|
Vol.
III, No. 10, July 2002
Union
Steps up Campaign for $100 Transit Subsidy
Braving
searing heat and a relentless sun, over 200 AFGE 12
members and supporters rallied in front of the Frances
Perkins Building on June 26 to call on Secretary of
Labor Elaine Chao to immediately raise the transit subsidy
to $100 a month for employees in the Washington DC metropolitan
area. Sporting red AFGE baseball caps and carrying green-and-white
signs, the participants were in good spirits despite
the brutal weather.
Following
informational picketing, several speakers echoed the
Union’s call for an increase in the transit subsidy.
Both Metro workers’ unions sent speakers (Mike
Golash, Secretary-Treasurer of Local 689 of the Amalgamated
Transit Union, and Eric Starin, Executive Board member
of Local 2 of the Office and Professional Employees
International Union). Randall Baxter, President of AFSCME
Local 3976 at the USDA, endorsed the $100 transit subsidy,
which his members already enjoy. Newly elected AFGE
National Vice President for the 14th District and former
AFGE 12 President Russ Binion ended the rally with a
rousing speech. Stewart Schwartz, Executive Director
of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, ably represented
the environmental movement. AFGE 12 President Larry
Drake served as Master of Ceremonies.
Rep.
Wolf to Sec. Chao: Raise the Transit Subsidy
A highlight of the rally was President Drake’s
reading aloud, to cheers of approval, a letter just
received that day from Rep. Frank Wolf. Wolf, a Republican
from northern Virginia and a champion of transit subsidies
and flexiplace (telecommuting) for Federal employees,
had been invited to speak. Unable to attend due to a
series of important votes in the House of Representatives,
Wolf sent a letter that he had written to Secretary
Chao. In it, he wrote: “This is a quality of life
issue. I urge you to take steps to increase the transit
subsidy for Department of Labor employees to the allowed
$100 monthly.”
Assistant
Secretary Pizzella Attempts to Cloud the Issue
Clearly responding to the popular sentiment within the
Department for raising the transit subsidy (by management’s
own figures, 3,850 employees in the National Office
receive the transit subsidy), Assistant Secretary for
Administration and Management Patrick Pizzella issued
a memo on June 17 to “National Office Managers
and Supervisors” and another memo on July 1 to
“All National Office Employees.” In these
memos, Pizzella paints management as reasonable and
wanting to “chart a progressive course” but
confronted with an uncooperative union, namely, AFGE
12. DOL management is willing to deal with the transit
subsidy matter, Pizzella says, but only within the context
of renegotiating the existing contract between management
and AFGE 12. He refers approvingly to the new contract
between DOL and the National Council of Field Labor
Locals (NCFLL) which includes the $100 transit subsidy.
He implies that if only AFGE 12 would come to the table,
the $100 transit subsidy would be a done deal.
“It’s
unfortunate that Assistant Secretary Pizzella has chosen
to confuse the issue,” stated President Drake.
“There’s absolutely nothing to negotiate concerning
the $100 transit subsidy,” he continued. “DOL
management is required by Executive Order (EO)
13150 to raise the transit subsidy to $100 a month;
they should have done it back in January like other
Federal agencies. Their open defiance of a Presidential
Executive Order is unworthy of the principal Federal
agency responsible for enforcing the labor laws of this
great country,” he emphasized.
“Since
they are located outside the Washington DC metropolitan
area, the NCFLL was correct to negotiate the $100 transit
subsidy because EO 13150 does not apply to them,”
Drake pointed out. “EO 13150 applies only to the
National Capital Region, which is where AFGE 12 is located.
There is no need for negotiation on our part, only compliance
by DOL management with the Executive Order.”
The
Truth about the Contract Reopening
In his memos, Assistant Secretary Pizzella claims that
the Union has committed an Unfair Labor Practice by
not coming to the bargaining table to renegotiate the
existing contract. Let’s look at the facts.
Article
47, Section 2 of the AFGE 12 – DOL Collective Bargaining
Agreement (CBA) states: “This Agreement shall remain
in full force and effect for three (3) years and from
year to year thereafter, unless either party gives to
the other written notice of intention to terminate or
reopen. Either party may give notice to the other not
more than ninety (90) nor less than sixty (60) calendar
days prior to the expiration date of this Agreement
of its desire to renegotiate or amend this Agreement.
The ground rules which will govern negotiations of the
new Agreement, including the procedure to be followed
in any negotiation impasse, are detailed in Appendix
A of this Agreement. This Agreement shall remain in
full force and effect during negotiations and until
a new contract takes effect.”
On
January 11, 2002, Jerry Lelchook, DOL’s Director
of Labor Relations, sent a letter to then-AFGE 12 President
Russ Binion, stating that management was reopening the
contract. The last sentence of his letter stated, “The
Department will contact the Union shortly to discuss
next steps and the timing and location of contract negotiations.”
Appendix
A, Section 2a states: “The parties shall meet within
ten (10) workdays of a reopening of this Agreement for
the purpose of negotiating ground rules for the conduct
of term negotiations. Such negotiations over ground
rules shall continue for five (5) consecutive workdays.
If no agreement is reached, the issues in dispute shall
be submitted to the Federal Service Impasses Panel.”
The
next contact from management on this matter did not
come until February 5, 16 workdays after Lelchook’s
January 11 letter. By that point, management had missed
the time frames and therefore waived their rights; thus,
the contract was rolled over until March 15, 2003. Meeting
contractual time frames is part and parcel of labor
relations; DOL management has alleged on various occasions
that the Union has missed time frames and therefore
waived its rights. Now the shoe is on the other foot.
Why
not go to the table with management anyway and renegotiate
the contract, you may ask.
“In
view of the antagonism of the Bush Administration toward
unions in the Federal sector, the conditions at present
are not favorable,” stated President Drake. Not
only has the Bush Administration vowed to contract out
or privatize 425,000 Federal jobs during its term, it
has expelled unions from the Justice Department under
the guise of “national security,” consistently
proposed meager pay raises for civilian Federal employees,
and fired all seven members of the Federal Service Impasses
Panel, the body that ultimately decides bargaining disputes
in the Federal sector.
Closer
to home, in late 2001, DOL management unilaterally stripped
five AFGE 12 officers of their “100% official time”
status. This move is hostile because it strikes at the
Union’s ability to represent employees on work
time (official time). These “100% official time”
arrangements were long standing, dating back to the
late 1980's, but without any discussion with the Union
management arrogantly abolished them. The Union has
formally contested this action.
“To
go into contract negotiations under these conditions,
where management is clearly seeking givebacks by the
Union and when it is not absolutely necessary, is not
smart,” declared Drake. “Our position that
management did not follow the proper procedures in reopening
the contract and therefore waived their rights, is solid
and fulfills our responsibility to our members,”
he concluded.
$210
That’s how much a DOL employee who would use the
full $100 transit subsidy has lost so far, as a result
of management’s refusal to raise the transit subsidy
to $100 in January. It’s $35 a month that many
DOL employees should be receiving but aren’t.
Region
Has Third Worst Traffic Congestion in Nation
The Texas Transportation Institute recently released
its annual survey of traffic congestion in the United
States. The DC area maintained its standing as having
the third worst congestion, following Los Angeles and
San Francisco (The Washington Post, June
21, 2002, p. B1). The $100 transit subsidy is part of
the solution to this problem.
Union
Expands Campaign for $100 Transit Subsidy
At its July 9, 2002 meeting, the AFGE 12 Executive Board
adopted a plan of action to secure the $100 transit
subsidy, including:
•
Weekly informational picketing. Every Wednesday
from 12:00 to 12:30 PM, there will be informational
picketing on the sidewalk along Constitution Avenue
in front of the Frances Perkins Building. All DOL employees
and concerned citizens are invited to participate. The
picketing will continue until the transit subsidy is
raised to $100.
•
Outreach to the environmental movement. AFGE 12
will seek assistance from the many organizations concerned
with matters like air pollution, traffic congestion,
and sprawl.
•
Legislative action. AFGE 12 will promote efforts
by DOL employees to petition their elected representatives
for redress of this grievance. “I encourage all
concerned DOL employees to contact, on their own time
and off the work site, their Senators and Congresspersons
to request their assistance in securing the $100 transit
subsidy,” said Drake.
“The
Union has other steps in mind which we will take as
circumstances dictate,” promised Drake. “It’s
too bad we have to resort to these measures, but the
benefits that we enjoy today – like flexitime and
flexiplace – also were resisted by management,
so we will persevere,” he vowed.
Build
the Union!
The current struggle over the transit subsidy underscores
the need for DOL employees to have an effective union
working on their behalf. The more members AFGE 12 has,
the more effective it will be. To encourage membership
growth, until August 31, 2002, the Union will give any
new member joining the Union a $50 rebate and the Union
member recruiting the new member a $100 bonus. Recruit
10 new members, get $1,000. It’s a little incentive
to do the right thing: build the Union!
|
