|
Protect DoD Workers
Sign the Inslee-Van Hollen Letter
Dear Colleague:
We are writing today to ask for your support in urging
OPM Director Kay
Coles James and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in honoring
the
National Defense Authorization Act for FY2004 by providing workers'
representatives with a written proposal of the changes for the National
Security Personnel System (NSPS).
To this date, DoD has not provided any specific details
to the workers'
elected representatives in the United DoD Workers Coalition. The
NSPS
proposal has been a source of concern for many workers, and it has
been
expressed repeatedly by Members of the House and Senate. This is
in direct
contradiction of the law's requirement, which clearly states that
management
"shall provide to the [representatives of affected employees,]
a written
description of the proposed system."
I urge you to sign on to the Inslee-Van Hollen letter
asking the DoD to
comply with the law and provide a written copy of the specific details
of
the proposal to the workers and their elected representatives in
the DoD
civilian workforce. The letter is attached below for your review.
Please
contact Nick Shipley (5-6311) or Phil Alperson (5-5341) if you have
any
further questions.
Very Truly Yours
,JAY INSLEE CHRIS VAN HOLLEN
Member of Congress Member of Congress
Dear Secretary Rumsfeld and Director James:
We are writing to express our concern that the Department
may be
about to publish the proposed National Security Personnel System
in the
Federal Register later this month, before discussing the proposal
with the
elected representatives of the Department's civilian workforce,
the United
DoD Workers Coalition (UDWC). Such action would be contrary to the
requirement that Congress included in Section 9902 of the National
Defense
Authorization Act for FY 2004, stating that management "shall
provide to the
[representatives of affected employees,] a written description of
the
proposed system." Failure to provide the employee representatives
with a
copy of the proposed system would also violate management's duty
under the
Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute to provide the
union with
the information needed for the proper performance of its representational
duties.
Although Department management has met several times
with the UDWC,
our understanding is that it has not yet provided the employees'
representatives with the specific details of the proposed personnel
system.
The Department's actions in developing the system have already led
to wide
concern by the Department's employees and their representatives,
as well as
by Members of Congress that the result of the process will be unfair
limits
on civil service protections and collective bargaining rights for
Department
employees.
We understand that you have responded to the union's
request to
review the proposal in advance of publication by stating that unions,
Congress and any other interested parties may provide public comments
for
consideration before implementation of the proposal. We also understand
that you believe, however, that providing a copy of the proposal
before
publication would give the union an unfair advantage over others.
The opportunity, available to all, to submit public comments in
the
agency rulemaking process is not a substitute for the union's right
to
obtain and review information in its role as the employee's certified
bargaining representative. Nothing in the Administrative Procedure
Act, or
any other federal statute, prohibits the Department from providing
the union
with a copy of the proposal in advance. It is essential that you
proceed
with the development of such an important human resources system
in the most
transparent way possible.
We urge you, therefore, before publishing the proposal
in the
Federal Register, to provide a written copy to the employees'
representatives. Additionally, we request that you provide a copy
to the
House Committee on Government Reform. We would appreciate your replying
to
this letter, including a copy of the proposal, no later than December
31st,
2004 or before the Department publishes the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
in
the Federal Register, whichever is earlier. We look forward to receiving
your response.
Very Truly Yours,
Signers thru 12-13-04: Abercrombie, Ackerman,
Andrews, Baca, Baldwin, Boswell, Boucher, Brady (PA), Brown (OH),
Case, Conyers, Cooper, Costello, Davis (CA), Davis (IL), DeLauro,
Dicks, Farr, Filner, Frank (MA), Green (TX), Grijalva, Honda, Jones
(NC), Kennedy (RI), Kilpatrick, Kind, Langevin, Lantos, Levin, Lynch,
Maloney, Markey, Matheson, McCarthy (NY), McDermott, McGovern, McIntyre,
Michaud, George Miller (CA), Miller (NC), Nadler, Napolitano, Oberstar,
Olver, Ortiz, Owens, Pallone, Payne, Rangel, Reyes, Linda Sanchez
(CA), Loretta Sanchez (CA), Sanders, Serrano, Slaughter, Solis,
Strickland, Tauscher, Taylor (MS), Udall (NM), Van Hollen, Waters,
Watson, Waxman, Weiner, Wexler, Woolsey.
NSPS Developments: DOD Begins Implementation of
NSPS Over Congressional Objections
- Statement by Senator Edward M. Kennedy on
the Response of the Bush Administration on Transparency in National
Security Personnel Regulations GO
>
- Letter to Kennedy Jointly Signed by OPM Director
Kay Cole James and DOD Deputy Secretary Paul Wolfowitz--Dated
December 3, 2004 (pdf) GO
>
- DOD Coalition Challenges Claims by Wolfowitz
and James--Dated December 8, 2004 GO
>
- An Open Letter from Metal Trades Department
President Ron Ault Regarding NSPS GO
>
- Defense Moving to New Personnel System--December
12, 2004; Page C02--Washington Post Article by Stephen Barr GO
>
|
