What Will New Union Coalition Mean for Stance on Personnel Reforms

Alex Parker has a good story up today on a new coalition of federal unions formed to create a unified front on personnel reform issues. The composition of the coalition, however, raised an interesting question for me:

The coalition does not yet include all the major players in federal organized labor. Two of the largest -- the National Treasury Employees Union and the American Federation of Government Employees -- have yet to sign up. Representatives from AFGE did not respond to the announcement on Monday, but Dougan said the union -- which is a member of UDWC -- already had decided not to join.

NTEU President Colleen Kelley said in a statement that the union, which isn't a member of UDWC because it doesn't represent workers in Defense, hadn't been approached by the alliance about joining.

"It speaks pretty loudly that we've got, with the exception of AFGE and NTEU, most of the remaining federal unions with a significant number of federal employees that they represent," Dougan said, noting that 13 of the 15 largest government unions were participating. "I'm certainly saddened that AFGE has chosen not to participate at this point in time. We're going to move forward and engage the administration as appropriate on issues as they come up."

NTEU's position is understandable, since the alliance is somewhat defense-focused. But I'm curious to see if this represents a split on personnel reform. AFGE has been much more outspoken than NFFE in its skepticism about the possibility and wisdom of reforming the federal pay system. If the administration could peel some unions off in support of its broader personnel reform efforts, it might have a stronger leg to stand on than the Bush administration did, though like it or not, Obama officials are going to have to reckon with NTEU and AFGE in any case.