TOPICS

Five unions walked out of meetings Monday with Defense Department officials that aimed to resolve differences over the Pentagon's new civil service personnel system. The walkout occurred just days before the management-union discussions were scheduled to end.

In a statement, National Federation of Federal Employees President Richard N. Brown called the "meet-and-confer" process, which started in April, "a sham." He added that Defense management has not considered union recommendations. "This process has been nothing but an attack on the rights of federal workers," he said.

In total, the five unions--NFFE, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, the International Association of Fire Fighters, the National Association of Government Employees, and the Metal Trades Department of the AFL-CIO--represent more than 100,000 Defense workers. The American Federation of Government Employees, which represents the bulk of Defense workers, continues to attend the meetings, though it too has criticized Defense management over the way it has handled the sessions.


RELATED STORIES

The 30-day meet-and-confer period was mandated by Congress in the 2003 Defense Authorization Act, legislation that authorized the Pentagon to create a new personnel system for its 650,000 civil servants.

Since then, Defense employee unions have complained that Defense management has not negotiated with them over the details of the new system. Defense managers insist that the legislation does not require them to negotiate. However, Pentagon leaders said they would share details during the meet-and-confer stage, and would consider union recommendations before final regulations are issued.

Leaders from more than 35 unions formed the United Defense Workers Coalition to lobby against the new system. The coalition objects to preliminary rules issued in February, criticizing Defense's move to limit union bargaining rights, create stricter disciplinary rules, and replace the General Schedule with a pay-for-performance system. And union officials say that Defense has not budged during the meet-and-confer sessions.

Byron W. Charlton, a legislative representative with the AFL-CIO, who is leading the coalition during the meet-and-confer process, said he would push ahead despite the walk-out. But he said that the other coalition members understood the decision not to participate. "Each union is guided by the dictates of its membership. They decide what they are going to do," he said. "It does send a strong message that we are tired and frustrated with the lack of sincerity and progress."

Charlton said that union leaders are particularly frustrated with Defense's insistence that the new system allow the Defense secretary to implement "issuances" that could override collective bargaining agreements.

Union leaders won support from some members of Congress last month at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., for one, said he was "deeply troubled by a number of aspects of the draft regulation which appear to send the message to department employees that the leadership of the Department of Defense isn't interested in ensuring that they're treated with the fairness and equity that they deserve."

COMMENTS

  • If you need a union to keep your job, then you shouldn't have it in the first place. Ninety-nice percent get the job because daddy or someone got it for them. Yes, they work hard at the start, but once in, it's a slob’s job. You want to keep getting those union heads richer, go ahead.
  • Poor, poor professional. It is too bad you do not understand how things work. The union gains of the 30's to the 50's can be lost in a minute. Unions need to maintain the status quo or the worker will fall back to yesterday's standards. It is guys like you that get a free ride without paying the dues the unions need to combat a reduction in benefits for workers. If you think unions hurt workers you're nuts. Unions give workers an ability to negotiate with those that have the power of capital and taxpayers who do not want to pay for what they get. Unions are simply a step in the balance of power for the various groups. If you're a pro you should see this and encourage the balance of power between taxpayer, management and worker.
  • Dave o Dave, you are talking about the need for unions back in the 1930's, 40's and 50's. I agree that they were needed back then because the country lacked labor laws that were fair. Today, however, unions are worthless especially in the federal government. The unions are corrupt, as they were back in the day, and do nothing for you or your union brothers. Obviously you are not too well educated to realize that so keep sending in your union dues. Progressive, professional (white collar, educated) and forward thinking employees is what we look for in government employees these days not ones that dwell on the past. Your mindset has to change as it is does with other like minded employees like you. Wake up and smell the coffee!