On June 7, the Working Group assigned to B(1) discussed their progress in a Report to the National Council on Labor Management Relations on bargaining B(1) issues.21 named people and somebody called OPM Staff were involved in developing this report. Of those named, four were union officials and one other a former AFGE lawyer now working for OPM, five political appointees, two were FLRA folks including the Chairman(she’s a political too lest we forget) , the President of the Senior Executives Association, an OMB staffer, an OPM Labor Relations person and five real live apparently career Feds.
What Agencies Will Play?
It was interesting to see that from a reluctance to pitch in early on, the following Agencies were apparently excited to participate once everything was explained to them:
What’s B(1) Again?
Remember that B(1) refers to that portion of the Federal labor law which says:
“(b) Nothing in this section shall preclude any agency and any labor organization from negotiating— (1) at the election of the agency, on the numbers, types, and grades of employees or positions assigned to any organizational subdivision, work project, or tour of duty, or on the technology, methods, and means of performing work;”
What’s the Group Vision?
The group is suggesting that the pilot cover bargaining units with more than 500 employees; cover any combination of subjects addressed in B(1); and, may be limited to certain subjects only. The group wants Agency Labor Management Forums to work out the details. They want participants to get training and encouraged the use of ADR.
The group suggests that success involves measurable changes in:
–organizational performance (to ensure that pilots contribute to better government);
–employee satisfaction; and,
What’s the Timeline?
According to the group, it foresees the following timeline:
What’s Missing in All This?
I went back and read this a couple of times thinking I must have missed something because there appeared to me some unanswered questions, for example:
Benjamin Franklin said “Necessity never made a good bargain.” If all of this is to make the unions happy, why not just say so and stop wasting type appearing to be deliberative. Is this the case, you figure it out.
As always, any perceived opinion in the above is solely my responsibility.