PRESIDENT PERKINSON IN THE WASHINGTON POST ON AGENCY LABOR-MANAGEMENT PANELS - October 27, 2009

For labor and management, rebalanced interests

By Joe Davidson, Washington Post, Federal Diary Columnist

President Obama wants to issue an executive order creating panels that would foster greater collaboration between management and labor in federal agencies, but it's hard to craft a document that pleases both sides.

Union leaders, who had felt good about an early draft, aren't so happy with a revised proposal from the White House this month. But groups representing managers are glad that the October draft responds to their complaints that the earlier document would gum up and slow down federal operations.

The big issue is bargaining rights.

Under the August draft, the president would have directed department and agency heads to bargain with employees over a set of issues that, federal labor law says, may be negotiated at the discretion of the agency.

Union leaders liked that.

But between August and October, the pendulum swung toward the bosses. The revised version would establish "several pilot projects of specified duration in the Executive branch in which some Federal departments or agencies shall elect to bargain over some or all of the subjects."

Now the supervisors are satisfied.

"The bottom line is that the [October] draft that we've seen reaches a constructive compromise," said Carol Bonosaro, president of the Senior Executive Association, which represents top-level civil servants.

The U.S. Code says, "at the election of the agency," managers may (but they don't have to) bargain with workers "on the numbers, types, and grades of employees or positions assigned to any organizational subdivision, work project, or tour of duty, or on the technology, methods, and means of performing work."

Union leaders want Obama to mandate a place on the bargaining table for those subjects.

"We're not happy with OMB's [Office of Management and Budget] proposal on this," said John Gage, president of the American Federation of Government Employees. He considers the later draft, which http://fedsmith.com first reported, a "non-starter in its current form," but he's continuing to talk with administration officials.

William Dougan, president of the National Federation of Federal Employees, doesn't like the current draft either, but he's not quite as critical. "The current version of the executive order is better than what we have today, which is no executive order," he said. "Having something is better than nothing."

But this something disappoints Dougan because it would not allow workers a voice in dealing with many situations that confront them and affect the services government provides.

"If management chooses to reorganize [an agency] that results in changes to numbers, types and grades [of employees], that's a huge area that has a significant impact on employees," he said.

Shortly after we reported the August draft, the Government Managers Coalition sent a letter to OMB Director Peter Orszag and Office of Personnel Management Director John Berry, complaining that "mandatory permissive bargaining is a policy that would lead to significant delays in the delivery of federal services and hinder future federal operations."

The administration apparently took notice. "The latest draft did take into consideration some of the comments we made," said Darryl A. Perkinson, president of the Federal Managers Association.

Despite the labor-management differences over bargaining rights, there is much in the order they agree on, and both sides are ready for a vehicle that would facilitate cooperation. The order, both versions, would create a National Council on Federal Labor Relations that would, among other things, foster training in dispute resolution and "cooperative methods of labor-management relations." The council also would support agency-level labor-management forums.

The order says employees and union reps should be involved "as full partners with management representatives to identify problems and craft solutions to better serve the agency's customers and mission." It would allow workers and unions to be involved in matters affecting conditions of employment before decisions are made.

Gage's mention of OMB, which is part of the White House, is noteworthy because it points to the high-level attention the Obama administration gives federal personnel issues. That attention also is reflected in another change from the August draft: The October version says OMB's deputy director for management, Jeffrey Zients, would co-chair the national council with Berry. Only the OPM director chaired the council under the August draft.

The earlier version only mentioned scheduling meetings among the responsibilities of the chairman. The later iteration says the co-chairs also will preside over council meetings, determine its agenda and direct its work.

Setting the agenda, directing work -- no wonder OMB wants a big hand in this.

To view this article in its original format, please visit the The Washington Post at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/26/AR2009102603389.html.