Return to Article: DoD workers seek union status on eve of personnel changes
-
16522
I heard that AFGE asked for a temporary restraining order to stop these employees from coming under NSPS and notice that a union attorney is quoted in this story as saying management can't make the change. I also heard that the labor board denied the union's request. Does anybody know about that? It sounds like the union was wrong in saying management wasn't allowed to act.
-
16502
The same thing happened when the FAA decided to change its non-union personnel into a pay band pay system. The affected employees formed bargaining units, joined unions and held off the pay system for almost four years. While they eventually lost it was not without bad feelings on all sides and the dissatisfaction continues today. It is interesting to note that one union and the FAA did reach agreement but before the FAA signed they referred it to someone (OMB/GAO) who said FAA didn't have the money or authority to sign.
-
16476
From the beginning I knew this system was no good. Anything that comes out of this White house is bad news for anybody. The funny thing is that Rummy wants to bust the unions and instead he's driving people to join.
-
16468
I have to agree with "Un-civil Servant." "Queen of Flunkies" just recently pointed out the second requirement of the six Key Performance Parameters of the NSPS Requirements Document (table 1, page 7, signed Sept. 23, 2004).
In the little bit of training we received the focus has been primarily on the performance pay, paybands, and pay pool panels (which are bad enough), but never had I heard the mention of being a deployable asset.
Mentioned several times in that document, this old military man knows what deployment means and never has this particular subject been breached by management or in training.
Thank you, Queenie, for opening my eyes even farther.
And yes, I belong to that organization-not-to-be-mentioned. Hey, it's only in self-defense.
Tip Off.
-
16466
Sooner or later everyone needs a union.
-
16461
I don't blame the employees for wanting union representation. As the NSPS regulations "ooze out" we are beginning to see what the government actually plans to do to us. As it stands now the latest NSPS fact sheet states that the old locality pay known as Local Market Supplement can be diverted to particular career groups/occupations. So much for pay for performance. Our regular pay can also be diverted to certain groups/occupations/locations. What happened to pay for performance??? That's all they had talked about, now it's pay for location or occupation!! If you're smart you'll get a "desired" occupation in an important location otherwise you're out of luck since there is no provision to allot the local market supplement equally to everyone who gets a satisfactory or excellent rating!
Un-Civil Servant
PROMO RIGHT: EVENTS
UPCOMING WEBINARS
NOVEMBER 18
Speed bumps for Teleworking: What are they and how to avoid them?
DECEMBER 3
Achieve Program Success: Unlock the Management Information in Your Data
DECEMBER 10
Practical Transparency: Applying Exchange Networks for Mission Results
PROMO RIGHT: DIRECTORIES
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.