GovernmentExecutive.com

Unions representing civilian workers at the Defense Department are turning to Congress as part of a last-ditch effort to bring Pentagon personnel officials back to the negotiating table.

Last year, lawmakers passed legislation that allowed the Pentagon to drop the General Schedule structure and implement a new personnel system for the department's almost 700,000 civilian employees. Friction over the plan ignited in February, however, when union officials objected to a plan that would replace the Merit Systems Protection Board's adjudicatory function. Union officials recently accused Pentagon negotiators of refusing to hold serious negotiations over the new personnel system.

In a further sign of deteriorating relations between the two sides, union officials held a press conference Wednesday and accused the Bush administration of using the personnel reform to outsource government jobs and enrich politically connected defense contractors.

Thomas Buffenbarger, president of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, called the new system "a great catastrophe." He said the National Security Personnel System was being developed with the philosophy, "what is it we can do to help the bottom line of private corporations."

The rewards of the overhaul will be seen by "the people who are spending millions and millions of dollars in New York City," said David Holway, president of the National Association of Government Employees, referring to the Republican National Convention now under way.

"This is one of the most devious acts I have ever seen in my entire life," Holway added.

Ben Toyama, the federal vice president of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, said the new system could "endanger the United States Navy's nuclear program."

The new proposals, Toyama said, "put safety and quality up against cost."

Defense officials did not respond to requests for comment, but last month the NSPS Program Executive Office Mary Lacey said the department had "meaningful dialogue" with the unions.

While some union representatives were leveling harsh allegations, American Federation of Government Employees President John Gage pointed out that progress could be made if Pentagon officials returned to the negotiating table.

"We can come up with a personnel system that is good for employees and good for the security of the country," Gage said.

He admitted, however, that it would take congressional intervention or a John Kerry victory in the November presidential election to compel the Defense Department to listen to union concerns.

"That's just the political reality of it," Gage said.

COMMENTS

• I've been following the Union activity closely since the day President Bush entered the White House. I was once a Union official. The Unions have not performed well these past four years and some of the blame needs to be accepted by the Unions. I teach Bible classes. After 8 years of plenty the Unions should have been storing grain, i.e. goodwill, for the inevitable drought and famine to follow. Now that we are in our fourth year of famine, it is unacceptable to keep crying that they didn't prepare for this disaster. The very serious question now for the Unions' leadership is how do we federal employees survive if the drought and famine goes another 4 years? HR Specialist PS- and than there was a Pharoah in Egypt that did not remember Joseph. :-) GovExec.com reader Posted September 7, 2004 8:11 AM
• Unions are good for balancing the act between federal managers and federal employees. Although I haven't had much opportunity to use our unions, it's a blessing knowing they are available if needed. As far as DOD and its safety record and the unions, as a former DOD employee, I have witnessed a few unions displaying more concern for its organization and union dues than for the safety of its members and the employees. But only a few. The majority of the unions that I came into contact with in DOD were responsible DOD employees watching out for the welfare of other employees. The unions in the Veterans Administration again display the same responsibility. The irresponsible employee/union member can be found here and there but they, thankfully, are the minority. With the current Commander In Chief, unions must play a vital role in ensuring Federal employees are treated fairly on the job, in their pay, and other important issues. Nena Phillips Posted September 3, 2004 2:32 PM
• Interesting comment by John Gage at the end of the article that shows his true position as a political activist rather than a bargaining unit representative. For AFGE members that do NOT agree with John's selection as representative of all federal workers, go to www.unionforbush.com I heard about the guy on Bill Bennett's radio show. He's a conventional union member that doesn't support the "we're union, we HAVE to be Democrats" line of thought control. GovExec.com reader Posted September 3, 2004 1:44 PM