make statements.
This is for retired exec and admin assist,
Bob admitted previously that he does not state all of the facts. Sorry, that is not a misquote. Ask him if he ever wrote that or somehjting close to it. If he is honest, he will answer yes. That is fact and not opinion. I write my opinion based on the facts. I also consider all of the facts. That is probably different from you based on your broad comments without any backup.
Again retired exec,
If you ignore me, why are you commenting about what I write? You comment about my alleged lack of intellect, yet you make these stupid comments. I guess my low intellect makes me not understand your nonsense.
Low character and vision? Wow, tell me about that one.

FLRA

worker
fed
Thu Nov 5, 2009 10:36 AM

Post Reply

I actually agree with Mr. Gilson on some of the comments here. Amazing.
I agree that the FLRA should post and organize its decisions. This would allow for better decision making by those who go before the FLRA. It would also allow for decisions to be used as precedent in an easier way.
I also think that previous decisions should also be organized in the same way for the same reason. Is this possible?
I also think that a GAO audit could be done limited to whether the issue was upheld by the courts. It should not reflect a personal bias by the auditor. In any case the court decision should be posted with the FLRA decision for better research. It would help, but might not be possible due to space limitations or other reasons.
Mr. Gilson did make a big deal about the the decision maker saying she worked for the Obama administration. This does not reflect a bias on how the worker will decide a case. Hopefully that person will decide based on facts and law. How refreshing.

A little consistency please

DO
DHS/ICE
Thu Nov 5, 2009 11:00 AM

Post Reply

Occasionally, the FLRA should adhere to it's own precedents. I am familiar with a case where a precedent was cited in exactly the same circumstances and the FLRA ruled 180 degrees opposite it's own precedent. That does not instill confidence in the Agency and seems blatantly arbitrary and capricious. Failing adherence, maybe an explanation of why they diverged would be in order.

Re: A little consistency please

worker
fed
Thu Nov 5, 2009 4:21 PM
It is very political. i believe appointments are made by the president. Bush will appoint those supporting his ideas. Obama will support those supporting his ideas. Those ideas will be radically different. Therefore decisions with the same facts and law will be different.
Even the supreme Court of the US does not respect precedent. A decision was made to invalidate a state law regarding a certain abortion method. It was unconstitutional. The US passed the same law with a variation that there was no excuse to preform this type of abortion. A Supreme Court change was made. The court cited this excuse to allow the law to remain on the books. It was a feeble excuse to ignore starre decisis.
With all of the present 5-4 decisions, replacing one conservative with a liberal will change the balance of power. Co you really think those 5-4 decisions will stand?
If the Supreme Court cannot respect precedent, how ill the FLRA?

New FLRA - Ten Suggestions

Outside looking in
VA
Thu Nov 5, 2009 11:08 AM

Post Reply

Since there are no suggestions, I guess none would work anyway...

Re: New FLRA - Ten Suggestions

lr specialist
dod agency
Thu Nov 5, 2009 11:14 AM
Out of curiosity, did you read the article when you say there are no suggestions? They are clearly labeled 1-10 in the article.

Finally, an acknowledgement of some practicality.

Union VP
DOJ
Thu Nov 5, 2009 11:04 PM

Post Reply

I am glad Mr. Gage affirmed my contention that both the Union and management have inherently different interests. Some on here have scoffed at my pointing that out.

I am at a loss for why managers were sold on the idea that the Union was an appendage of their mission mandates in the first place. Obviously, time and again, we're faced with the fact that that is simply "rosy rhetoric." To be fair, I've heard this line of reasoning from certain Union officials as well, but I have always written it off as pretentious posturing.

Even though Mr. Gilson cited John Gage as his new favorite Union President, I have to wonder if that he was being facetious, or if he genuinely appreciated the honest description of reality.

FLRA

Retired
Retired
Fri Nov 6, 2009 11:25 AM

Post Reply

It would be helpful if the FLRA would fix the research features of the website. I recently spoke to an FLRA agent who confided that he no longer uses their website, but uses Lexis instead.

Ten Suggestions

Outside looking in
VA
Thu Nov 12, 2009 11:36 AM

Post Reply

To lr specialist, dod agency, when I posted my comment earlier in the day, there were no other comments. So, looks like you need to know what you're talking about.

Total Comments: 16
Page 1 of 1

Add a Comment about this Article

** All fields are required.
Note: Your comments will not show up right away. FedSmith.com selects the most insightful comments from our readers for posting. If selected, your comments will show up in the comments section after they have been reviewed and approved. See our terms of use for more information.