Mark Matthews Home Inspections, Inc.
 

Customer Login

User Name
Password


Air Force Collective Bargaining Agreement

December 2, 2020 by MMinspect

Executive Order (EO) 13836, Developing Efficient, Effective, and Cost-Reducing Approaches to Federal Sector Collective Bargaining, signed by the President on May 25, 2018, requires agencies to submit any long-term collective agreement (CBA) and its expiry date within 30 days of the CBA`s entry into force. EO 13836 also requires OPM to make these CBAs available to the public on the internet. This promotes transparency by allowing the public to consult the types of agreements between federal agencies and industry unions. Agencies are also required to submit arbitration awards to OPM within 10 business days of receipt. OPM has issued a memorandum on the publication of the CBA database, which contains guidelines on agency requirements for CBAs and arbitration awards. Furthermore, in that case, the record provides no evidence that Patti Williams wrote and executed the letters in which she invoked arbitration while working on the official time in accordance with her steward status under the DLA master`s agreement. In fact, the statement by Williams and the President of the Union, Tom Scott, was that she was not preparing the letters while it was official and that statement had not been questioned or refuted. (Tr. 31, 37-38, 49) More importantly, it was the testimony of John Pugh, the respondent`s representative, who rejected the letters in which the arbitration claimed that it was for him to be of tenure or not, whether it was his status as a representative under the DLA employment contract that prevented him from working on matters related to the AFMC agreement. (Tr. 63, 66-67) If a principal employment contract contains restrictions on the use of official time, a union delegate may be excluded from work on matters related to this agreement, while he is on an official date under another agreement.3 However, these are not the facts presented in this case and the excessively extensive disqualification imposed by the respondent`s representative is not supported by the law.

, and no documents were presented to this authority at the time of rejection or to the oral procedure. As the appointment of Patti Williams 100% (100%) Official Time Union Steward under the DLA employment contract did not prevent her from supporting Local 987 in another function, a positive defence was not established by the respondent and the refusal to recognize a designated representative of the Union violated the statute. In his correspondence with Local 987 and again in his testimony at the hearing, John Pugh indicated that his refusal to recognize Patti Williams as a duly authorized union representative was justified by a violation of Section 4.13 a of the AFMC Executive Contract. (Jt Ex. 3, 9; T. 61-62). Essentially, the respondent expresses an interpretation of the contract with the affirmative defence.2 The respondent takes the position that the use of 3 “may” must give its speculative meaning and not its permissive meaning. Whether work on a collective agreement with a limitation on the use of official time can be carried out by a union representative working in a time of service in accordance with a second collective agreement is an issue that the Authority is obliged to address if it is properly presented by facts that do not exist in this case.


No Comments

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Mark Matthews Home Inspections, Inc.
284 Electra Lane
Westfield, NC 27053
Telephone: 336-618-6096
Email: MMinspect1@yahoo.com