No guaranteed bargaining rights under homeland security compromise
The Bush administration would have authority to strip collective bargaining rights from unionized employees in a new Homeland Security Department under a compromise proposal that has support from key Senate lawmakers.
The compromise, which is strongly opposed by federal employee unions, won backing late Tuesday from Sens. John Breaux, D-La., Ben Nelson, D-Neb., and Lincoln Chafee, R-R.I., who previously had supported a union-backed version of the homeland security bill.
"We believe this new proposal represents improvement in the personnel flexibility provisions now contained in pending...legislation to create a new Homeland Security Department," said the senators in a joint statement.
"They have capitulated, and it is unfortunate," said Beth Moten, legislative director for with the American Federation of Government Employees.
The compromise creates a mediation process for resolving labor disputes in the proposed department. But it does not guarantee collective bargaining rights for employees, a key union objective that has long been opposed by the White House.
"It's a terrible setback for federal employees, especially those who are moving into the new department," said Moten.
"This is really not a compromise," added Maureen Gilman, legislative director for the National Treasury Employees Union.
The new proposal would give unions 30 days to respond to any proposed change to civil service rules. If parties failed to reach agreement, either party could request 30 days of mediation by the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, an independent agency that intervenes in labor disputes, but does not make rulings. The Homeland Security Department would retain the authority to alter civil service rules after this process.
Unions said the compromise gives no formal bargaining rights to employees. "Since management could, within 30 days, just implement whatever they proposed, there would be no incentive for them to agree to modify their position," said an AFGE official.
The compromise would also require President Bush to make certain findings before revoking the collective bargaining rights of unionized employees. But unions said the White House could still deny collective bargaining rights at will under this provision.
"I don't think any meaningful limitation on the president's authority is being considered at this point," said an NTEU official.
Breaux, Nelson, and Chafee described the compromise as a necessary step following the outcome of the midterm elections, which strengthened the hand of President Bush and Republicans, who believe the new department should have wide discretion to determine labor rules. "There is no doubt that [they] are in a better negotiating position following the elections of last week," they said.
But the senators added that their original proposal, which would have guaranteed employees' collective bargaining rights, was better.
In September, the White House pledged not to rescind the collective bargaining rights of all employees when they are transferred to the new department. But the administration has maintained it needs flexibility to change civil service rules and deny union rights if it is necessary to protect homeland security.
Union officials will consider asking Democratic members to filibuster the compromise, which would need 60 votes to be immune such a tactic. But Republicans will press for a straight up or down vote on the proposal. Senate Majority Leader Thomas Daschle, D-S.D., has pledged to oppose a filibuster of the homeland security legislation.
Homeland Security employees would have been guaranteed collective bargaining rights under the union-backed Breaux-Nelson-Chafee amendment proposed in September. That proposal would have sent labor-management disputes to the Federal Service Impasses Panel. It would have given homeland security employees roughly the same labor protections as workers at the Internal Revenue Service, according to union officials.