GovernmentExecutive.com

In June 2002, the White House unveiled proposed legislation to create the Homeland Security Department. The proposal asked for presidential authority to waive collective bargaining when necessary for national security and also called for the creation of a personnel system that would restrict collective bargaining. Federal labor unions protested. Democrats on Capitol Hill balked. But President Bush threatened to veto the legislation if his limits on the unions were removed.

"To meet the threats, I must be able - and future presidents must be able - to move people and resources where they're needed, and to do it quickly, without being forced to comply with a thick book of rules," he said.

Fearful of standing in the way of homeland security legislation, Democrats backed down. They insisted that union voices be heard in the design of a new personnel system, but they let the department have the final say. For the unions, it was a fateful moment. Soon, the Defense Department asked Congress for, and received, similar authority. And now both departments are on the verge of rolling out their systems.

Under the new systems, nearly half of all civil servants will lose the ability to rely on unions to look after their interests in the assigning of work, the deploying of personnel and the use of technology. Most issues once governed by bargaining agreements now will fall under the broad rubric of management rights. That includes everything from overtime, shift rotations and deployment away from regular work sites, to health and safety concerns about new technologies. Federal unions have never had the right to bargain over pay or benefits, as their private sector counterparts do, or to strike.

As personnel reform sweeps across the government, the traditional labor relations model is being turned on its head -- what does that mean for the civil service? Shawn Zeller explores this issue and more in the July 1 issue of Government Executive. Read the full story here.

COMMENTS

• HR Specialist, Contracting out is the goal and federal unions stand in the way of that goal. If you marginalize the unions, one check on unfettered power and control of the bureaucracy is lifted. That will facilitate contracting out. Next grateful contractors tithe to party that controls the White House. And money in politics equals power. The more money you have, the more power you have. Power begets power. The ultimate marriage of the governmental/industrial complex and politics. These guys are not dumb. More like insidious. Poor Richard GovExec.com reader Posted June 30, 2005 8:33 AM
• Dear Poor Richard, Chief Steward of a large BU is by far the hardest job in the federal government, especially if the Agreement doesn't make Chief Steward full time. And the 2nd hardest job in the federal sector is first line employee relations supervisory HR specialist. And these jobs are the hardest for exactly the same reason. I couldn't agree more with your statements and it's a real shame that this administration doesn't reach out, as all forward thinking corporations and businesses do, to its employee representative organizations. I could never understand back in FY 2001 why the administration reached out to the Teamsters and completely ignored, and still ignores, NTEU, AFGE, NFFE, et. al. The health of the civil service is really bipartisan. Partnership was valuable because it made both parties allies on resolving so many day to day issues and built trust-- and in my opinion better resolution to agency problems. But sadly, after 5 years of hammering-- there isn't much left in labor management relations except HR Managers like Mr. Neville. I honestly don't know how much more of a beating the American Federal Civil Service can take before it just dies. And of course is replaced by contractors and consultants. :-) Keep up the good work of steward Poor Richard- it is even more thankless today than it was five years ago and probably will be worse five years from now. I've been in your shoes and I know the contribution that you make to the mission, and to working conditions. HR Specialist GovExec.com reader Posted June 29, 2005 2:41 PM
• Dear Queen of Flunkies and HR Specialist, Contrary to the predjudices of the Neville types, the vast majority of union folks are valued federal employees who do union work out of conviction rather than self aggrandizement. I have always made it a point to remind any new manager I work with that no matter what our differences over details, the big picture is that we are all generally rowing the boat in the same direction. I take pride in my agency and what it accomplishes. I take pride in my role as steward. What I do at the most basic level is to insure that those who know how to get the job done best, the employees, have a meaningful say in how that work is done. Poor Richard GovExec.com reader Posted June 29, 2005 12:58 PM