Dod Collective Bargaining Agreement

Democrats in the House of Representatives had included a provision in a 2020 finance bill prohibiting agencies from implementing or enforcing collective agreements or clauses or articles in a CBA that was not agreed upon by both a department and their federal union. Secretary Esper recently told the House Armed Services Committee that he did not ask for that authority, that he did not know why the White House had designed it, and that existing collective agreements had prevented DoD from fulfilling its mission. Neal said Congress could introduce some kind of law or provision that blocks or expands the exclusion of collective bargaining, which members of Congress would likely try to add to appropriations legislation or the annual Defense Authorization Act. Led by U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI), a member of the Armed Services Committee, and U.S. Senator Gary C. Peters (D-MI), a member of the Homeland Security Committee – Governmental Affairs Committee, comes the letter on the heels of a Trump administration memorandum that gave Secretary of State Esper the power to remove tariffs for DoD`s 750,000 civilian workers. , including a various blue collar which is made up of concierges. , firefighters, food service personnel, teachers, corporate service technicians, welders and many other professionals. While Trump`s memo allows the defense minister to exclude doD agencies or sub-components from collective bargaining rights, that doesn`t mean – at least here – that the secretary will use that new authority. But past debates on national security and collective bargaining have not gone far because they are often not popular, Neal said.

If DoD Secretary Mark Esper chooses to exclude certain political groups from the Department of Collective Bargaining, the department must publish these findings in the federal registry. To date, it does not appear that he has taken any decisions to exclude any of them. According to a union lawyer, if the policy is implemented, union agreements concerning civilian employees of the Ministry of Defence would suddenly no longer be in force. Fellows of the 2007 Heritage Foundation argued that collective bargaining was tedious and that „staff comfort“ provided priority national security. The president`s memorandum, signed on January 29 by President Trump and first reported on February 8 by government management, suggests that unionized Department of Defense personnel could pose a threat to „national security“ and that, if necessary, the tariffs of these employees could be eliminated.