GovernmentExecutive.com

The American Federation of Government Employees, the largest union representing Defense workers, on Tuesday announced that members have adopted a statement of "no confidence" in Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, indicating they have lost trust in his handling of personnel reforms.

Representatives of AFGE's Defense Conference, a coalition of 39 local AFGE branches that represent Defense employees, took the vote last Friday just before the start of the union's annual legislative conference.

John Gage, president of AFGE, said the vote was in response to a recent court decision against labor relations portions of Defense's proposed National Security Personnel System. The next step for the unions, he said, will be to mobilize the membership to write letters to Congress and to Rumsfeld, pressing Defense to drop the contested labor relations portion of its plan and develop new measures in consultation with labor groups.

"Secretary Rumsfeld...told Congress and the employees of DoD...that DoD would not and was not taking away the collective bargaining rights of DoD employees," the statement agreed to Friday by the union representatives said. "Secretary Rumsfeld has proven that what he says and what he does are very different."

"A vote of no confidence shows that you've become aggravated to the point of no return," said Don Hale, chairman of AFGE's Defense Conference. He argued that Rumsfeld exceeded the bounds of what Congress authorized, in proposing to cut sharply into collective bargaining rights, and said that the union is ready to work with the department to develop appropriate guidelines.

"It would be much better if we sat down together and came up with a personnel system," Hale said.

But while Judge Emmet Sullivan, in his recent decision against the NSPS labor relations provisions, did conclude that the regulations went beyond congressional intent in favoring departmental flexibility against collective bargaining rights, he rejected an argument by the unions that Defense had failed to collaborate with them while developing the system.

"While defendants may not have met Congress' requirements with enthusiasm, the court finds no evidence that defendants acted in bad faith," Sullivan, of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, wrote.

Defense spokeswoman Joyce Frank said she is not aware of details of the AFGE's statement, but reiterated the department's position of moving forward with the personnel system in consultation with unions. "We will continue to engage in this collaborative process with the goal of implementing a system that aligns with our national security mission," she said.

COMMENTS

• To DoD Pride and the Kool-Aide Drinkers: Two who bash and throw stones at AFGE should not profit from what AFGE accomplishes. Those who do not pay dues should not be under the umbrella of protection from AFGE. Why should I carry Kool-Aide drinkers and DoD pride? I once thought unions were for those who could not stand on their own, until I busted my butt for years for nothing (cause I did not golf and do those other "good ole boy" ring-kissing things). People who could not even explain what we were doing were promoted over me, and I wound up carrying the incompetent Kool-Aide drinkers. Only AFGE stood up for me. I hope the "pay for who you know" system goes in now, but just for non-AFGE members ...we will see how long it takes to get them a reality check. GovExec.com reader Posted March 9, 2006 5:12 PM
• DoD Pride, You’re a chump! When you took the oath of office it says, "Protect the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic." The biggest enemy to our freedom and way of life is this fascist government. It believes it is above the law. Right on AFGE ! Good job John Gage. Outstanding work. If the middle class doesn’t stand up, we will have the wages and working conditions of Mexico. Kill NSPS as soon as possible. And for all you other wannabe Republicans, look at your daddy's approval rating. He's a divider, not a uniter. Wake up, he loves the rich. And guess what ...you’re not rich. You work for a living. GovExec.com reader Posted March 10, 2006 7:04 AM
• From several of the comments, it is clear that at least some federal employees are prepared and postured for pay for performance. It is also evident, that many of these same folks continue to look at things very limitedly. This should serve as a wake up call to the hundreds of thousands of federal employees who will wait until they experience what Mary Lacey herself called "the change that will hit employees in their pocketbooks." But of course, it will be too late. The union will be proved correct again (as they were in Judge Sullivan's decision). And for the record, union activists don't cry about what is happening to them, they do something about it. Join the doers, or continue to cry. Mark Gibson Posted March 15, 2006 6:24 PM