Posted on 09/19/2002 10:30:28 AM PDT by MoodyBlu
This morning, John Carr, president of the National Air Traffic Controller Association, delivered a speech to the Chicago Kent College of Law on the subject of labor relations under the Bush Administration. Also in attendance were representatives from Office of Personnel Management and NTEU. Below is the text of the speech. Your comments are requested and appreciated.
*****************************************
Ladies and Gentlemen, distinguished panelists and guests, good morning. My name is John Carr, and I am President of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. My union represents over 15,000 air traffic controllers and five thousand other aviation safety critical positions at the Federal Aviation Administration and the Department of Defense.
The topic for this mornings’ panel was titled, “Labor Relations Under The Bush Administration.” I think the title couldn’t have been more disingenuous. To be accurate the title should have said, “Whatever Became of Labor Relations under the Bush Administration?” Or perhaps another title to be considered could have been, “Labor…Under The Thumb of the Bush Administration.”
In the time allotted please allow me to explain….and it’s a good thing there’s only a short time allotted, because it would take all day to catalog this Administration’s assault on labor in general, and organized labor specifically. During his campaign, President Bush promised the American people he would be "a uniter, not a divider." But while the country did unite around President Bush and the war on terrorism following the horror of the Sept. 11 attacks, when it came to the nuts and bolts of governing all the people, the President has created a huge divide between the needs of America's labor community and the wants of Business and corporate America.
A brief chronological litany is in order. Shortly after taking office, February 17, 2001 President Bush revoked Executive Order 12871, which created and maintained Partnerships between labor and management in the federal sector. All partnerships between workers and their managers were dissolved. All efforts at collaborative decision-making were effectively wiped out with the stroke of a pen.
In its budget request to Congress, also in February of 2001, the Bush Administration proposed a study of successful privatized air traffic control systems. The language said, and I quote, “the Administration will examine the success that various nations, including Canada, have experienced with individual air traffic control systems owned and operated by private companies."
That study was never completed, and it’s a good thing it wasn’t. Staffing is so bad in Australia they had to abandon the tower to take a restroom break. NavCanada is hundreds of millions of dollars in debt, and shutting down sectors to save money on staffing. Great Britain’s privatized air traffic control system is the poster child for inept management of a safety function, and members of Parliament are on record warning the United States against choosing the same path.
In March 20, 2001 the Bush administration successfully repealed an ergonomics standard that was 10 years in the making. Never mind that workers have been waiting over a decade for legal protections, they were then forced to wait another year while the administration dragged its heels and missed numerous self-imposed deadlines. On April 5, 2002, the Bush administration announced a meaningless measure that further delays action and provides workers no protection against ergonomic hazards-the nation’s biggest job safety problem. The plan the administration developed is woefully inadequate and serves only the interests of its corporate backers, who are now officially off the hook for protecting workers from ergonomic hazards.
In the summer of 2001, the President announced his "Management Agenda" - his strategy for improving the management of the Federal government. However, his scheme seeks nothing more than to increase management rights and prerogatives while at the same time diminishing the involvement of employees and their unions. A main component of the Presidents plan is to accelerate the pace of competitive outsourcing. All agencies have been directed to contract at least 5 percent of their commercial jobs by the end of FY02; 10 percent by the end of FY03 and 50 percent by 2006. Fortunately, both the House and Senate have wisely included language in their FY03 Treasury Postal Appropriations bill to prevent enforcement of these privatization quotas. Yet, now the Administration is threatening to veto the bill over this language.
On January 7, 2002 President Bush issued an executive order barring five sections of the Justice Department from union representation. He also dismissed seven members of the Federal Service Impasses Panel. For the employees who represent these sections of the Justice department, it means that their union rights are gone. The president’s reason behind this decision is that if the union were to strike or resist by other means that National Security would be weakened. However, since all five sections are government employees they cannot strike due to Title 5,Section 7311 of US Code. Never before have any of these departments disrupted the ability of the Federal Government to pursue any issue relating to National Security. From a labor perspective, the main goal for the Bush Administration here is clear.
Since April of 2002 the position of general counsel for the FLRA has sat vacant. The Federal Labor Relations Authority is an independent agency responsible for administering the labor-management relations program for 1.9 million Federal employees worldwide. The president must nominate with the advice and consent of the Senate the person who fills that position for a five-year term, and so far the president has not done his part. Until that job is filled, the FLRA cannot process unfair labor practice allegations on representation matters or decide on appeals of a Regional Director's decision not to issue a ULP complaint. The Administration has recently shown some movement on this issue, but as of today this vital position remains unfilled.
On June 4, 2002, two days before the most massive restructuring of the Federal Government in over 45 years, the Bush Administration amended Executive Order 13180 without any fanfare. And it’s no wonder. Bushs’ amended Order deleted four words from a Clinton Executive Order on air traffic control. And the four words the Bush Administration chose to delete? “An inherently governmental function.”
Ladies and Gentlemen I don’t recall anyone quibbling with the inherently governmental nature of our work on September 11th, 2001 when the men and women I represent landed over five thousand aircraft in a little over two hours without a single incident. I don’t recall anyone questioning our loyalty to our nation or the governmental nature of the service we provide when we caused the skies above your head to fall as silent as they were on the day the Wright Brothers ran down the sand dunes at Kitty Hawk. I’m sure you know the aircraft used in Afghanistan, as well as those used over Iraq and in every other conflict we find ourselves in, are not shipped over there by boat. They fly there, and the men and women I represent work them. The provision of air traffic control services is intrinsically linked with the public interest, and as such is an inherently governmental function under OMB Circular A76. The safety of our nations’ skies should not be for sale.
Recently, the House Government Reform’s Technology & Procurement Policy Subcommittee released the Commercial Activities Panel Best Value Report. One of the main problems that laborers face as a result of this report is that now it is easier for contractors to be handed work that is normally performed by federal workers. Also, the report further takes advantage of loopholes in the A-76 process by allowing contractors to legally prevent federal workers from competing for their jobs. Even if federal workers did achieve the recommended criteria of a federal work proposal there is still a chance that their jobs could be contracted out as a result of the CAP true values report. The Bush Administration is looking to circumvent the A-76 process, by Executive Order if necessary, in order to contract out as much work as possible.
And just this morning, the United States Senate will take up debate on the president’s homeland security proposal. As part of his proposal to create a new Homeland Security Department, President Bush is insisting that he have the authority to eliminate collective bargaining rights exercised for years by 50,000 federal workers and he insists on eliminating core civil service protections for all 170,000 federal workers who would be transferred to the new Department.
Under existing law, the President can issue an executive order to exclude workers from collective bargaining if their work is related to intelligence, counterintelligence and investigative or security work which is related to national security. Through the years, this authority has been used by presidents to exclude federal employees whose work is directly related to national security. However, the establishment of a new Homeland Security Department creates an extraordinary opportunity for this President to misuse this authority and to further an anti-labor agenda. Under this President, “Homeland Security” could become synonymous with “national security” and justify the termination of collective bargaining rights for 50,000 employees who are currently covered by agreements and will be moved to the new Department.
The President is demanding that the heart of civil service rules, including those regarding pay, classification system, performance appraisals and appeal rights be eliminated for employees of this new Department. In its place, the Administration would develop a new system, with greater flexibility to determine individual pay rates, including whether an individual would receive annual cost-of-living increases granted by Congress. The system would open the door for favoritism, discrimination and cronyism in the setting of pay and break down the internal equity that provides workers engaged in work with similar skills, effort and responsibility comparable pay.
Also of great concern is the Administration’s insistence on eliminating the appeal rights of employees. The Administration cynically argues that it would preserve whistleblower protections and safeguards against discrimination and patronage. But these protections are meaningless if employees have no right to challenge a firing or suspension.
So let’s wrap up, shall we? The Administration chose Linda Chavez as Secretary of Labor, who labor themselves viewed as staunchly anti-worker. The Administration chose corporate tax breaks over worker relief in the economic stimulus legislation in December. Ergonomics protections were overturned. The power of the presidency was brought to bear with Executive Order attacks on workers rights and unions, stripping clerical and paraprofessional employees who had been unionized since the mid-70s of their exclusive representation.
The Administration openly supports paycheck deception legislation, a blatant attempt to silence unions. The Administration’s budget and tax legislation favors the wealthy over the workers, and the Administration continues it’s efforts to privatize Social Security, although you don’t hear too much about investing retirement funds in the stock market anymore…pretty much ever since this Administration took us from a seven trillion dollar budget surplus to a several hundred billion dollar national debt in just under ten months.
The Administration’s support for Fast Track and the Free Trade Area of The Americas threatens US worker’s jobs but more than that it has jeopardized the rights of workers and their families around the globe, where they lack basic protections for workers rights and the environment. The Administration has openly sided with airline management by telling everyone from pilots to mechanics that they will intervene in any labor dispute … so much for 40 years of good faith bargaining under the Railway Labor Act.
From the minimum wage fight to civil liberties and job safety, this Administration has chosen to attack American workers. Now this Administration has waged a very successful war in Afghanistan, and they are to be applauded for that. But they have also waged a very successful war against working families and labor, and they should not be given a free pass for that. The attacks last September brought out the very best and the very worst in mankind. It also brought out the very best and the very worst in politics and public policy for working men and women in this country.
I heard a congressman recently speak on this issue, and he likened it to profiteering. We all remember on September 12th, when many gas stations across the country jacked their prices up to five and seven dollars a gallon, not because that’s what they paid for the gas or because it represented a fair market price, but because they could. The climate of fear made profiteering possible.
American workers are now facing political profiteering, where workers’ rights, workplace protections, ergonomic standards, appeal rights and collective bargaining are being trampled by people who wrap themselves in the flag while raising the specter of terrorism to achieve their anti-labor agenda.
While organized labor represents only one twentieth of this nations’ population, on September 11th it represented over one fourth of her dead. And while people were running for away from those horrors, union men and women were running in. Running in to the fire. Running in to the danger. Running in to save lives. Running in to make a difference.
The American dream lives on and the goodwill and the unbending spirit of this great nation live on. At the same time, we must remain ever vigilant if we are to prevent future attacks like those we have all just witnessed. Attacks against our buildings, attacks against our cities, attacks against our citizens, and attacks on workers rights, workplace safety and worker security. God bless you all, and thank you very much.
MoodyBlu
This is a clue to me that this Carr fellow may not be on the up and up...
Interesting how he glosses over the fact that three airplanes were hijacked without alarming the air traffic controllers and wants credit for landing all the airplanes smoothly in 2 hours on September 11.
OK, so if this is true why doesn't the New Labour (leftist/socialist) goverment of Tony Blair nationalize the U.K.'s Air Traffic Control System? Maybe it's not so bad?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.