9 May 2005

After Friday's review of DOD's proposals and responses to UDWC previous concerns, UDWC has determined that the role of the people at meet and confer for management is one of non importance's in the decision making. With that, the frustration and delays for meet and confer for either party to come to terms is, as always management driven. UDWC spent the day finalizing Pay for Performance and National Level Bargaining concepts, the unions are prepared to demand the details in their entirety in order to formulate a proposal that DOD can adopt in the final version of NSPS.

Monday opened with Charles S. Abell who was appointed by the President as the Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. Apparently enough concerns have been raised for DOD to answer our questions and comments. UDWC can only hope this does not come to late in meet and confer. With eight days remaining the full meaning of issuances is raised and grievance for performance appraisals.

Apparently Mr. Abell was not informed and has not seen our proposal on National Level Bargaining but welcomes a robust discussion on this subject. What are we doing here? The unions gave them two days last week to brief higher authority so we can get things on the table.

Subpart A General Provisions

Subpart D Performance Management

  1. Administrative Grievance Procedure: Management official makes decision over rating of record and share amount awarded. Bargaining unit employee can be represented.
  2. Administrative Grievance Procedure or Negotiated Grievance Procedure (NGP) (Employees choice) Under the NGP an arbitrator can only change the rating of record. He/She cannot change the share amount awarded the employee. The management official will only have that determination.
  3. Administrative Grievance Procedure or Performance Appraisal Review Panel (Employees choice): The Panel consists of a union and management representative, along with an arbitrator. The Panel can change the record of rating, but only the management official can change the share amount awarded the employee.

The Unions agreed to nothing above at this point.

 The Unions then gave numerous examples on how determinations will be made, how disbursement will be allocated under adjudication, and the overall grading of a performance appraisal that is under appeal. It would be in the best interest to have a one stop shop appeal system in order to be fair and consistent.

Relative to Performance Appraisals, Yes to adjudication, No to pay!

Scope of Bargaining:

Again the UDWC asked for answers on this subject and got nothing!

The theme to Jeopardy is now playing as DOD sinks into their seats!

 Quote of the day: Charlie Abell "it is a hard one for us or at least for me, to understand if there is room on either side to find some middle ground, and to try to understand your wants or desires in this regard. I match that with the fairly rigid position the administration has taken on this so far, and to find out if there is any fertile ground we can plow, that we can plant the seed"! While speaking on Scope of Bargaining.

Question of the day: Are you willing to define any subject that could not be defined as an implementing issuance that the unions would have bargaining rights over?

(In an attempt by the UDWC to get DOD/OPM to define the scope of bargaining)

 While trying to accommodate flexibility:

As they relate to issuances outside of NSPS Implementing Issuances.

UDWC gives an interpretation of 5 CFR chapter 71 scope of bargaining proposal on Department or Component-wide Rules and Regulations for sec.9901.