If only Mr. Gilson would render HIS services to the struggling nation. Then Mr. Obama would not have to scrape the bottom of the barrel to staff the FLRA with such blatent unionists!!!
Then we could continue with the dismantlement of all those EVIL unions. You know the ones that gave us overtime, health benefits, paid vacation.
O who will Save our nation??
Mr. Gilson, take heart. there will be another election, if Obama does not declare himself dictator for life. Then you can vote against all the evil union people and thier candidates.
Until then, Mr. Gilson, sweet dreams.
Gilson Rant
AFGE General Counsel AFGE, AFL-CIO Tue Jun 9, 2009 10:01 AM
Bob
You still don't get it. Dubester and Clark have 3 qualities not present in Bush appointees: knowledge, experience, and competence. I'm not feel'n the "love" Bob. Your views must have made a lot of sense when "Taylorism" was the rage.
Peace
Re: Gilson Rant
Author Fedsmith Tue Jun 9, 2009 1:16 PM
Mark,
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow said, "The strength of criticism lies only in the weakness of the thing criticized."
The more political Federal unions get, the more critics should be engendered for your own good. The sad thing is that the only voices for Federal agencies in labor relations have to retire to speak their minds. Government tries reform frequently, when is the last time AFGE considered taking a hard look at itself?
Re: Gilson Rant
worker Fed Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:23 AM
Hey, Bob,
Maybe you ought to take a good look at yourself before critisizing others. The full truth is needed, not just your selected version of the facts.
The writer makes no sense
worker Fed Tue Jun 9, 2009 10:19 AM
The writer makes no sense. The present administration haqs picked 2 nominees who worked for unions in one or more capacities. He then states that the unions might give them a hard time based on an interview given in 2005 when the anti union president was in office. The writer makes no sense.
Is he writing tongue in cheek? Is he saying that Mr. Gage should give the questioning senators questions to show that the nominees will be objective while the Bush
panel members were ideologues?
This is a very poorly thought out article which shows how the radical right thinks.
Re: The writer makes no sense
Diversity Manager DOL Tue Jun 9, 2009 7:26 PM
Duhhhhhhhh, quick on the pick up
Bias of author Gilson
Ray Downey Retired Federal Employee Tue Jun 9, 2009 10:38 AM
Any time I see an article by Bob Gilson, I know there will be a 100% management bias to the article. This article is no exception.
Re: Bias of author Gilson
Diversity Manager DOL Tue Jun 9, 2009 7:28 PM
Good that way there is some balance on all the other webs that FEDs follow. Usually when i post I either get blocked or URL banned.
Unions and Libs for some reason think that the constitution only applies to them
Re: Bias of author Gilson
Fed Peasant DOD Tue Jun 9, 2009 9:41 PM
Diversity Manager DOL:
No doubt, you think of unions as "EVIL DOERS".
Re: Bias of author Gilson
HR Specialist Dept of Labor Wed Jun 10, 2009 8:50 AM
Div Man,
If all your posts didn't amount to yelling, "Fire!" in a crowded movie house, you wouldn't get blocked and banned.
Re: Bias of author Gilson
worker Fed Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:28 AM
To Diversity Manager
You must write an awful lot. I see plenty of your letters. We disagree again. You will not get all of your letters printed. Neither will I. If we did, there would not be space for others.
Be cool. There is no liberal bias in this section. Your friend, Bob Gilson is proof.
positive outlook
president jalor properties inc. Tue Jun 9, 2009 10:44 AM
i am glad the obama administration is taking a strong interest in the matter of support for the working class: union and non union. i hope the senate will confirm these appointments post haste so these people will be on board in helping workers get a fair shake.
Federal Labor Relations
Clown Around Tue Jun 9, 2009 10:56 AM
Gilson is simply, once again, affirming what a joke the federal labor relations program is.
Re: Federal Labor Relations
BMEU USPS Tue Jun 9, 2009 1:21 PM
Gilson is a hoot! Sounds like Limbaugh still whining about Robert Bork. This guy seems to think politicking is a one-way street, and wasting a lot of energy carping about something like this. Sour grapes.
Whose's Biased Now!
NTEU Union Rep IRS Tue Jun 9, 2009 12:41 PM
Mr. Gilson why do you even belong in the labor relations profession with your out of touch "us against them' attitude"? Isn't the whole LR endeavor an effort to find common ground on the day to day problems confronting both labor and management? You speak as though the issues present in the cases pending before FLRA are not worthy of a fair hearing.
Just maybe the FLRA's poor work environment might have something to do with the politicization of the organization with inexperienced and partisan appointments made by the Bush administration. Is it possible you're blinded by your own bias?
Re: Whose's Biased Now!
Worker Fed Govt Tue Jun 9, 2009 4:29 PM
And the union isn't biased???!!!!!! Please, let me get my feet up quick!
Re: Whose's Biased Now!
worker Fed Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:31 AM
Difference is Gilson only presents his version of the facts and leaves out facts that would yield a different conclusion. He admitted this.
The union works for its members, but for a better agency.
Finally
Aviation Worker (and not a controller, Bob.) FAA Tue Jun 9, 2009 7:39 PM
Bob, I've been waiting nearly two years for three ULP's to be adjuticated. In my 9 years as a Union rep, I have only ever filed when I felt I had a clear case. I've never had a case without strong merit, and three of those 300 are mine, and deserve a chance to be heard.
Are the new nominees fair and unbiased? I believe so. I would trust them to apply the law based on precedent, rather than ideology. That would be fine with me. The last group didn't believe in legal precedent, and turned decades of case law on it's ear.
As for the FLRA being low on employee attitude- I can relate- my agency, the FAA, scored 214th of 216. I have spoken with FLRA workers, and understand why they feel betrayed by the former administration as well. They too look forward to doing what is right, instead of being told what political spin to put on things.
Bless our President, and pray for wisdom for the new FLRA appointees.
Watch Out
Vet Navy Wed Jun 10, 2009 9:55 AM
As a former Stewart, VP, and Local NAGE President for over 13 years I have to say, just because these nominees are "Union related" doesn't mean that they will rule for the Unions. How many National officers have been corrupt, no, I mean management friendly, no, I mean have partnered with management when trying to futher their own political careers. If it sounds too good to be true, than it probably is.
Article
President SATCO Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:49 PM
Bob, It seems like you write these articles on Partnership and the FLRA positions with some glimmer of hope that our elected officials are going to listen to you. The truth is we need partnership again and we need these FLRA positions filled. Our organization has 2 of the 300 ULP's and one was filed against the CPMS. Of course, the RD offered a settlement with the normal ULP postings. The CPMS rep responded with NO with a bunch of colorful language and the other was another arrogant NO by a LRO. Of course they have the right to appeal/disagree. Both these individuals were former Union presidents and their attitude appears to show they have no intent to following the Statute. The Unions and the Government should be setting the example. Let's hope the confirmations go quickly so the FLRA can function the way Congress intended.
Article
President SATCO Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:50 PM
Bob, It seems like you write these articles on Partnership and the FLRA positions with some glimmer of hope that our elected officials are going to listen to you. The truth is we need partnership again and we need these FLRA positions filled. Our organization has 2 of the 300 ULP's and one was filed against the CPMS. Of course, the RD offered a settlement with the normal ULP postings. The CPMS rep responded with NO with a bunch of colorful language and the other was another arrogant NO by a LRO. Of course they have the right to appeal/disagree. Both these individuals were former Union presidents and their attitude appears to show they have no intent to following the Statute. The Unions and the Government should be setting the example. Let's hope the confirmations go quickly so the FLRA can function the way Congress intended.
Experience over Politics
Tech DoD Mon Jun 15, 2009 8:40 AM
The major difference between Obama and Bush appointees is that they have the practical experience needed for the position. Just like any other election, to the victor go the spoils. In politics you win or lose by the people you support. If you sit on the fence you neither win or lose. You won't gain anything for your members that way.
Federal relations
Patient Business Assistant VA Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:01 PM
Pleease NETU. The whole watchdog system as a whole needs to be revamped, Unions included. I am a rep. Recently while trying to file some cases I found myself in a giant loop with all them. I was recently told by an FLRA attorney that their boss is tired of VA filing ULP's and will from this point, dismiss anything the he feels is "covered by the agreement" (even though I know the case would be better handled as a ULP). I was told by an MSPB case worker that they are so backed up that unless criminality is a factor it will probably be tanked. I was told by an EEO advisor that they are so overwhelmed that I should tell the employee to take her retaliation case to a civilian lawyer. If work envirmnt is the cause then every watchdog agency must have miserable employees, because nobody wants to do anything, & almost everything submitted to them is dismissed or sided with mangt. When I tried to contact Mr. Gage about problems w/my Ntl. Pres., it was deleted w/out read.
FLRA members
USMC
Tue Jun 9, 2009 8:07 AM
If only Mr. Gilson would render HIS services to the struggling nation. Then Mr. Obama would not have to scrape the bottom of the barrel to staff the FLRA with such blatent unionists!!!
Then we could continue with the dismantlement of all those EVIL unions. You know the ones that gave us overtime, health benefits, paid vacation.
O who will Save our nation??
Mr. Gilson, take heart. there will be another election, if Obama does not declare himself dictator for life. Then you can vote against all the evil union people and thier candidates.
Until then, Mr. Gilson, sweet dreams.
Gilson Rant
AFGE, AFL-CIO
Tue Jun 9, 2009 10:01 AM
Bob
You still don't get it. Dubester and Clark have 3 qualities not present in Bush appointees: knowledge, experience, and competence. I'm not feel'n the "love" Bob. Your views must have made a lot of sense when "Taylorism" was the rage.
Peace
Re: Gilson Rant
Fedsmith
Tue Jun 9, 2009 1:16 PM
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow said, "The strength of criticism lies only in the weakness of the thing criticized."
The more political Federal unions get, the more critics should be engendered for your own good. The sad thing is that the only voices for Federal agencies in labor relations have to retire to speak their minds. Government tries reform frequently, when is the last time AFGE considered taking a hard look at itself?
Re: Gilson Rant
Fed
Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:23 AM
Maybe you ought to take a good look at yourself before critisizing others. The full truth is needed, not just your selected version of the facts.
The writer makes no sense
Fed
Tue Jun 9, 2009 10:19 AM
The writer makes no sense. The present administration haqs picked 2 nominees who worked for unions in one or more capacities. He then states that the unions might give them a hard time based on an interview given in 2005 when the anti union president was in office. The writer makes no sense.
Is he writing tongue in cheek? Is he saying that Mr. Gage should give the questioning senators questions to show that the nominees will be objective while the Bush
panel members were ideologues?
This is a very poorly thought out article which shows how the radical right thinks.
Re: The writer makes no sense
DOL
Tue Jun 9, 2009 7:26 PM
Bias of author Gilson
Retired Federal Employee
Tue Jun 9, 2009 10:38 AM
Any time I see an article by Bob Gilson, I know there will be a 100% management bias to the article. This article is no exception.
Re: Bias of author Gilson
DOL
Tue Jun 9, 2009 7:28 PM
Unions and Libs for some reason think that the constitution only applies to them
Re: Bias of author Gilson
DOD
Tue Jun 9, 2009 9:41 PM
No doubt, you think of unions as "EVIL DOERS".
Re: Bias of author Gilson
Dept of Labor
Wed Jun 10, 2009 8:50 AM
If all your posts didn't amount to yelling, "Fire!" in a crowded movie house, you wouldn't get blocked and banned.
Re: Bias of author Gilson
Fed
Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:28 AM
You must write an awful lot. I see plenty of your letters. We disagree again. You will not get all of your letters printed. Neither will I. If we did, there would not be space for others.
Be cool. There is no liberal bias in this section. Your friend, Bob Gilson is proof.
positive outlook
jalor properties inc.
Tue Jun 9, 2009 10:44 AM
i am glad the obama administration is taking a strong interest in the matter of support for the working class: union and non union. i hope the senate will confirm these appointments post haste so these people will be on board in helping workers get a fair shake.
Federal Labor Relations
Around
Tue Jun 9, 2009 10:56 AM
Gilson is simply, once again, affirming what a joke the federal labor relations program is.
Re: Federal Labor Relations
USPS
Tue Jun 9, 2009 1:21 PM
Whose's Biased Now!
IRS
Tue Jun 9, 2009 12:41 PM
Mr. Gilson why do you even belong in the labor relations profession with your out of touch "us against them' attitude"? Isn't the whole LR endeavor an effort to find common ground on the day to day problems confronting both labor and management? You speak as though the issues present in the cases pending before FLRA are not worthy of a fair hearing.
Just maybe the FLRA's poor work environment might have something to do with the politicization of the organization with inexperienced and partisan appointments made by the Bush administration. Is it possible you're blinded by your own bias?
Re: Whose's Biased Now!
Fed Govt
Tue Jun 9, 2009 4:29 PM
Re: Whose's Biased Now!
Fed
Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:31 AM
The union works for its members, but for a better agency.
Finally
FAA
Tue Jun 9, 2009 7:39 PM
Bob, I've been waiting nearly two years for three ULP's to be adjuticated. In my 9 years as a Union rep, I have only ever filed when I felt I had a clear case. I've never had a case without strong merit, and three of those 300 are mine, and deserve a chance to be heard.
Are the new nominees fair and unbiased? I believe so. I would trust them to apply the law based on precedent, rather than ideology. That would be fine with me. The last group didn't believe in legal precedent, and turned decades of case law on it's ear.
As for the FLRA being low on employee attitude- I can relate- my agency, the FAA, scored 214th of 216. I have spoken with FLRA workers, and understand why they feel betrayed by the former administration as well. They too look forward to doing what is right, instead of being told what political spin to put on things.
Bless our President, and pray for wisdom for the new FLRA appointees.
Watch Out
Navy
Wed Jun 10, 2009 9:55 AM
As a former Stewart, VP, and Local NAGE President for over 13 years I have to say, just because these nominees are "Union related" doesn't mean that they will rule for the Unions. How many National officers have been corrupt, no, I mean management friendly, no, I mean have partnered with management when trying to futher their own political careers. If it sounds too good to be true, than it probably is.
Article
SATCO
Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:49 PM
Bob, It seems like you write these articles on Partnership and the FLRA positions with some glimmer of hope that our elected officials are going to listen to you. The truth is we need partnership again and we need these FLRA positions filled. Our organization has 2 of the 300 ULP's and one was filed against the CPMS. Of course, the RD offered a settlement with the normal ULP postings. The CPMS rep responded with NO with a bunch of colorful language and the other was another arrogant NO by a LRO. Of course they have the right to appeal/disagree. Both these individuals were former Union presidents and their attitude appears to show they have no intent to following the Statute. The Unions and the Government should be setting the example. Let's hope the confirmations go quickly so the FLRA can function the way Congress intended.
Article
SATCO
Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:50 PM
Bob, It seems like you write these articles on Partnership and the FLRA positions with some glimmer of hope that our elected officials are going to listen to you. The truth is we need partnership again and we need these FLRA positions filled. Our organization has 2 of the 300 ULP's and one was filed against the CPMS. Of course, the RD offered a settlement with the normal ULP postings. The CPMS rep responded with NO with a bunch of colorful language and the other was another arrogant NO by a LRO. Of course they have the right to appeal/disagree. Both these individuals were former Union presidents and their attitude appears to show they have no intent to following the Statute. The Unions and the Government should be setting the example. Let's hope the confirmations go quickly so the FLRA can function the way Congress intended.
Experience over Politics
DoD
Mon Jun 15, 2009 8:40 AM
The major difference between Obama and Bush appointees is that they have the practical experience needed for the position. Just like any other election, to the victor go the spoils. In politics you win or lose by the people you support. If you sit on the fence you neither win or lose. You won't gain anything for your members that way.
Federal relations
VA
Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:01 PM
Pleease NETU. The whole watchdog system as a whole needs to be revamped, Unions included. I am a rep. Recently while trying to file some cases I found myself in a giant loop with all them. I was recently told by an FLRA attorney that their boss is tired of VA filing ULP's and will from this point, dismiss anything the he feels is "covered by the agreement" (even though I know the case would be better handled as a ULP). I was told by an MSPB case worker that they are so backed up that unless criminality is a factor it will probably be tanked. I was told by an EEO advisor that they are so overwhelmed that I should tell the employee to take her retaliation case to a civilian lawyer. If work envirmnt is the cause then every watchdog agency must have miserable employees, because nobody wants to do anything, & almost everything submitted to them is dismissed or sided with mangt. When I tried to contact Mr. Gage about problems w/my Ntl. Pres., it was deleted w/out read.