DoD canceled all union agreements

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:those contracts are not helping anyone - they are only there for unions to make money. Tell me anything significant they negotiated recently that was helpful to feds?

Union dues are not taxpayer dollars. You are free to not pay your dues if you don't want to, and you still get to benefit from the union's work and then moan about it here. I find the dues worthwhile for a lot of reasons, including good benefits that the union negotiated, like backup childcare access and free dental. But the union does not run on taxpayer dollars.

The negotiations with the agency were done by agency employees - people who have real, everyday jobs at the agency - who are allowed to use paid work time for union business. Because the only way to meet with management is to do it during business hours.

Yes and for the name of union business, they just slack around all day. The time they spend on BS are all tax payer $s and needs to be eliminated right away.

Agree and disagree. Tine spent on union business should be tracked, as taxpayer money is being used to pay the salaries for their actual jobs. Unless they are employed by the union, they should still be working the jobs they were hired/paid to do and taking designated union leave to conduct union business. It's on management to track and enforce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The anti union sentiment on this board is so ignorant. Unions are the reason you (including unrepresented staff such as managers) have the hours, leave, and benefits you do - what they negotiate becomes the norm. Unions raise the floor for everybody and keep the worst of manager abuse at bay.

And yes, they need to negotiate on work time because the managers wouldn't agree to meet with them after hours.

Govt unions are a polite fiction. It is illegal for them to strike, so what was the leverage they used to negotiate? Political endorsement, most union members vote the way they want not based on union and it is impossible to verify.

Quiet quitting, calling in, quitting, grievances, candidate endorsements

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The anti union sentiment on this board is so ignorant. Unions are the reason you (including unrepresented staff such as managers) have the hours, leave, and benefits you do - what they negotiate becomes the norm. Unions raise the floor for everybody and keep the worst of manager abuse at bay.

And yes, they need to negotiate on work time because the managers wouldn't agree to meet with them after hours.

Govt unions are a polite fiction. It is illegal for them to strike, so what was the leverage they used to negotiate? Political endorsement, most union members vote the way they want not based on union and it is impossible to verify.

Quiet quitting, calling in, quitting, grievances, candidate endorsements

Quiet quitting? That just adds fuel to the idea that Feds don’t work much. If you work rule, no one will notice.

Calling in is effectively illegal strike (1981 PATCO strike) and can result in firings

Quitting. Nose, meet face.

Grievances. Courts are controlled by political parties

Candidate endorsements — people are polarized, I would bet at least half union members voted for Trump.

Without being able to strike, they depend upon the consideration and gifted power of the politicians. That era has ended.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:those contracts are not helping anyone - they are only there for unions to make money. Tell me anything significant they negotiated recently that was helpful to feds?

Union dues are not taxpayer dollars. You are free to not pay your dues if you don't want to, and you still get to benefit from the union's work and then moan about it here. I find the dues worthwhile for a lot of reasons, including good benefits that the union negotiated, like backup childcare access and free dental. But the union does not run on taxpayer dollars.

The negotiations with the agency were done by agency employees - people who have real, everyday jobs at the agency - who are allowed to use paid work time for union business. Because the only way to meet with management is to do it during business hours.

Yes and for the name of union business, they just slack around all day. The time they spend on BS are all tax payer $s and needs to be eliminated right away.

Agree and disagree. Tine spent on union business should be tracked, as taxpayer money is being used to pay the salaries for their actual jobs. Unless they are employed by the union, they should still be working the jobs they were hired/paid to do and taking designated union leave to conduct union business. It's on management to track and enforce.

You know that doesn't happen, right? Tell me one union rep at your agency that actually does his/her job. Union gets paid by dues and these people are hired on Govt salaries so where is the money going?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:those contracts are not helping anyone - they are only there for unions to make money. Tell me anything significant they negotiated recently that was helpful to feds?

Union dues are not taxpayer dollars. You are free to not pay your dues if you don't want to, and you still get to benefit from the union's work and then moan about it here. I find the dues worthwhile for a lot of reasons, including good benefits that the union negotiated, like backup childcare access and free dental. But the union does not run on taxpayer dollars.

The negotiations with the agency were done by agency employees - people who have real, everyday jobs at the agency - who are allowed to use paid work time for union business. Because the only way to meet with management is to do it during business hours.

Yes and for the name of union business, they just slack around all day. The time they spend on BS are all tax payer $s and needs to be eliminated right away.

Agree and disagree. Tine spent on union business should be tracked, as taxpayer money is being used to pay the salaries for their actual jobs. Unless they are employed by the union, they should still be working the jobs they were hired/paid to do and taking designated union leave to conduct union business. It's on management to track and enforce.

You know that doesn't happen, right? Tell me one union rep at your agency that actually does his/her job. Union gets paid by dues and these people are hired on Govt salaries so where is the money going?

They have full time lawyers. And the money goes towards lawsuits like the innumerable ones in the past year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:those contracts are not helping anyone - they are only there for unions to make money. Tell me anything significant they negotiated recently that was helpful to feds?

Union dues are not taxpayer dollars. You are free to not pay your dues if you don't want to, and you still get to benefit from the union's work and then moan about it here. I find the dues worthwhile for a lot of reasons, including good benefits that the union negotiated, like backup childcare access and free dental. But the union does not run on taxpayer dollars.

The negotiations with the agency were done by agency employees - people who have real, everyday jobs at the agency - who are allowed to use paid work time for union business. Because the only way to meet with management is to do it during business hours.

Yes and for the name of union business, they just slack around all day. The time they spend on BS are all tax payer $s and needs to be eliminated right away.

Agree and disagree. Tine spent on union business should be tracked, as taxpayer money is being used to pay the salaries for their actual jobs. Unless they are employed by the union, they should still be working the jobs they were hired/paid to do and taking designated union leave to conduct union business. It's on management to track and enforce.

sure and what other waste they spend money on? Did you ever see their expenses/statements for what happened with your dues? Also, they have been useless in getting any significant raises to federal employees. Half of the union reps I know at my agency have side businesses going on and never at their desk.

You know that doesn't happen, right? Tell me one union rep at your agency that actually does his/her job. Union gets paid by dues and these people are hired on Govt salaries so where is the money going?

They have full time lawyers. And the money goes towards lawsuits like the innumerable ones in the past year.

[Anonymous]

and where else the money goes? I have never seen their expenses or P&L sheet and they are allowed to do whatever they want. The work towards federal employees raise is useless.

Also, my agencies union reps are never around and half of them I know have side businesses going on. WTH

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Whether you liked them or not, you should still be appalled that they are just cancelling an agreed to contract.

This.
Ours was cancelled March 2025 with no notice. It helped bring morale down quickly since RTO was no longer up for discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whether you liked them or not, you should still be appalled that they are just cancelling an agreed to contract.

This.
Ours was cancelled March 2025 with no notice. It helped bring morale down quickly since RTO was no longer up for discussion.

and Unions didn't do anything to support or fight against it.

I don't see them any different than our previous congressman, Connelly who would just bring a bill at the start of year for 5-7% fed salary raise and it don't go much further in house/senate. He never fought for feds and received all their votes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whether you liked them or not, you should still be appalled that they are just cancelling an agreed to contract.

This.
Ours was cancelled March 2025 with no notice. It helped bring morale down quickly since RTO was no longer up for discussion.

and Unions didn't do anything to support or fight against it.

I don't see them any different than our previous congressman, Connelly who would just bring a bill at the start of year for 5-7% fed salary raise and it don't go much further in house/senate. He never fought for feds and received all their votes.

Connelly and the new congressman Wilkinshaw are lame for feds. why would they care though since it is an easy seat for Dems to win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whether you liked them or not, you should still be appalled that they are just cancelling an agreed to contract.

This.
Ours was cancelled March 2025 with no notice. It helped bring morale down quickly since RTO was no longer up for discussion.

and Unions didn't do anything to support or fight against it.

I don't see them any different than our previous congressman, Connelly who would just bring a bill at the start of year for 5-7% fed salary raise and it don't go much further in house/senate. He never fought for feds and received all their votes.

Unions have and are still currently fighting in court over the union exclusion EO. Anytime they get a win, the government just appeals and drags it out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whether you liked them or not, you should still be appalled that they are just cancelling an agreed to contract.

This.
Ours was cancelled March 2025 with no notice. It helped bring morale down quickly since RTO was no longer up for discussion.

and Unions didn't do anything to support or fight against it.

I don't see them any different than our previous congressman, Connelly who would just bring a bill at the start of year for 5-7% fed salary raise and it don't go much further in house/senate. He never fought for feds and received all their votes.

Unions have and are still currently fighting in court over the union exclusion EO. Anytime they get a win, the government just appeals and drags it out.

Right the only “power” unions have is essentially class action court cases, and the government is/owns the courts.

[Anonymous]

That's why there is no point of having unions since they are not effective with current laws and everything else.

[Anonymous]

I don't like unions and don't care if the loafers got their contracts canceled.