Trouble in Toronto
Just before the New
Year the officers at Toronto Pre-flight Inspection received a jolt. Long time director John Smarsh was reassigned and Jim
Torgerson came on board. Torgerson wasted no time in trampling employee rights in the name of the NIAP. Pre-flight director Jennifer Kava responded to the charges by stating she would do whatever
necessary to make Toronto more efficient. She made no indication if she would begin by taking the airlines to task and help
ease the mass congestion at peak times, the staffing problems, low morale and overall poor management of Toronto Pre-flight.
The union has responded
with unfair labor practice charges and grievances for failure of the agency to bargain. We expect victory or meaningful negotiation
in the coming months. Our message to the Toronto employees is to sit, tight, work hard, keep the faith and keep your head
up. Help is on the way.
AFGE 2580 WEBSITE
RELAUNCHED
The local has relaunched
the website which will contain the online copy of these newsletters as wel as all past newsletters. It can be reached at http://afge2580vp.tripod.com/afge2580/. We hope you enjoy it.
Ronald Spinelli New
Chief Steward in Toronto
Long time Steward Ron Spinelli has taken over as Chief Steward
in Toronto for Andrew Korzak whom resigned for personal reasons. Ron is a hard worker, very knowledgeable and is not afraid
to do what is right. He is a tremendous representative for the Union. Please give Ron your full support.
Marc Smith New
Chief Steward in Batavia Detention Facility
Marc Smith has been elected Chief Steward by a solid 6-3 majority
of his fellow Stewards. Marc is a solid representative and the officers in Batavia will benefit from his solid leadership
and commitment to the officers in Batavia.
Negotiations started
for parking privileges for AFGE Union members at Rainbow Bridge.
Negotiations aimed at making Lot 1 available for AFGE union
members.
Recently Local 2580 President Patrick Law and Raymond Goll
of the Niagara Parks commission began talks in regards to extending parking privileges to AFGE Union members. While the talks
are in their infancy they center on a yearly lump sum payment for use of lot 1 (state lot, directly next to the bridge) during
the non-peak, non-summer months. Currently all officers are required to park in the parking garage at the Rainbow Mall. The local will keep you updated on this as it develops.
FAA Employee Group Decries
How 'Pay Band' Limit Affects Raises
Monday, January 17, 2005; Page B02
For the third consecutive year, about 800 employees at the Federal Aviation Administration are getting a pay
raise as a lump-sum payment rather than as an increase in their base pay because they have bumped up against the top of their
"pay band."
FAA Administrator Marion C. Blakey told FAA employees last week that she would not expand the pay bands --
which are broad salary ranges for occupations or categories of jobs -- because the agency's latest survey shows that agency
employees are paid about 14 percent above the market average for similar private-sector jobs.
A group of FAA employees contends that the decision to hold the line on the pay bands is unfair and reduces
the value of their pensions and other salary-based benefits. Adjustments to the base pay count toward retirement credits,
but lump-sum payments do not.
Of about 38,000 employees under the agency's "core compensation" system, about 20,600 -- because of union
contracts and other reasons -- get raises to their base pay that put them over the top of their pay band, the group calculates.
Tim O'Hara, an FAA employee, said he believes that the FAA compensation program is "not a pay system but more
like a caste system." O'Hara is a board member of Local 3300 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees,
one of several FAA unions.
In an e-mail to employees, Blakey said she understands "that for many employees, the issue is not how much
they are paid, but rather the different rules that apply to other employees."
She added, "I share this concern because I believe our compensation policies should be as consistent as possible."
She said that the FAA will work to move all employees under a policy reflecting market-based compensation
and that union contracts, negotiated before she arrived, will be renegotiated to make for a more consistent pay policy.
Union contracts require semiannual adjustments to pay bands for air traffic controllers, and all pay adjustments
go to base salaries of airway specialists.
Blakey said she has approved a 3.15 percent increase for employees covered by the FAA core compensation system.
In addition, she said, some employees will receive a pay raise based on their "superior contribution," which will vary in
size. Employees also will receive an average 1 percent increase in "locality pay," she said. FAA executives will receive a
2.5 percent raise, she said.
In her e-mail, Blakey noted that the departments of Defense and Homeland Security plan to launch pay-for-performance
systems and promised that the FAA "will be comparing our policies with those proposed by these other agencies." She said the
FAA will hire an outside consultant in the next few months to assess its pay system.
Defense and Homeland Security probably will use pay bands in their new systems, officials said. Those two
departments cannot bargain over pay.
E-mail: barrs@washpost.com
Prosposed OTP Grievance
Settlement
Agreement would require
OTPs to return to FLETC for full CBP course.
Recently, the service
submitted a proposal to settle multiple grievances concerning the OTPs throughout the land. The following is the text of the
proposal as submitted for local review. The local has responded with numerous concerns. Please email any concerns you may
have to Frank Stanczak, Secretary Treasurer of NINS 117 at f1stanczak@aol.com.
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
WHEREAS,
This Settlement Agreement is entered into by and between the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) and the
National Immigration and Naturalization Service Council, American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, and their officers
and bargaining unit employees it represents (“NINSC”) (CBP and NINSC are hereinafter collectively referred to
as the “parties”). The parties hereby agree that a settlement has
been reached and stipulated to as follows:
WHEREAS, NINSC, through its national, regional
and local offices and on behalf of the bargaining unit employees it represents, has filed
grievances and invoked arbitrations against the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), alleging, among
other allegations, that INS was required by law to upgrade the journeyman level of GS-1816 Other Than Full Time Permanent
(“OTFTP”) Immigration Inspectors to the GS-11 grade; and
WHEREAS, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (“CBP”) has assumed the processing of those grievances and arbitrations, and desires to require
all of its OTFTP inspectional work-force to attend and successfully complete the CBP Officer Integrated Training Program;
NOW, therefore, in a full
and final resolution of the pending three grievances and arbitration invocations, the parties hereby agree as follows:
1. In exchange for the promises made by the
Agency in Paragraph 2 of this Agreement, NINSC agrees as follows:
a. To immediately
withdraw its grievances and arbitration invocations related to these matters, with prejudice, including but not limited to
the following grievances, Grievance on OTP Upgrades filed with INS on April 30, 2003, Regional Grievance filed by Steven Weekes
against INS on October 17, 2002 and the Step B Grievance filed against CBP by Jerry Emory on June 28, 2004, by executing the
letter attached hereto as Exhibit D. CBP will forward that letter to arbitrators
and other adjudicating officials, as necessary, to have proceedings dismissed or withdrawn.
b.
Not to file or pursue further grievances, unfair labor
practice charges, invoke arbitration, or to pursue any other action based upon the facts, allegations and circumstances giving
rise to the grievances resolved by this Agreement, and that arose before the date all parties have executed this Agreement.
2. In exchange for the promises made by NINSC
in Paragraph 1 of this Agreement, CBP agrees as follows:
a. On or
about [Date], CBP will send the letter, attached hereto as Exhibit A, to the home address of record and a copy to the Port
of all former U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) GS-1816 OTFTP inspectors employed with CBP as CBP Officers
(Limited Duty) as of October 3, 2003, and included on the list attached hereto as Exhibit B (the “OTFTP Inspectors”).
b. OTFTP
Inspectors will have 30 calendar days from confirmed receipt of the letter referred to in Paragraph 2(a) sent to either the
employee’s home address or the copy sent to their Port of record to respond as requested in the letter. If CBP does not receive a response from the OTFTP Inspector at the return address indicated in the letter
by the end of the 30-day period, the OTFTP Inspector will be presumed to have declined the offer to attend the CBP Officer
Integrated Training Program (“CBP Officer Basic Training”). Initial
declinations to attend training will result in the removal of the employee from CBP for failure to meet a condition of employment.
c.
OTFTP Inspectors who elect in their response to the
letter referred to in Paragraph 2(a) to attend CBP Officer Basic Training will be placed on a list to attend the training
at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) in Glynco, Georgia. A
description of the FLETC CBP Officer Basic Training program is attached hereto as Exhibit C.
OTFTP Inspectors will be expected and required to successfully complete the full CBP Officer Basic Training program
on the same basis, and with the same requirements, as any other trainee admitted to that course.
d. OTFTP
Inspector training priority and timing will be determined in CBP’s sole and unreviewable discretion. To the extent practicable, however, CBP will determine training order based upon OTFTP Inspector seniority,
with reverse seniority for OTFTPs stationed in the Buffalo, NY, district
which will be determined according to the OTFTP Inspectors’ respective Federal Service Computation Dates.
e. Training for OTFTP Inspectors who elect
to attend the training will commence on or about [Date]. OTFTP Inspectors will
have seven (7) calendar days to accept or decline CBP’s training offer. OTFTP
Inspectors will be permitted to decline to attend one training class and, thereafter, if they do not attend scheduled CBP
Officer Basic Training, will be considered to have declined CBP Officer Basic Training.
Upon the initial declination of training, the OTFTP Inspector will be placed at the end of the list for future training
courses.
f. Any
OTFTP Inspector who has already successfully completed a full basic immigration law enforcement training, as defined in 8
C.F.R. § 287.1(g), but not to include the INS Other Than Permanent Full-Time (OTFTP) Immigration Inspector Basic
Training Course, may be granted a waiver of the training requirement by submitting his or her training records and other evidence
of completion of training to CBP Office of Field Operations, [Address] within 60 days after his or her receipt of the letter
referred to in Paragraph 2(a) above. CBP will consider and grant or deny such
waiver requests and in its sole and unreviewable discretion. Prior to denying any waiver request, CBP will verify all training documents with the
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. If the waiver request is denied,
the OTFTP Inspector will have an opportunity to be placed on the training list as if he or she had elected training under
the terms of the letter referred to in paragraph 2(a).
g. Contingent on the successful
completion of CBP Officer Basic Training or upon receiving a training waiver, and dependent upon the availability of full-time
positions at the OTFTP Inspector’s assigned duty location, OTFTP inspectors may elect to convert to a full-time schedule. OTFTP inspectors who do not elect to convert to a full-time position may remain, dependent
upon workload considerations and available OTFTP positions, at their current duty station.
Work schedules for employees remaining at their current duty stations will be subject to management’s determination
based on agency need.
h. OTFTP
Inspectors who successfully complete CBP Officer Basic Training and elect conversion to a full-time CBP Officer position,
but are assigned to a duty station where full-time vacancies do not exist will be requested to submit a request for voluntary
transfer to up to 5 other duty stations. To the extent practicable and if full-time
positions are available, CBP will transfer the employee to one of the 5 designated locations. OTFTP Inspectors voluntarily
transferring under these circumstances will be responsible for their own relocation and travel expenses. The final selection of duty stations for OTFTP Inspectors will be resolved in CBP’s sole and unreviewable
discretion. To the extent practicable, however, selections will be based upon
OTFTP Inspector seniority, which will be determined according to the OTFTP Inspectors’ respective Federal Service Computation
Dates.
i. Upon the successful completion
of the required training requirements or upon obtaining a waiver there from, CBP will promote OTFTP Inspectors who have completed
at least 2087 hours at their current grade to the next higher grade, up to the full-time, GS-11 journeyman level. For example, OTFTP Inspectors at the GS-7 level who have completed at least 2087 duty hours will be converted
to the GS-9 level with promotion potential to the GS-11 level.
j.
OTFTP Inspectors who elect not to attend or twice decline offers to attend CBP Officer training, or attend but fail
to successfully complete CBP Officer Basic Training may, at management’s
sole discretion, be subject to removal from their position for the efficiency of the service, and in CBP’s sole
and unreviewable discretion. NINSC agrees to waive the grievance arbitration
provisions of the applicable collective bargaining agreement as to removal actions undertaken by CBP in these circumstances.
3. All parties agree as follows:
a. The parties
agree that this Agreement does not constitute an admission by CBP of any violation of the INS/NINSC collective bargaining
agreement or of any federal or state statute or regulation.
b. The terms of this Agreement will not establish
any precedent, nor will the Agreement be used as a basis by NINSC or any other person to seek or justify similar terms in
any subsequent case.
c. Nothing in this Agreement creates a
contract of employment or grants OTFTP Inspectors greater employment or retention rights than granted to any other federal
employee. OTFTP Inspectors, in particular, are subject to all of DHS and CBP’s
background investigation and other standard qualification requirements.
d. Each party is responsible for its own attorneys’
fees, travel and per diem expenses, and other costs.
e. This Agreement constitutes the complete
understanding between CBP and NINSC. No other promises or agreements shall be
binding unless signed by both parties. The terms of this Agreement shall constitute
the sole consideration for this settlement and release.
AGREED:
CBP
NINSC
By:
By:
Title:
Title:
Date:
Date:
Christmas Massacre
by CBP
In the days before Christmas including Christmas Eve the agency
served numerous suspension and termination notices throughout the nation including several in the Union local area. One local
employee of pre-flight was served a termination notice on Christmas Eve after a yearlong investigation. The union is monitoring
this situation and has addressed it at the highest levels. We will defend each employee vigorously.
Know your rights!! What to do when OPR shows up to
see YOU!
Recently, we have
had many officers who have been called in by the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) for interviews/interrogations
in regards to alleged misconduct. Even if you do your job well, there is a chance you could become involved in an OPR investigation
or some other internal investigation. If this happens keep your head, relax and be truthful and forthright.
There are a few things
you should know prior to entering the room. IN EVERY CASE YOU ARE ENTITLED TO A UNION REPRESENTATIVE. The Federal Labor Relations
Authority has upheld this and it is your absolute right. I strongly recommend this as this might be your only chance to tell
your side of the story and you will be under tremendous pressure. Do not be fooled by the officers demeanor, they may come
across as your friend, or overly aggressive. Keep your head! They are there for one reason and one reason only, to prove you
committed an act that may result in discipline or you witnessed an act by someone else that may result in discipline of them.
You are, by contract,
to be notified in advance of any interview of this type. Unfortunately, since the merger, the Agency has seen fit to trample
on this portion of the contract, but no matter, if you know your rights you will be prepared nonetheless.
They will most likely
speak to you in an office. They will identify themselves and show you their proper credentials. If they do not, ask to see
them, they will most definitely oblige. They will then briefly explain the reason for the interview and inform you of the
type of interview (Criminal or Administrative). They will then tell you that your interview will be taped. If they tell you
they want to conduct an administrative interview and you do not have Union representation, ASK NOW. They may tell you that
you are not entitled to it or try to talk you out of it by saying you are putting the Union representative in a bad position.
Do not fall for it. Ask again, if they say no, then be calm and continue to cooperate.
At this point they
will probably read you some documents and ask you to sign the documents. Read each one; ask questions if you are not sure
what you are signing. If you feel truly uncomfortable with what you would be signing, do not sign it. There is very little
to be gained by you signing a form in this room unless the form states something obviously untrue. For example, if the form
informs you that you have right to representation, yet they deny you that right, then don’t sign the form.
They will then begin
rolling the tape recorder. They will introduce themselves on the record and then have you state your name and the spelling
of the last name, maybe first too if it is unusual and they will introduce any observers or assistants in the room (I.E. Recording
tech, court reporter, etc.). Before you answer any questions, state, on the record, that you have repeatedly asked for and
been denied representation and that you feel your rights have been violated. Then state that you intend to cooperate fully
and then proceed with the interview.
Always tell the truth.
Lying to investigators is the surest way to lose your job. The next surest way is to refuse to answer their questions. You
can be relatively assured that they know the truth already, maybe not all of it, but most of it. They are simply trying to
cement their case.
Do not volunteer
any more information that what is asked of you. BRIEF HONESTY is the way I suggest you conduct yourself.
WHAT IF I DID COMMIT
A CRIMINAL ACT?
I‘ll be frank with you here. If you know you committed
a criminal act you have to way the seriousness of the offense and possible outcomes versus the damage that could be done to
your employment. If they inform you that you are the subject of a criminal investigation then stop the interview right there
and demand to speak to a lawyer. If they read you your Miranda rights at any point during an administrative interview. STOP
answering questions and demand an attorney. If this happens you are in trouble, do not kid yourself. Keeping your job may
well be the least of your worries at that point. AT NO POINT SHOULD YOU LIE OR CUT A DEAL ON THE SPOT.
Step away from the brink until you speak to your attorney or
at the very least a Union representative. Your freedom could be at stake.
Follow these simple instructions, tell the truth, cooperate
and things have a chance of turning out well. Half of the terminations we end up having are from officers who lie or misrepresent
their actions in an effort to save face. You can make up for an error in judgment over time, but once you lie you will always
be labeled a liar and that is impossible to bring back. If you have any questions or concerns please see your local union
representative.
COPRA
Rule Reminders
As you know COPRA(Customs
Officer Pay Reform Act) took effect on July 25, 2004. Here are a few things to remember about COPRA.
1)
It is a premium pay package, not a schedule. Both
the 6 and 7-day schedule work with it as well as Alternative Work Schedules. There is no imminent date for Legacy II’s
to move to a different schedule.
2)
All overtime is double time, period.
3)
Any overtime assigned that includes more than a one
hour break (less than 16 hours) between the end of your shift and beginning of overtime shift means you will be paid a commute.
A commute is one hour at triple time.
4)
You cannot swap shifts to create a commute in any
circumstances.
5)
You must have either 0 or 16 hours between shift and
overtime shift to avoid the commute. The National Inspector Assignment Policy (NIAP) requires this of management so don’t
shoot the messenger if they deny a swap based on this. The Unions are currently challenging this, but it is at an impasse.
6)
The Agency, by law and regulation, is requires
assigning overtime at the least cost, as long as it is equitably
distributed to all employees. This may result in employees on an odd shift (I.E. 7-3, 6-2) being bypassed for overtime because
of the least cost principle. Parts of this have been challenged by the Unions but are at impasse, so the rule will stand.
7)
Night differential is paid for the whole shift if
the majority of the shift (4 hours or more) falls between 4pm and 8am. For instance if you are scheduled 10 pm to 6 am, you
would be paid at 20% differential for midnight shift for all 8 hours. The same would apply for 2 pm to 10 pm, except you would be paid 15% premium for evening shift differential.
8)
Holidays and Sundays are regularly scheduled workdays
at a 50% premium. You also receive holiday pay on holidays.
There is no imminent
date for rollout of a joint wheel for overtime, but the issue is being dealt with as you read this and will hopefully be solved
shortly.
AFGE LOCAL 2580 AUDIT BY DEPARTMENT OF LABOR .
The audit in July and August of local 2580 was a success. We
were sited for a lack of meetings and meeting minutes, but otherwise came through with a clean bill. Currently the local has
in the area of $30,000 in liquid assets that have all been accounted for.
AFGE OFFERING DISCOUNTED DENTAL INSURANCE THROUGH MET LIFE.
Metropolitan Life is offering Dental Insurance though its partnership
with AFGE. As amember of District 2 all members of the local are eligible. I am currently working to activate the account
and I will be the officer assigned to endorse each application. Please forward your application to me and I will return the
endorsed copy to you or submit it to Met Life after I get further instructions from their representative. I will provide more
information as it becomes available.
In Budget Debate, Government
Employees Will Have a Lot on the Line
By Stephen Barr
Friday, January 21, 2005; Page B02
President Bush, who took the oath of office for a second term yesterday, will kick off this year's debate
on spending and policy priorities when he sends his fiscal 2006 budget to Congress in early February. Federal employees and
retirees have a huge stake in the outcome of that debate.
To be sure, much of the president's management agenda for the government will remain unchanged. Bush administration
officials plan to keep emphasizing the importance of putting federal jobs up for bid as a way to lower costs -- called competitive
sourcing -- and to continue championing an initiative that links budget decisions to program performance.
But federal employees will see other, significant workplace changes this year. The Defense and Homeland Security
departments are moving away from the decades-old General Schedule pay system and into systems that determine raises according
to more rigorous job performance ratings. The 15 agencies in the intelligence community will soon get a new leader and management
team.
More important, at least in the short term, may be the budget squeeze that employees will face in their agencies.
Financing the war against terrorism and military operations in Iraq probably will divert funding in fiscal
2006 from domestic agencies to Defense and Homeland Security. Agencies that receive little or no increase in operating funds
will find it difficult to expand their workforces, buy the latest technology and improve training for employees.
The federal deficit also will add pressure for budget reductions that could nick federal employees and retirees.
For years, the Congressional Budget Office has maintained a list of options -- such as revamping federal health insurance
and retirement benefits -- that would produce long-term budget savings.
The National Association of Retired Federal Employees, which has about 400,000 members, says in this month's
issue of Retirement Life magazine that NARFE has been warned by congressional allies to expect a difficult year.
According to NARFE officials Judy Park and Dan Adcock, possible budget reductions might include cancellation
of cost-of-living adjustments for federal pensions, a smaller government contribution for health insurance premiums, increases
in employee retirement contributions and a change in the annuity calculation formula.
Some think tanks that look favorably on the president are urging the administration to scale back spending.
The Heritage Foundation, in its 2005 Mandate for Leadership guide to smaller government, offers an array of suggestions, including
a recommendation that the administration energize its competitive sourcing initiative.
Bush's 2001 plan for contracting out federal work "has been watered down in response to congressional efforts
to protect civil servants and by agency reluctance to make tough choices to improve operations and reduce costs," Heritage
fellow Ronald D. Utt writes. He urges the administration to adopt more ambitious competitive sourcing goals.
Office of Management and Budget officials have said they plan to step up efforts to explain the competitive
sourcing initiative to members of Congress and to show that projected savings in operating costs can be tracked and achieved.
A newly confirmed appointee, David Safavian, will lead the effort at OMB.
In a recent letter to administration appointees, Clay Johnson III, deputy director for management at OMB,
applauded progress on achieving the president's management goals but noted that a year-end tally showed four agencies backsliding
on some initiatives.
Although implementing Bush's agenda "is hard work," Johnson says, "we are serious about holding departments
accountable."
CONGRESS WORKING
TOWARDS EYE AND DENTAL BENEFITS FOR ALL FEDERAL EMPLOYEES
Better Dental, Vision Coverage Could Be on the Way -- at a Cost
By Stephen Barr
Sunday, July 18, 2004; Page
C02
It's time for a toothy smile. Congress appears ready to create a voluntary program for federal employees and
retirees who want to purchase dental and vision insurance.
For years, federal employees have responded in surveys that they want better dental and vision benefits than
those offered through their health insurance program. But policymakers balked at playing tooth fairy, worried that providing
such benefits could be expensive and add to premium costs that are mostly borne by taxpayers.
Now, it appears likely that for many employees and retirees, the long policy toothache is over.
Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, and Daniel K. Akaka
(D-Hawaii), a committee member, introduced legislation last week that would provide enhanced dental and vision benefits to
employees and retirees at affordable group rates, obtained through the leverage of the government's purchasing power.
In exchange, enrollees would shoulder all the premium costs, according to the bill.
Collins introduced the bill late Wednesday, after several weeks of private talks with unions and employee
groups. Major unions said they would support the legislation, even though they would have preferred that the government, as
employer, pick up most of the premium cost, as it does for medical insurance in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.
On Friday, Rep. Jo Ann S. Davis (R-Va.), joined by Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.), introduced an identical
bill in the House. Their quick action might give the Collins-Akaka bill a chance at congressional passage before year's end.
The senators patterned their proposal after the federal program that provides long-term care insurance to
government employees and retirees, who bear the full cost of that benefit.
The bill includes a nonbinding provision that calls on Congress, after implementation, to consider picking
up a share of dental-vision premiums.
"Skyrocketing federal deficits, coupled with a political environment that lacks the will to fund such an endeavor"
left Collins and Akaka to propose "the next best thing" to a subsidized premium, said Gregory Junemann, president of the International
Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers.
"Clearly something had to be done with regard to the huge expense being incurred by our nation's civil servants
for dental and vision services," Junemann said.
By most accounts, the government provides meager dental and vision coverage to employees, compared with private
sector benefits.
CompBenefits Corp., an administrator of health and vision benefits, evaluated 150 FEHBP medical plans for
testimony before the House civil service subcommittee in February. Of the 150 plans, only one provided preventive dental care
for children, and only 14 offered orthodontic coverage, CompBenefits found. In general, reimbursement levels and annual maximum
benefits were significantly less than those provided by private-sector employers.
Forty-eight state governments provide employees with access to dental benefit plans, and surveys show that
95 percent of employers with 500 or more workers provide dental insurance, Collins said in a statement.
The legislation, she said, "grants the Office of Personnel Management the authority to select the appropriate
combination of nationwide and regional companies and a variety of benefit packages to meet the diverse needs of our federal
employee and annuitant population."
Under the bill, plans could provide a broad range of dental coverage, including oral and maxillofacial surgery,
endodontics, periodontics, prosthodontics and orthodontics. Vision plans could cover preventive care and eyewear, for example.
Because employees may be enrolled in a flexible spending account, which helps cover out-of-pocket dental and
vision costs, and because many employees and retirees have limited coverage through their medical plans, Collins said the
bill would direct OPM to develop information "so that employees have a clear understanding of the choices available to them."
Collins and Jo Ann Davis said the legislation would make the government a more attractive employer. "It is
no secret that the federal government has been lagging behind the private sector," Jo Ann Davis said. "Federal employees understand
this disparity and so do the talented potential employees out there who the government wants to recruit."
E-mail: barrs@washpost.com
© 2004 The Washington Post Company
Proposed Rule Changes Include
a Single Method for Counting Leave Time
Friday, January 14, 2005; Page B02
The Office of Personnel Management is rewriting rules for several civil service pay and benefit programs as
part of an effort to consolidate federal payroll systems.
"We took a look at all our regulations to see what changes we could make that could provide for more consistent
application of policies," said Donald J. Winstead, deputy associate director at OPM for pay and performance policy.
The proposed changes cover an array of issues, such as time off, work schedules and military leave, and should
help simplify payroll processing. For the last two years, the Bush administration has worked to consolidate 22 payroll providers
into four.
One proposed change, for example, would create a government-wide method for calculating leave time for federal
employees. OPM would require agencies to charge leave to employees in increments of either six minutes or 15 minutes. Currently,
agencies calculate used leave in a variety of time frames, ranging from one minute to one hour.
Another proposal would establish Nov. 15 as the last day employees can schedule use-it-or-lose-it leave each
year. The current method varies each year because it is linked to the last pay period of the year, which changes by a day
or two each year. "It is just easier to give everyone one date," said Jo Ann Perrini, a pay and leave expert at OPM.
The proposed regulation would make it clear that existing policy does not permit so-called hybrid work schedules,
such as a combination of a compressed and a flexible work schedule.
The proposal also clarifies the definition of "official duty station" as it relates to telecommuting and locality
pay. The proposed rule would designate the telework location or a temporary assignment site as the employee's duty station
for the purposes of locality pay unless the employee comes to work at the agency's office at least once a week. The proposal
also provides for exceptions, such as employees working from home for medical reasons or off on critical projects that keep
them out of the office for long periods of time.
Most agencies already decide locality pay based on the proposed rule, OPM officials said. But the proposed
change could affect the salaries of some employees, since some locality adjustments are higher than others.
OPM published a proposed regulation describing the changes in the Federal Register this month, and they will
be open for comment until March 7.
Your Local Executive Representatives:
President – Pat Law
V.P. - Steven Sodja
Sec/Treas. – Virginia Barnhill
V.P. Pre-Flight – Tom Kuhn
Fair Practices – Debra Skok-Watson
