COUNCIL 222 2018 Executive Orders Reference Page
Govexec.com, October 19 - A three-judge panel in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on Thursday mostly denied a request by the Trump administration to expedite its appeal of a U.S. District Court ruling overturning the key provisions of three controversial workforce executive orders. read article
Federalnewsnetwork.com, Sept 25 - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has denied federal employee unions a chance for a rehearing on the merits of President Donald Trump's workforce executive orders. The court on Wednesday denied the unions' petition for a rehearing en banc.
A group of federal employee unions, which sued the Trump administration last June over the president's workforce executive orders on collective bargaining, official time and employee removals, in August had asked a full panel of judges to rehear their case. Their request follows a decision from a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals, which in July had overturned an August 2018 decision from a federal district court. The panel said the lower court didn't have jurisdiction to invalidate portions of the president's executive orders but denied the Trump administration an opportunity to immediately begin enforcing them.
The court´s decision not to grant an en banc rehearing of this vitally important case with far-reaching effects across the federal government is a sad day for the country," J. David Cox, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees, said in a statement. "While we review our options, hundreds of thousands of federal government workers will suffer as their access to union representation at the worksite is stripped away by the implementation of President Trump´s union-busting executive orders." read article
Govexec.com, Sept 25 - The Justice Department on Tuesday filed a notice that it would appeal a recent court decision that struck down three controversial workforce executive orders President Trump signed earlier this year to make it easier to fire federal workers and reduce the influence of federal employee unions.
The case will go to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
In a notice filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Assistant Attorney General Joseph Hunt said the administration will seek to overturn the August decision by U.S. District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, which found that the key provisions of the executive orders were unlawful. read article
Govexec.com - August 25 - U.S. District Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson late Friday night struck down most provisions of the Trump administration´s controversial workforce executive orders, concluding that they conflicted with the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act.
Jackson found that the three executive orders, which seek to make it easier to fire federal workers and significantly reduce how unions can collectively bargain and represent employees, disregard Congress´ conclusion that good-faith labor-management negotiations are "in the public interest." read article
federalnewsradio.com - August 25 - In a highly-anticipated decision, a federal district judge invalidated nine provisions of the president's executive orders on official time, collective bargaining and employee removals, in response to a series of legal challenges from a coalition of federal unions. The decision, which came late Friday night, prevents agencies from implementing or enacting the following provisions of the president's EOs:
1) The imposition of a 25 percent cap on the use of official time,
2) The prohibition against employees' right to petition and communicate with Congress,
3) The ban on the use of official time by union representatives to prepare and present grievances,
4) The one-hour per bargaining unit employee formula to be applied to set an aggregate cap on the use of official time,
5) The limitations placed on unions' use of agency facilities, such as office space and computers,
6) The exclusion of challenges to performance ratings and incentive pay from the scope of the negotiated grievance procedure,
7) The limitation of performance improvement periods (PIPs) to 30 days, with agencies alone having the discretion to apply longer periods,
8) The direction to agencies to press for the exclusion of removals from the scope of the negotiated grievance procedure, and,
9) The prohibition against bargaining over the "permissive" subjects. read article
Government Exec, July 26 - After months of posturing by the Trump administration and federal employee unions, both sides had their day in court Wednesday, as a federal judge spent four hours challenging both sides over the president's recent workforce executive orders.
More than a dozen federal employee unions have sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to block implementation of the executive orders, challenging their legality on a number of fronts. They have asserted that the orders conflict with the Civil Service Reform Act and that the act precludes the president from weighing in on collective bargaining altogether.
Jackson said she would take the arguments raised under advisement and issue a written ruling in the coming days. But she had one broader critique for how the Trump administration analyzed the Civil Service Reform Act in crafting its executive orders.
"You were very careful in citing the ´effective operation of government´ aspect of the law, but that´s only one aspect Congress was concerned about when they wrote it," she said. "Congress makes it very clear that it believes effective unions—and collective bargaining—are in the public interest. But these EOs are about half of that balance and not the other." read article
Government Exec, July 24 - Attorneys for the government plan to argue Wednesday that a federal court lacks jurisdiction to hear a legal challenge against President Trump´s recent workforce executive orders, and that unions were premature in filing the challenge. But a cursory look at the actions taken by the Trump administration and federal agencies since the orders´ enactment in May calls those claims into question. read article
Government Exec, July 12 - In a call with reporters, American Federation of Government Employees National President J. David Cox said that union access to office space is integral to labor groups being able to meet with and represent front-line employees as required by the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act. Union leaders representing employees at the Social Security Administration, the Veterans Affairs Department and the Bureau of Prisons said management is moving to evict unions from office space, preventing them from taking documents off-site and blocking them from using official time or unpaid leave to represent workers.
"Union officials at the Social Security Administration are being stripped of access to vital tools that help us represent working people as we are required to do by law, including telephones, computers, Internet access, and even bulletin boards," Cox said. "And as of yesterday, management has removed union access to all meeting rooms on agency property."
John Kostelnik, president of AFGE Local 3969, which represents Bureau of Prisons employees in Victorville, Calif., said the administration´s implementation of the executive order has hamstrung the agency's ability to respond to the massive influx of detainees from the White House's zero tolerance policy for undocumented immigrants and asylum seekers. read article
December 15, GovExec.com - Federal agencies may use President Trump's executive order abolishing labor-management councils across government as justification for throwing out collective bargaining agreements with their workforces, guidance from the Office of Personnel Management suggested Wednesday.
In a memo to agencies, acting OPM Director Kathleen McGettigan instructed departments to abolish their labor-management forums and eliminate any rules or policies related to those forums. The memo also ordered agencies to examine whether their agreements with federal employee unions include provisions involving the forums or other labor outreach for "pre-decisional involvement," and when applicable, to renegotiate or get rid of them. read article
Government Exec, June 19 - A federal judge announced Monday that she is consolidating three different legal challenges brought against President Trump's recent workforce executive orders, and has scheduled a hearing date of July 25.
Since the enactment of three controversial executive orders aimed at making it easier to fire federal employees and reducing the influence of federal employee unions, the American Federation of Government Employees; the National Treasury Employees Union; and the Federal Workers Alliance, a coalition of 13 smaller unions, all have sued the Trump administration challenging the edicts. AFGE and NTEU both have filed injunctions to prevent the orders from being implemented until after their court challenges have been resolved.
In an order issued June 18, U.S. District Court Judge for the District of Columbia Ketanji Brown Jackson consolidated all three cases, citing their similarity in facts and legal questions. She also agreed to "expedited briefing" of the case, meaning the court will skip traditional preliminary phases of the case and proceed directly to discussion of the merits, with a motion hearing scheduled for July 25. read article
Federalnewsradio.com, June 18 - The Department of Housing and Urban Development is moving quickly to implement President Donald Trump's recent executive order on official time by telling federal employee unions they can no longer use federal facilities or resources to do the organizations´ work. And the Social Security Administration and Department of Health and Human Services may be following in their footsteps.
HUD told the American Federation of Government Employees and the National Federation of Federal Employees that it wants to engage in midterm negotiations to implement the requirements under the EO. But one key proposal submitted by the agency would be for the unions to vacate federal office space by July 15.
"No union representative, when acting on behalf of the union, may be permitted the use of government property or any other agency resources. Such property and resources include office or meeting space, reserved parking spaces, phones, computers, computer systems, copy machines, paper, filing cabinets, keys, scanners, external drives, fax machines, use of printing services, subscriptions to information services (cyberdfeds, etc.) and all other government property or resources," HUD told AFGE on June 14. "The union shall have until July 15, 2018, to vacate all offices they currently occupy, return all government property they currently possess and cease using government resources. This applies to field and HQ." read article.
Read the June 15 Washington Post article "Social Security, HUD act on Trump's orders in move to emasculate unions"
Read the Gov Exec article "HUD Moves to Evict Union From Federal Office Space"
Read the Federal Times article "Why HUD is evicting an employee union from its offices"
NOW - AFGE.org and Council 222 ask you to FIGHT BACK against the three Executive Orders by clicking on the link at the end of this paragraph. When you click the link you will see the following notice, please comply - IMPORTANT: This information should not be downloaded using government equipment, read during duty time or sent to others using government equipment, because it suggests action to be taken in support of or against legislation. Do not use your government email address or government phone in contacting your Member of Congress.
AFGE.org is providing information on how you can FIGHT BACK.
Government Exec, June 14 A group of 23 House Democrats, including Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Whip Steny Hoyer, demanded Thursday that President Trump rescind three controversial executive orders that seek to make it easier for agencies to fire federal workers and significantly curb the influence of federal employee unions. In a letter to Trump, the lawmakers said the executive orders erode statutorily required protections for whistleblowers, and make it easier to politicize hiring and firing decisions in the federal workplace. read article
Government Exec, June 13 A group of 21 House Republicans sent a letter to President Trump Sunday asking him to reverse course on three controversial executive orders aimed at making it easier to fire federal workers and curbing the influence of federal employee unions. In the letter, the GOP members of Congress touted the work of federal employees and asked the White House to rescind the executive orders and uphold the current law. read article
Government Exec, May 31 - The largest union representing federal employees sued the Trump administration Wednesday over President Trump´s executive order significantly curbing the use of official time by union representatives, arguing the edict violates the First Amendment and exceeds the president's constitutional authority.
In a lawsuit filed at the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the American Federation of Government Employees said the White House's Executive Order Ensuring Transparency, Accountability and Efficiency in Taxpayer Funded Union Time Use violates the First Amendment-guaranteed freedom of association and effectively rewrites portions of the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act without the assent of Congress. read article
Federal Times, May 27 - In three executive orders signed May 25, 2018, President Donald Trump took aim at making federal employees easier to fire while cutting back on union time.
• Merit System Principles
• Official Time
• Collective Bargaining
The first order fulfils a longstanding goal of the Trump administration in making it easier for the government to fire poor performers from federal positions. The order would limit the amount of time an employee under investigation for misconduct could spend on probation and encourage firings.
The second order specifically targets the use of official time, which allows federal employees to conduct union activities such as representing employees in disputes and negotiating contracts with the agency, by stating that federal employees must spend at least 75 percent of their time doing government work.
Official time use has recently come under fire by both OPM and members of Congress, who say that the rising amount of time spent per employee is a waste of taxpayer money. However, many experts have said that current methods for measuring official time use are likely wildly inaccurate.
The use of official time is protected under the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, and the amount of official time used by employees within an agency is usually up to the negotiations between unions and the agency.
The third of the executive orders calls for the renegotiation of such contracts, placing the responsibility for the negotiating strategy with the Office of Management and Budget within the White House and requiring that union contracts are posted online. read article