Va is obviously not the only major agency to propose negotiating proposals that resemble the provisions of the president`s executive mandates. Following a decision by the Federal Service Impasses Panel, the Department of Health and Human Services introduced new negotiating articles, some of which resemble the President`s EOs. The National Treasury Employees Union refused to recognize the panel`s decision as a new comprehensive collective agreement. Ibidun Roberts: The union seeks fairness in the agreement. That is why we always offer conditions that require fair action from management. B for example, by communicating something to employees, by allowing employees to react, management performs due diligence, such as an investigation before making a decision. So these are things that the Union would impose. And the panel pulled out these things. There are therefore several clauses in which the Agency suggested that they would simply comply with the law, and the panel gave them that none of the procedures were in place. It will not be clear how management will carry out these tasks, because the body has resumed the procedures that we would have proposed and negotiated. Ibidun Roberts: Oh, yes, it`s possible. The parties can always agree on their own, we can always go back and renegotiate.
We just need to agree. The Union cannot insist. Management, the agency should agree with us. As long as that happens, we can renegotiate. So President Biden votes, as soon as he sits down, he can give that order. And we would be happy to go to the table and negotiate fairly. Therefore, I conclude that the VA Center changed the terms of employment of workers in the collective agreement unit and that the amendment was implemented before the end of the negotiations. The half-term negotiations are excluded, which are stated in each article. Some of the bargaining positions set by the VA stem from the requirements set out by three executive orders signed by President Donald Trump in May 2018: reduce the official time for union representatives, remove union representatives from agency offices and renegotiate collective agreements to meet those priorities.
A series of new negotiating proposals, presented last month to AFGE and the public, has raised concerns among a bipartisan group of 128 members of the House of Representatives. The proposal significantly changes the way workers can work remotely and requires people with telework contracts to travel to their duty stations four days a week. People with compressed work schedules, z.B. Employees who work four 10-hour days per week would not be eligible for the program and employees would have to reapply every four months to work remotely.