Congress is at odds on whether tracking official time is a basic necessity for decision making, or a cynical attack on federal workers. Image: Nuchylee/Shutterstock.com
By: FEDweek StaffFollowing are the key portions of a recent debate on the House floor over an amendment—ultimately rejected with some Republican support—offered to the defense authorization bill to require an accounting of official time at the DoD. The participants were sponsor Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa. and Reps. Donald Norcross, D-N.J. and Val Hoyle, D-Ore.
Mr. PERRY. This amendment is pretty straightforward. It just requires the Secretary of Defense to report on the use of taxpayer-funded union time by DOD employees. We are not saying it is bad. We are not saying it is good. We are not saying it is too much. It is too little. We just want to know what it is. We just want to know.
For those who may be unfamiliar, Congress granted certain employees the ability to perform certain tasks for labor unions while on duty. To be clear, that means that these employees are being paid by our constituents to work for union activities instead of doing the job that they were hired to perform.
I think maybe it would be fine if we said in the job description that your job is to do organized labor activities, but that is not what is in the job description. The job description is what is needed for the country for the Department of Defense; but instead of doing that work, you are doing other work. Unacceptably, the statistics on the use of official time are very few and far between.
Take a GAO report from January of 2017, so we are a few years beyond that now, which is telling in itself. According to the data from the Department of Veterans Affairs, 346 employees spent 100 percent of their time on official union activities instead of taking care of our Nation’s veterans.
Now, the Trump administration took some steps to improve transparency, including actually reporting the use and the cost of official time by agencies.
A VA press release dated November 8, 2018, cites a particularly egregious example. A VA registered nurse, who was elected as a local union official, spent 100 percent of her time doing organized labor activities. That might be fine if the job description was organized labor activities, but the job description is registered nurse. How much time taking care of veterans as a nurse was this person spending? Well, zero, that is how much time.
To use examples from the Department of Defense, the most recent available data or estimates of the data from the Trump administration’s final report was that 3,235 DOD employees used official time in FY19 for a total of 526,990 hours at a cost of millions upon tens of millions of dollars, not to mention the equipment.
We are here debating the National Defense Authorization Act.
There are very serious threats around the world. While we stand here, while we sit here, while we watch, the Russians are moving a fleet into Cuba about 100 miles off the coast of the United States of America. Now, I don’t know about you, but for me, I want every DOD employee focused on keeping America safe.
All we are asking for, all this amendment asks for is a report so that we don’t go blindly searching around to try and figure out how best to do that. If we have the information, we can make decisions. We don’t have the information. This amendment says give us the information, track the information so we can make decisions.
Mr. NORCROSS. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to amendment No. 56, which would require a report that would be prejudicial to the rights and interests of Federal employees by calling into question something called official time.
Official time is a system that we, Congress, established in law almost 40 years ago to ensure that all employees entitled to union representation receive it, regardless if they are in the union or not.
Through official time, Federal employees who volunteer as union representatives spend time on what they call representational activities, working with employers and managers to resolve disputes, to resolve disputes, improvements in the workplace that benefit all employees, one of which–and many people consider it the highest–is for safety issues, so they can walk around, they can do the very inspections that save lives and save people from injury instead of waiting for it to happen and reacting before somebody gets hurt or dies on the job.
Simply put, let’s call it what it is. This is an attack on official time, and my colleagues want to gut public sector unions. Call it what it is. The report that this amendment requires would only tally the cost of official time, ignoring many benefits. That official time provides for management as well as workers, their safety, and their productivity.
Workers have the right to have a voice on the job. They have that right. That is exactly what the official time provides for. I know that workplaces are more productive and efficient when management and workers come together. This amendment would lay the groundwork to take us in the opposite direction.
As co-chair of the Labor Caucus, I continue to oppose these efforts to take away rights from workers. When we look back at some of the history on this, it has been incredible. This has been an enhancement for the government.
There has been report after report on this already, but the bottom line is, this is about protecting workers on the job who become more protective of the people, the workers on the job.
Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, there are many things that I agree with the gentleman, my friend on the other side of the aisle. These are important tasks that need to be done. Disputes need to be resolved. We all care about the people who are working for the Federal Government, but to think that after 40 years we have gotten it perfect, and we can’t take a look and we can’t ask for a report I think is a little bit shortsighted. This isn’t an attack on anyone because those things do need to be done.
Ms. HOYLE of Oregon. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this unnecessary amendment that seeks to restrict the rights and interests of Federal employees by calling into question the role of official time.
Forty years ago, Congress established official time to ensure that all employees entitled to union representation receive it regardless of whether or not they choose to join the union. Official time ensures Federal employees have a voice at the worksite to resolve disputes, address issues of discrimination or retaliation, and propose improvements to the workplace.
The Federal Government covers the cost of official time activities because under Federal law, unions must provide fair representation to all employees at the worksite, not just those who pay dues, but also those who benefit from their unions bargaining for better wages, hours, and working conditions, even though they aren’t union members.
Opponents of public sector unions claim that official time is a waste of taxpayer dollars. This is false. The cost of official time amounts to just one-tenth of 1 percent of all the salaries and benefits paid to Federal employees in a given year.
This amendment is an attack on official time and on public sector unions, plain and simple. I urge my colleagues to oppose any and all efforts to take rights away from workers and to oppose this antilabor amendment.
Mr. NORCROSS. Mr. Chair, to wrap up, let’s be clear: This is an attack on people’s voices at the workplace. This is something that we collectively have looked at for over 40 years, and we continue to have a productive way of keeping people safe on the job and to understand that there is no way that they can use this time to do any union political activities, which has been suggested by the opposition.
Let’s keep our workers safe. Let’s continue to care about those who make our country the best in the world.
OPM Advises Agencies on Conducting RIFs During Shutdown
Updated Shutdown Contingency Plans Show Range of Impacts
Use Shutdown as Justification for More RIFs, OMB Tells Agencies
Unions Win a Round in Court Disputes over Anti-Representation Orders
Deferred Resignation Periods End for Many; Overall 12% Drop
Senate Bill Would Override Trump Orders against Unions
TSP Adds Detail to Upcoming Roth Conversion Feature
See also,
Legal: How to Challenge a Federal Reduction in Force (RIF) in 2025
How to Handle Taxes Owed on TSP Roth Conversions? Use a Ladder
The Best Ages for Federal Employees to Retire
Best States to Retire for Federal Retirees: 2025
Retention Standing, ‘Bump and Retreat’ and More: Report Outlines RIF Process
