ULP filed in response to
implementation of internal controls guidelines
January 29, 2009: NFFE Local 1998 Vice President Rob
Arnold filed an Unfair Labor Practice charge (ULP) with the Federal
Labor Relations Authority after Passport Services Management
implemented changes in working conditions as part of a new emphasis on
internal controls. Determining the internal security practices
of the Agency is a Management Right under the Federal Service Labor
Management Relations Statute (5
U.S.C. 7106), but that same law gives unions the right to bargain
over the procedures and appropriate arrangements for the
implementation of changes relating to that authority. A ULP is
an allegation that the Agency violated the law, specifically 5
U.S.C. 7116. The Union had sought to separately account for
the time that employees had to perform new locking and security
functions, and had sought to obtain tools (such as lockers) for
employees to be able to comply with locking requirements, but
Management refused to bargain with the Union and never responded to
the Union's proposals. The ULP also alleged that Management
implemented a new regulation in conflict with the collective
bargaining agreement already in effect, and also that Management
inappropriately made inaccurate statements regarding the Union's role
in developing internal controls policies.
Unfair Labor Practice charge filed
against Passport Services Management
November 28, 2008: NFFE Local 1998 filed an Unfair Labor Practice
charge (ULP) against Passport Services Management regarding the
implementation of performance elements for approximately 100
bargaining unit employees. Management had notified the Union of
changes in late 2007 and the Union had invoked its right to bargain
over those changes. The parties had agreed to first address the
Passport Specialist position - a position held by 1,300 of the 1,400
employees represented by the Union - and then turn to the other
positions, including File Assistant, Contact Representative,
Processing Clerk, and Cashier. The parties did bargain to
completion on the Passport Specialist position (including an
implementing memo and a mechanism for gathering input into the
elements) but Management abruptly implemented the elements for the
other positions without bargaining with the Union.
Unfair Labor Practice charge filed
against Passport Services for disciplinary action taken against Union
representative
September 9, 2008: NFFE Local 1998 Recording Secretary Jennifer Gile
filed an Unfair Labor Practice charge with the Federal Labor Relations
Authority (FLRA) regarding a "Letter of Warning" that a
Regional Director gave to a Union Senior Steward. The Senior
Steward had been in a labor-management meeting with the RD to discuss
the Union/Management Council and was later disciplined for alleging
raising his voice and criticizing the RD in the meeting and for not
using a "subject line" when he sent emails to the RD in his
capacity as the Union representative. The Union believes that
FLRA caselaw firmly and repeatedly has established that the verbiage,
tone, and volume of speech in labor-management discussions is
considered protected. For example, in 51
FLRA No. 2, the Authority ruled that an Agency committed an Unfair
Labor Practice when it suspended a Union official for two weeks for
using curse words directed at a Management official in a
labor-management meeting.
HQ contracts out passport application
acceptance; Union files Unfair Labor Practice charge
June 12, 2007: NFFE Local 1998 filed an Unfair Labor Practice
charge after Passport Services Management refused to honor the Union's
request to negotiate over a plan to have non-governmental contractor
workers accept passport applications at the Philadelphia and Boston
Passport Agencies. Accepting an application involves identifying
the applicant, ensuring that he/she is who he/she claims to be,
recording evidence, taking fees, administering the oath, witnessing
the signature, signing the application, and entering it into the
computer. This has always been considered an "inherently
governmental function" by both employees and Management, and this
change appears to conflict with Department of State and Passport
Services written policy. Passport Services has firmly instructed
acceptance facilities (e.g., clerks of court, post offices) that they
may not use contractors to accept passport applications. HQ
notified the Union of this proposal on May 29th and the Union
responded that same day that it objected to that plan for a number of
reasons, though none were personal or professional criticisms of the
contractor workers themselves. Government workers take an oath of
office to the country and the Constitution. Contractors do not
have the same clearance level as government workers, and the
contractors do not have the training or experience that Passport
Specialists have in performing acceptance functions, especially the
key role of detecting passport fraud and identity theft. The
Union believe that the integrity of the passport issuance process
should not be sacrificed even though there is a large backlog of
applications. The Union also objected to this plan on the basis
that adjudicators in many offices had been pulled from adjudication to
perform functions that contractors could perform, despite the massive
backlog, so this plan does not increase productivity. Because
Management implemented the change without bargaining with the Union,
the Union feels that Management committed an unfair labor practice (a
violation of 5
U.S.C. 7116). This story was covered by the Federal
Daily in the June 20, 2007 online
edition.
|
