In AFGE`s opinion, the union contradicted VA`s proposal to remove entire sections of the new collective agreement, which official data say could lead to ongoing collective disputes and called many of the ministry`s proposals « contrary to the law. » 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. « If the parties are not included in the [master] collective agreement, they are in an indeterminate state of bargaining because there is a legal obligation of collective agreement for unresolved matters, » the union wrote. Such a result is inefficient, inefficient and costly. . In addition, the non-coverage of issues in the agreement requires that each loan facility be implemented in its own policies, which will lead to inconsistencies. « In articles that have not been fully decided [in contracts], the department presents proposals that subordinate the [collective control agreement] to agency policy and future government-wide rules and regulations, » AFGE wrote. « [Here] the department`s repeated and insistent proposals require the union to waive its right to negotiate important working conditions for departmental policy and then adopt government-wide rules and regulations.
This body has made it clear that it will not put forward such proposals. « Under the law, only the federal labour relations agency, not the FSIP, can deny an assertion that a proposal is non-negotiable, » the union wrote. « In this regard, the Authority has not been interested in the negotiation or applicability of [executive] market proposals. If the panel imposed the terms of the E.O., the panel would essentially have made a negotiable conclusion – that the terms of the executive`s mandate were enforceable. In addition, the union has a pending bargaining complaint on the issue of the official time [before the FLRA]. The CBAs found in this database were transmitted to OPM by executive services and agencies. This database is based on information provided to OPM by executive services and agencies and may not contain all existing CBAs within the executive. OPM will regularly update this database when existing OPMs and new CBAs are made available.
« There is no reason to believe that the Authority`s interpretation of a provision of its enabling statute would not lead the court to take into account the appointment clause, due process and legal fitness rights that are formulated here, which may require a review of the specific functions of the panel and the Authority in the management of the various provisions of the statute » wrote the government.