GovernmentExecutive.com

Documents obtained by the National Treasury Employees Union through a Freedom of Information Act request show that the Federal Service Impasses Panel, the body responsible for settling disputes between government agencies and federal employee unions, lost two-thirds of its professional staff and 60 percent of its travel budget between fiscal years 2001 and 2007.

"The real need at the FSIP is for independent, professional staff trained and experienced in federal labor-management relations," said NTEU President Colleen Kelley, who called on the Federal Labor Relations Authority, of which FSIP is a part, to devote more resources to staffing and travel budgets.

But Becky Norton Dunlop, the chairwoman of FSIP, said the reduction in staff and travel budget was a result of the panel's improved efficiency and did not hinder its performance.

"The panel has a strong record of commitment and accomplishments in working with the individual parties, and there is an increase in resolution between the respective managers and union leaders indicated by the significant decrease in the number of cases filed with the panel -- 215 in fiscal 2001 to 115 in fiscal 2007," Dunlop said. "A reduction in the budget and staff is driven by efficient work by the panel and the decrease in the caseload."

But Mark Roth, general counsel of the American Federation of Government Employees, said his organization distrusts the panel so much that the union is seeking alternate mechanisms to resolve disputes and avoiding FSIP as much as possible. Consequently, the level of the panel's resources is not a significant cause for concern.

"The fact that they have less money to do bad things to unions does not really upset me," Roth said. "We are trying as little as possible to use them. We are looking at all other alternatives, even ones that cost us money, like using neutrals.... I can't cry crocodile tears over the impasses panel being starved of resources right now."

FSIP had seven staffers in 1999, and six in 2000 and 2001, according to the documents provided to Government Executive by NTEU. In 2002, when President Bush fired the panel that had been appointed by President Clinton and restocked FSIP with seven of his own appointees, the number of professional staff fell to four. In 2006, the panel employed three staffers, and in 2007, employed two.

"I'm told that high-ranking officials at the panel, who don't want to be quoted, say they no longer have the time to help the parties reach a compromise because of staff cuts," Kelley said earlier this year.

A Government Executive analysis of the panel's decisions found that during the Bush administration, FSIP brokered 19 percent fewer compromises than the Clinton panel.

Roth said he thought the impact of professional staff was overrated.

"From the first year on, even when they were fully staffed, they just overrode their staff, directed their staff to rewrite decisions, and basically took their staff, the career people, out of the equation," he said.

FSIP's budget for travel to hearing sites also fell during this six-year period. In 2001, the travel budget was $62,578, and in 2007, it dropped to $25,341, according to outlines included in the documents NTEU received.

Despite the cuts, the personnel compensation section of FSIP's budget rose from $699,345 in fiscal 2001 to $834,933 in fiscal 2004, and then declined to $574,091 as professional staffing levels at the panel fell.

NTEU said the documents the union obtained showed that FLRA hired a political appointee to act as a liaison to FSIP. The union declined to release those documents because they contained personal information about the appointee.

But Kelley questioned the need for a liaison, given that FSIP is a unit of the FLRA.

"There is really no justification for the hiring of a liaison to the FSIP," she said.

COMMENTS

• It should be pointed out that only one member of the FSIP has any experience pertaining to labor/management relations. Clinton's panel at least covered both sides. Moreover, please do not comment if you have no clue about the FSIP's jurisdiction. It is not about claims, and dismissing claims. It is where parties go when they reach impasse, and the panel decides which proposal wins the day. Per Son Posted November 30, 2007 4:21 PM
• Maybe they are able to dismiss all the blatently bogus claims from afar and it allows them to efficient I appluad their efforts dan ketter Posted November 30, 2007 11:32 AM
• Amazing! A government agency that isn't attempting as all the rest do to build its own little bureaucratic fiefdom. Instead, they achieve economies and for their pains are derided for it by the "usual suspects." I can only fervently hope that such an approach to good governance takes hold across the government, while recognizing that the chances of that occurring are those of the proverbial snowball in a very hot place. TR Posted November 29, 2007 8:07 PM