|
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Compressed Work Schedules for Passport Services employees represented by NFFE Local 1998 are governed by Article 26 of the July 3, 2001 Collective Bargaining Agreement, as amended on February 8, 2005 and May 22, 2008. In addition, Article 25 governs the standard work schedule and Article 38 addresses aspects of the night shift. Compressed Work Schedules include the following options:
The creation, termination, and details of CWS are fully negotiable according to the Flexible and Compressed Work Schedule Act of 1982 (5 U.S.C. 6120-6133), FLRA rulings, and OPM guidance (scroll down below). That means that Management cannot terminate a particular CWS or create a particular CWS without negotiating with the Union. The negotiations would be substantive in nature, meaning the parties would bargain over the decision of whether or not to create or terminate a particular CWS, as opposed to the procedures and arrangements bargaining (also called "I&I" for impact and implementation) that is connected to the implementation of a Management Right. Looking at the example at the Seattle Passport Agency in 2003-2004 (scroll down below), Management proposed to terminate three particular CWS (for example, a 5/4-9 CWS that started at 6:30 AM) and move the affected employees to a different CWS that started half an hour later. Management cited the 5 U.S.C. 7106 Management Rights (including the right to determine internal security practices and to set tours of duty) as the basis declaring the Union's proposal to "retain the status quo" as nonnegotiable and to subsequently unilaterally implement the change. However, the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) ruled in 60 FLRA No. 34 that the Union's proposals - including the proposal to maintain the status quo (of keeping the 6:30 AM and other CWS) was fully negotiable and that the Management Rights provisions were no basis for refusing to negotiate substantively over the proposal to terminate the particular CWS. Because CWS are fully negotiable, that also means that Management is obligated to bargain over a Union proposal to create a new CWS. Looking at the example of the Houston Passport Agency in 2001 and the New Orleans Passport Agency in 2008, the Union proposed to create a 5/4-9 CWS in Houston and a 4/10 CWS in New Orleans. Management is required to meet and negotiate over the Union's proposals. Looking at the example of the Washington Passport Agency in 2007-2008, employees cannot be forced to work a CWS unless it is specified within a collective bargaining agreement. In addition, because CWS are fully negotiable, Management cannot dictate the details of the particular CWS that are allowed. So if the Union proposes to have two 4/10 CWS - one running from 7:00 PM to 5:30 AM and the other running from 6:45 PM to 5:30 AM - but Management desires to only have one CWS, then the parties must jointly agree on the final decision. If Management unilaterally implements a particular CWS and forces employees to work it, or if Management unilaterally terminates a particular CWS (e.g., a 4/10 CWS starting at 7:00 PM and ending at 5:30 AM) and forces employees off of it - without bargaining with and reaching agreement with the Union - then Management would have violated the law and the contract (and the Union could file a grievance or Unfair Labor Practice charge). If Management and the Union bargain to an impasse over whether to create or terminate a particular CWS, then either party can take the matter to the Federal Service Impasses Panel (FSIP). If Management can prove to the FSIP that a particular CWS is causing an "adverse agency impact" (e.g., an increase in cost of agency operations other than a reasonable administrative cost relating to establishing a CWS), then the FSIP will order the schedule terminated. If a particular CWS is proposed by the Union is not yet in existence, but Management can prove to the FSIP that it would cause an adverse impact, then the FSIP would order that it not be established.
|
||||||||
| Legal Authorities/Guidance | ||||||||
|
OPM - Negotiating
Flexible and Compressed Work Schedules |
||||||||
| Local Work Schedule Agreements, Negotiations, and Problem Resolution | ||||||||
|
Seattle Passport
Agency |
||||||||
| 10-08-2008: Seattle Work Schedules Agreement | ||||||||
|
Grievance/Arbitration/Settlement
|
Negotiability Appeal 08-17-2004: FLRA Negotiability Ruling - 60 FLRA No. 34 12-10-2003: Management Response on Negotiability Appeal 11-21-2003: Union Position Statement on Negotiability Appeal 11-06-2003: Management Position Statement on Negotiability Appeal 07-23-2003: Union Negotiability Appeal: Work Schedules |
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Colorado Passport Agency 06-17-2008:
Colorado
Work Schedules Agreement |
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Philadelphia Passport Agency 08-31-2004:
FLRA
Dismissal of ULP |
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Houston Passport Agency 10-17-2001: Houston Work Schedules Agreement |
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
New Orleans Passport Agency 11-28-2008: New
Orleans Work Schedules Addendum 07-06-2000: New Orleans Work Schedules Agreement |
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Washington (DC) Passport Agency
05-22-2008: Grievance
Settlement Agreement |
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
National Passport Center
01-19-2007: Forced Removal From CWS (Step 3 Grievance)
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
| News stories about work schedules | ||||||||
|
More night shift employees moved to
day shift Night
shift grievance settled; 9 employees moved to
day shift; new contract article created Union
invokes arbitration over schedules dispute Forced CWS/night shift grievance
continues Management denies grievance
regarding 2nd shift at Washington, DC Passport Agency CWS
Continues During Holidays Union Challenges CWS Removal Grievance
Filed over Removal from CWS
Work
Schedules Dispute Settled
NFFE
Legal Update Re: Local 1998 FLRA Ruling FLRA
Rules For Union in Negotiability Appeal FLRA
Rules Against Union in ULP FLRA
Interviews Union Rep Re: ULP at PPT/PA ULP Filed
Over Schedule Change in Philadelphia
Arbitration Hearing Postponed; Management Violates Contract (Again) Local 1998 Files Arbitration Brief
Negotiability Appeal Pending With FLRA Management In Seattle
Fails To Honor Time Schedule Agreement, Appeal Filed With FLRA -
Arbitration Invoked Over Related Issues |
||||||||
|
|
||||||||