Welcome to AFGE Local 1286

Strength in Solidarity

GO -  BACK TO HOME PAGE                                                     GO TO  -  PRESIDENT'S PAGE

BUSH ATTEMPTING TO DESTROY ALL UNION REPRESENTATION EVERYWHERE

STATEMENT OF AFGE NATIONAL PRESIDENT BOBBY L. HARNAGE ON NIMA'S DECISION TO TERMINATE THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING RIGHTS OF 1,322

(WASHINGTON, D.C.)—The decision by the Director of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA), James Clapper, to immediately terminate the collective bargaining rights of 1,322 workers on January 30, 2003, falls in line with President Bush’s anti-union policy.

Last year, President Bush took the collective bargaining rights away from workers in the U.S. Attorneys’ offices—rights they had for over two decades—in the name of national security. Bush then pushed for legislation to eliminate collective bargaining rights for tens of thousands of dedicated federal workers in the new Department of Homeland Security. This month, Bush backed the directive to prevent 56,000 airport screeners at the Transportation Security Administration from joining a union.

If Bush can’t strip hard-working federal employees of their collective bargaining rights, then he’ll privatize their jobs. Over the last several years, NIMA has engaged in reckless privatization, including a massive $2 billion, sole-source, sweetheart contract to a start-up Native-American firm that generated bipartisan Congressional opposition as well as unfavorable headlines. Earlier this week, it was actually reported on Government Computer News’ Web site that “Clapper said NIMA is moving away from quality control of their contractors to increase its emphasis on what he called a trusted cadre of contractors.”

NIMA workers, who are represented by AFGE Local’s 1827 (St. Louis) and 3407 (Bethesda, Md.), are performing the same jobs they have performed for years. About ten years ago, Congress specifically grandfathered in the collective bargaining rights of hundreds of NIMA employees. At the time, Congress clearly said the Director could not strip them of their rights unless their roles were modified to include intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative or security duties not previously assigned, and that the performance of the newly assigned duties directly affected national security.

NIMA’s mission has not changed. Clapper insists that the need for NIMA employees to obtain security clearances makes it necessary to bust the union. However, NIMA employees already have significant security level clearances. In fact, employees in NIMA’s collective bargaining unit often have to shepherd contractors around the agency’s installations because they have security clearances and the contractors do not.

Like other Bush Administration officials, Clapper also invokes the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, to cloak this union busting with a respectable cover. We are here to remind Clapper that the fight against terrorism, in which federal employees have always been on the frontlines of the homeland, is about preserving our freedoms—including our right to organize—not destroying them.

It is worth noting that AFGE Locals 1827 and 3407 were aggressively helping NIMA employees pursue concerns about safety, promotions, performance pay (bonuses and base pay increases), as well as serious allegations of gender and racial bias. Clapper’s decision to bust the union now leaves these employees at a severe disadvantage during a crucial time.

Clapper must meet with AFGE officials and provide detailed explanations of why the collective bargaining rights of 1,322 employees were stripped.

David Gonzalez, President L-3975

 By Stephen Barr
  Three Virginia Republican lawmakers announced yesterday they are reintroducing legislation that would allow civil service and military retirees to pay their health insurance premiums with pretax dollars, as federal and legislative employees do.

 Sen.   John W. Warner and Reps.   Thomas M.   Davis III and   Jo Ann S. Davis said their proposal is the right thing to do and a way to recognize the importance of public service. "This is an inequity that ought to be rectified," Tom Davis said.

 "Premium conversion," as the benefit is known, was granted to executive branch employees in 2000 and to congressional employees in 2001. The tax code does not extend the benefit to retirees.

 The bill would amend the tax code and allow the government to subtract from monthly annuity checks the amount retirees pay for their share of health insurance. Such deductions lower taxable income, with recent estimates showing the benefit saves the typical federal employee $400 a year.

 The measure has been pushed by the National Association of Retired Federal Employees but has not been granted a hearing by the House Ways and Means Committee, which controls tax legislation.

  To get the bill moving, Tom Davis said, this year's proposal includes a referral to the House Government Reform Committee, which he chairs. He said Jo Ann Davis, chairman of the civil service subcommittee, would hold a hearing on the issue.

 Two House Democrats,   Henry A. Waxman (Calif.) and   Danny K. Davis (Ill.), have joined as co-sponsors, Tom Davis said. An aide to Warner said the Senate bill has 14 co-sponsors.

 Davis acknowledged that "a lot of budget pressures" may work against the bill's chances this year but called it a "health care issue" vital to retirees. According to estimates made last year, the bill would cost $370 million in its first year and $7.1 billion over 10 years.

   Charles L. Fallis, the NARFE president, and   Sue Schwartz, a deputy director of the Military Officers Association of America, joined the lawmakers on Capitol Hill for the announcement.
 Pay Parity
 Sen.   Paul S. Sarbanes (D-Md.) and Rep.   James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.) have succeeded in attaching provisions to the Senate and House budget resolutions that call on Congress to provide the same pay raise to the military and the civil service next year.

   President Bush has proposed a 2 percent pay raise for the civil service and a 4.1 percent average raise for the military in his 2004 budget plan.

 The "pay parity" amendments will give advocates for the civil service a bargaining chip when Congress starts writing appropriations bills this year. Sarbanes and Moran received support for their provisions from Warner, Sen.   George Allen (R-Va.) and Tom Davis.

 Federal unions, however, attacked the rest of the Budget Committee's resolution, which calls  on the Government Reform Committee to cut almost $40 billion "of waste, fraud and abuse" over 10 years.

 "These cuts would decimate the federal service," said   Colleen M. Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union.   Bobby L. Harnage Sr., president of the American Federation of Government Employees, said, "To help pay for further tax relief for Bush's billionaire buddies, the House Budget Committee has decreed that federal employees must give up either a portion of their earned retirement benefits or their health care."

 But Tom Davis, the Government Reform chairman, said employees and retirees should not worry. "We have a long way to go on it. . . . At the end of the day, we're going to be fine. It is a long process from the Budget Committee mark to the House floor to reconciliation, and Jo Ann [Davis] and myself and   Frank Wolf [R-Va.] and a number of others on the Republican side will ensure that the benefits are untouched."

WASHINGTON -- New legislation would ensure federal employees who are in the National Guard and Reserves do not suffer a pay cut when they are called to active duty.

The Reservists Pay Security Act of 2003,  S.593, introduced by Sens. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., and Richard Durbin, D-Ill., would require federal agencies to pay their employees the difference between their civilian and military wages while on active duty.

According to the Office of Personnel Management, the federal government is the largest employer of the nation's military reservists, and many either have already been or will likely be activated as the United States prepares for war with Iraq.

"We must help our men and women in uniform, who have been called up in record numbers," said Mikulski. "When they are activated, they are often given little warning and rarely know for how long they will be activated. This places a tremendous burden on their families, including the emotional burden of long periods of separation and the financial burden of losing pay."

Mikulski urged quick passage of the bill since many reservists work for the government in "highly specialized areas."

"The government should be a model employer and set the example," she said. "This should be the first step."

Durbin said it is unfair to ask reservists to absorb what can be a "substantial" salary gap between civilian and military service.

"The federal government must give these special employees of our government more than just words of support," he said on the Senate floor. "We should not encourage Americans to protect their country and then punish those who enlist in the armed forces by taking away a large portion of their salaries."
 
 

Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) this week announced that he will reintroduce
legislation in Congress to increase the government's share of Federal
Employee Health Benefit Plan premiums from 72 percent to 80 percent.
Hoyer was joined in reintroducing the bill by a bipartisan group of
22 members including Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.).

Hoyer said he hopes the adjustment will also make the government more
competitive in the marketplace for employees. By increasing the
government's share of premiums, the share the federal government pays
will be brought more in line with what most private and state
employers pay, which is 83.1 percent for single health coverage and
76.2 percent for family coverage, according to the Kaiser Family
Foundation.

In 1959, Congress enacted the Federal Employees Health Benefits
Program as a recruitment and retention tool for the federal
government to compete in the job market. The FEHBP presently insures
more than 9 million employees, their dependents and annuitants.

The FEHBP has not been immune to sharp health care premium increases.
FEHBP premiums increased 13.3 percent in 2002; 10.5 percent in 2001;
9.3 percent in 2000; 9.5 percent in 1999; and 7.2 percent in 1998.

As a result, FEHBP participants are digging deeper and deeper into
their pockets to pay for health care. A federal workforce where the
average federal employee is now 46, a longer living retiree
population, and prescription drug costs are primarily driving FEHBP
cost increases.

As calculated by the Office of Personnel Management, the average
employee would save approximately $509.08 per year under this
legislation.

Hoyer introduced the same legislation in the 107th Congress (H.R.
1307), which 94 other members of Congress co-sponsored.

CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES IN WASHINGTON AND LET THEM KNOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS BILL...IT'S MONEY IN YOUR POCKET.