| Comment Number: | EM-023145 |
| Received: | 3/15/2005 1:20:49 PM |
| Subject: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment |
| Title: | National Security Personnel System |
| CFR Citation: | 5 CFR Chapter XCIX and Part 9901 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
From: The United Power Trades Organization 942 Prune Orchard Rd. Colfax WA 99111 (509) 397-3737 To: The Secretary of Defense And The Acting Director of OPM Re: Department of Defense National Security Personnel System DOCKET NUMBER NSPS-2005-001; RIN NUMBER 3206-AK76 Dear Mr. Secretary and Mr. Acting Director: The United Power Trades Organization (UPTO), a federal sector Union recognized as the exclusive representative of a bargaining unit consisting of Corps of Engineers' non-supervisory operation and maintenance employees, as defined by the Department of the Army, and paid from the Pacific Northwest Regional Power Rate Schedule within the Portland, Seattle and Walla Walla Districts of the Northwestern Division Pacific Region submits the following comments and recommendations concerning the proposed Department of Defense National Security Personnel System. We expect that, as required by the Statute, you will give these comments and recommendations full and fair consideration in deciding whether or how to proceed with the proposed regulations. We hereby incorporate by reference into these comments and recommendations in total, as if they were the comments and recommendations of The United Power Trades Organization (UPTO) the comments and recommendations of the United Department of Defense Department Workers Coalition (UDWC) as hand delivered and electronically forwarded to the Department. We also stand ready, as required by the Act, to meet and confer with you in an effort to reach agreement over the many disputed areas contained in our comments and recommendations and those of the coalition. After thorough review and analysis of the proposed regulations we are compelled to object to the system in its entirety and strongly recommend that it not be implemented until the many serious defects have been corrected. In submitting these comments, and/or participating in any public comment period, and/or any action, UPTO is waiving any of our legal rights or processes as to any procedural and/or substantive concerns we may raise in any forum at the appropriate time. Comments: In addition to comments and recommendations submitted by the UDWC also known as the Coalition UPTO submits the following: (1)The proposed new NSPS regulations fail to meet the standard set by the law under 9902 (m) (2) which says, "The system developed or adjusted under paragraph (1) would allow for a collaborative issue-based approach to management relations". The proposed NSPS regulations under 9901.910 (3) (b) prohibit any bargaining over the procedures management would use in the exercise of its rights, waives all requirements for advance notice to the union of changes to working conditions (9901.910 (3)(d)) , severely limit "appropriate" arrangements (9901.910 (3)(e)(1)) and eliminates status quo ante remedies (9901.908 (b)(7)) and give management the "sole, exclusive , and unreviewable discretion to determine the procedures that it will observe in exercising the authorities set forth in 9901.910(a)(1) and (2) and to deviate from such procedures, as necessary. These all violate the spirit and the letter of the law. We recommend that the Department negotiate with the unions methods to incorporate the views of the employees as expressed through their exclusive representative methods and procedures for meaningful pre-decisional input into all policies and decisions that impact working conditions. This can be done in a manner that will give the Department the flexibility they claim to need. (2)The proposed NSPS while it gives lip service to veterans' rights it severely waters them down. As an example under your proposed regulations in a RIF situation veteran status is dropped from the number one consideration to the number 3 consideration. Of all Departments, DoD should always give first consideration and best retention rights to qualified veterans. All current veterans rights and preferences should be maintained without modification. Any thing less is a slap in the face of our veterans by the very Department that should be defending their rights and preferences. (3) Mr. Secretary in your testimony before the Senate Government Affairs Committee on June 4, 2003 in regards to collective bargaining and NSPS you stated and we quote, " It [NSPS] will not end collective bargaining. To the contrary, the right of Defense employees to bargain collectively would be continued. What it would do is to bring collective bargaining to the national level, so that the Department could negotiate with national unions instead of dealing with more than 1,300 different union locals-a process that is grossly inefficient." Your own interpretation of the statute as stated above is to allow bargaining at a level above exclusive recognition. The statue clearly gave the Department that right with the exception that bargaining at the National level only binds the subordinate components of that union and not other union's bargaining units. As the proposed NSPS regulations are written the Department goes far beyond what the statute allows or what you promised the Senate. I believe the law requires (and if you have any honor in your promise) that the proposals under 9902 (m) be deleted and be rewritten to change Chapter 71 only in regards to national level bargaining. (4) One of the issues that is most disturbing to UPTO is that the Department follows neither the procedures set out in the statute nor the procedures of the Administrative Procedures Act. Much of what should have been published in the Federal Register and subject to open debate and review of congress is hidden and reserved for "implementing issuances". This is a subversion of both processes. We recommend the DoD "start over" and do the process right. (5) The representatives of the Department tell us they have no authority to bind the Department or make agreements to changes in the proposed regulations during the meet and confer process. This also violates the law which clearly and unambiguously states, "The Secretary and the Director shall.meet and confer for not less than 30 calendar days with the employee representatives, in order to attempt to reach agreement on whether or how to proceed with those parts of the proposal" If your representatives do not have the authority to bind the Department then you are in violation of this part of the statue and are not in good faith attempting to reach agreement. We recommend you either participate in the "meet and confer" personally (the letter of the law) or give your representatives the authority to bind the Department and Office. (5) The law calls for separate processes for the overall NSPS and the 9902 (m) labor relations part of the statute. You have failed to do this. We recommend you start over and follow the law. Sincerely, President, United Power Trades Organization For the United Power Trades Organization