AFGE
FIELD SERVICES DEPARTMENT
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING GUIDANCE FOR RESPONSES TO
THE POSSIBILITY OF PANDEMIC FLU
Summary
AFGE provides this guidance to its Locals and Councils as a source of information for use in dealing with the possibility of a pandemic flu outbreak, and the responses by federal employers to such an event. Primarily, we believe you should be aware of the background of the threat, what agencies are being told by the Office of Personnel Management, and what language you can negotiate and enforce to protect and expand employees’ rights and benefits.
The Office of Personnel Management has issued instructions (“guidance”) to your employer about the possibility of a pandemic flu and how to respond to it. OPM has addressed major areas of human resources management (Accomplishing Agency Work, Hiring, Labor Relations, Leave, Overtime, EDP, and others). OPM’s guidance is in keeping with its current motto (“Ensuring the Federal Government Has An Effective Civilian Workforce” – a opposed to anything like “Let’s Treat Employees Fairly and Respectfully—If Only In Our Own Self-Interest”). When reading it, keep in mind that OPM provides only its own conclusions and interpretations, which are not necessarily complete and therefore don’t provide the full picture, i.e., that making decisions about unionized employees must include the unions.
Because pandemic flu, if it occurs, would be of paramount concern to employees and their representatives, it is necessary to understand the nature of the threat, and what to do about it in advance and during such an outbreak.
This guidance is intended to provide a basic approach that can be used by all AFGE Locals and Councils. It is important to tailor any approach to specific workplace conditions and the policies your employer proposes to follow.
For example, in the interest of maximum protection, AFGE’s guidance does not distinguish between the steps that must be taken to protect employees who are I involved in direct patient care and first responders, as opposed to the steps that must be taken to protect employees generally. That’s because the same human resources policies should be followed for all employees with respect to whether they must report to work, what an agency should do if an employee does not report to work as ordered, leave use, and other matters. This does not mean all employees, including direct care providers and first responders, will be exposed to the same risks if a pandemic occurs; rather, it means there is insufficient information and insufficient agreement within the Administration to warrant providing less protection or fewer rights to any employee.
Because of the technical nature of available information, we also recommend that you carefully and completely consider the “Resources” information at the end of this document. It is not sufficient to skim it and it may become necessary to incorporate the material into proposals, grievances, and other actions that you undertake on behalf of employees. Some of the OPM Guidance actually may help promote progressive concepts such as telework and alternative work schedules (which are described in greater detail below) by calling attention to the availability of such programs in all existing circumstances, not only a possible pandemic flu situation. Of course, the trick is to bridge the gap between a progressive concept and an agency’s actual practices.
Finally, AFGE activists should keep in mind that an outbreak of pandemic flu does not negate the laws and contracts that are in effect or may be negotiated to deal with pandemic flu. Agencies may try to use the “emergency” nature of an outbreak to try to ignore their obligations to employees and the labor law; in that case, it is even more important than usual to enforce and strengthen employees’ rights and to improve the policies and practices affecting them – because an emergency cuts both ways: agencies may need extraordinary measures to assure the work gets done, but extraordinary measures are therefore also appropriate to assure the employees who do the work are protected.
For more information, you can contact your National Vice President’s office and staff; Milly Rodriguez, AFGE’s Health and Safety Specialist, rodrim@afge.org; or the Field Services Department, FSD@afge.org.
Key Points About Pandemic Flu
(Information gathered and written by AFL-CIO)
Negotiating and Enforcing Appropriate Protections and Rights for Employees Affected by Pandemic Flu
The basic analytical framework for protecting employees should be: extraordinary dangers and difficult working conditions must be balanced by equally extraordinary actions by the employer. Such actions should be preventive and adaptable in their approach, and physical and administrative in their application. If it’s a crisis for the employer in terms of performing agency work and mission, then it’s a crisis for employees, in terms of the workforce and of their community and family.
Agencies may well claim they cannot or will not negotiate over certain union proposals because of their management rights, such as to take “any action” during an “emergency.” Such an argument is not persuasive because of the limited applicability of the “emergency” right stated in the law, and because management rights are subject to the ability of unions to negotiate “appropriate arrangements”. Under the appropriate arrangements standard, agencies must negotiate over union proposals, even where the proposals interfere with a management right, if there is a counter-balancing benefit to employees that outweighs any interference with such a management right. In the context of pandemic flu, the balancing test should include the benefit to the employee(s) of the union’s proposals in reducing the adverse effects of the employer’s policies and practices. Some of the more obvious adverse effects are: the exposure to potentially harmful or lethal flu that results from going into the workplace; harm to family members; application of normal performance requirements under the extraordinary conditions of a pandemic flu; and the exhausting of leave because of the employee’s incapacitation and to take care of sick family members.
Bargaining, In General
In each of these hypothetical cases, the decision is appropriate for bargaining with the union, which can fight for whichever decision best meets the needs of employees. The Union can propose the answer be “yes, “no,” or some variation. And, unless precluded specifically by law, the Union can propose what the criteria will be for making the decision.
When is Bargaining Appropriate?
Now. According to OPM, the Administration has directed agencies to take specific steps in preparation for a possible pandemic flu, and they have done so. In 2005, the Department of Health and Human Services issued a Pandemic Flu Plan, and throughout 2006 the Office of Personnel Management issued policy guidances on specific aspects of human resources management (preparation, planning, testing). OPM also issued a Human Capital Planning Manual that focuses on strategies, policies, and specific readiness steps that every executive branch agency is required to take in anticipation of a pandemic flu outbreak.
Such steps affect the conditions of employment of employees, even though an outbreak hasn’t yet occurred and may not occur. There is no requirement that bargaining depend on an event(s) that has occurred, and, in fact, much bargaining involves the procedures and processes that will be used if and when certain events happen – you don’t wait for an employee to request leave or apply for a promotion to address what actions the agency will take when such events happen, and there’s no reason to wait until an outbreak is officially recognized to bargain with your employer about it. On a more technical level, employees’ conditions of employment are affected when there are reasonably foreseeable outcomes from management actions; and, aspects of those actions are within the scope of bargaining. Since the Administration has directed, and OPM has implemented, a government-wide program to prepare for pandemic flu as it affects the federal workplace, it is at least reasonably foreseeable that such actions will have effects on conditions of employment,
Bargaining Proposals for a Pandemic Flu Outbreak
Not every subject that can be addressed in negotiations necessarily should be. We recommend that you request a full briefing from your employer and focus your questions on aspects of your particular agency’s planning and strategies that appear to need improvements. Then, you can target your proposals on the subjects that your workforce is concerned about, or will be if it becomes necessary to activate pandemic flu procedures in your workplace.
Following are some of the subjects that appear to involve changed conditions of employment resulting from the employers’ actions in anticipation of an outbreak. Because most unionized workplaces already have a contract, it is not necessary to bargain from “square one”; existing agreements should continue to provide protections and benefits to employees that preexisted as of the time the Administration decided to initiate the changes related to pandemic flu.
|
Subject |
Issues For Consideration in Bargaining
|
|
Telework |
OPM “recommends” that each employee who participates in sign written agreements concerning their use or non-use of telework; such agreements must have the approval of the union (not just the employee) because they otherwise constitute illegal dealings (bypass) between individual employees and the employer over matters affecting conditions of employment. Negotiation of such individual agreements also is a kind of formal discussion; therefore, they cannot be held without offering the union an opportunity to be represented during the discussions.
OPM expects Telework agreements covering individual employees to include a “checklist” and certification that the employee’s home work area is free of hazards. OPM admits such certification is not legally binding; therefore, at most the Telework agreement should require that the employee make “reasonable efforts” to provide a safe and secure work area. The content of the checklist also should be reviewed and negotiated as necessary.
|
|
|
Procedures for offering telework opportunities, and for temporary or ongoing suspension or termination from the telework option are negotiable. Seniority among employees whose work can be done at home, for example, and whose performance is at least fully successful (or the equivalent) could be included in an MOU over telework.
|
|
|
Both of the above subjects are compatible with language negotiated to address specifically an agency’s use of Telework during an flu outbreak. In addition, language should be included that requires the agency to use Telework “to the maximum extent possible”, which is a legal requirement that is often not given real meaning by agencies, but which may become crucial to agencies in order to perform their missions.
Training on Telework is given extensive attention in the OPM guidance. In general training is considered non-negotiable as work, but the FLRA has found agency work does not include training for employees to understand the requirements of their job. Therefore, training on the use of Telework, especially during a flu pandemic (when employees would be directed to perform work and be subject to separation for not doing it) should not be considered training on agency work and can be addressed in bargaining. Training should include: complete information to the employee about the Telework program; notification to the employee that laws such as Workers Compensation, Federal Tort Claims, and others provide coverage when the employee is working at home; and specification of what is expected of the employee (particularly what the employee is required to know and do under the agency’s “Continuity of Operations (COOP)” program. The COOP program is specifically intended to assure an agency can get work done remotely (that is, when the employee works at home), during interruptions of workplace safety such as those that might result from a flu outbreak.
|
|
Alternative Work Schedules |
Bargaining over Alternative Work Schedules (AWS) is not subject to the “Management Rights” clause of the labor law. Because the Flexible and Compressed Work Schedules Act (FCWSA) contains criteria for establishing, modifying, and terminating AWS work schedules, Congress intended that this program not be subjected to any “rival” set of limitations—including the Management Rights clause. If AWS is not agreed upon by the agency and the Union, the resulting impasse is to be referred to the Federal Service Impasses Panel (FSIP) for a decision that is t be based on the criteria stated in the FCWSA, and the FSIP cannot consider management rights when deciding the outcome.
Procedures for amending an AWS that is in existence in a particular location are an aspect of the design of that AWS program. If an AWS is silent about how the AWS will be administered if a flu outbreak occurs and changes the work requirements of individual employees, either party can propose to address that aspect in the collective bargaining agreement that describes the AWS. Applying an existing AWS differently during a flu outbreak could mean that an employee(s) would be required to work at the office fewer days, or more days, or all days.
|
|
Evacuation Payments |
Evacuation payments may be made to employees or their dependents, or both, who are ordered to be evacuated from or within the United States and certain nonforeign areas in the national interest because of natural disasters or for military or other reasons that create imminent danger to the lives of the employees, their immediate family, or their dependents. When there is imminent danger to the lives of an employee’s dependents or immediate family, an agency may authorize evacuation payments and require employees to work from home during a pandemic health crisis. An employee who is ordered to work from home during a pandemic health crisis may not care for his or her children while performing work. However, the employee may request changes in his or her work schedule to allow the employee to work during the periods he or she is not responsible for caring for the child (e.g., when the child is sleeping or when a spouse or other family member is available to care for the child.
Because of the extreme nature of the hazard involved, at a minimum it would generally be a good idea to propose that the agency would provide evacuation pay “when the statutory requirements are met.” Further, if the agency assigns other work to the employee, the employee must have the skills and knowledge required to perform that work.
|
|
Leave (including Leave for Religious Puroses |
Because of the numerous fact-specific situations involved in leave administration (approval/disapproval, type of leave legally available, employee options as to type of leave, cancellation, etc.), please refer to the hypothetical questions and answers in OPM’s Manual, Part B, Leave Flexibilities for Employees Adversely Affected by a Pandemic Health Crisis Leave Flexibilities.
Leave use during an epidemic is related to Telework and AWS. The social interaction in the workplace that could expose an employee to a flu carrier is obviously reduced if the employee does not work from the office as much as under normal conditions. Therefore, disputes over leave use (such as mandating use of sick leave) can be addressed in context of other negotiated provisions such as Telework and AWS.
However, OPM also has “bad cop” language in its Manual: Part C, Employee and Labor Relations During a Pandemic Health Crisis. That guidance emphasizes OPM’s “command and control” mindset, particularly when it emphasizes that employees can be removed for such “misconduct” as declining to use sick leave if they are sick with flu during an outbreak; can be separated for refusing to stay away from work; and can be separated for refusing to participate in a medical examination to determine fitness. A response to this Theory X view of employees is to enforce provisions of existing agreements that require just cause for separation. Negotiating provisions that would prevent bad decisions by supervisors and their Human Resources mentors would be difficult to prevent, but procedures can be negotiated that require disputes over keeping an employee at work include the right to union representation could provide an avenue to minimize unnecessary disciplinary action.
Many contracts already contain provisions for leave accrual and use. As applied during a flu outbreak, however, the procedures and requirements might require changes. For example, if a leave approving manager or supervisor is not available because he or she has the flu, other communication procedures may be needed. Rather than make blanket proposals about leave approval procedures and employee options, it may be prudent to discuss with the employer how each of the provisions of existing agreements would apply, left unchanged, during a flu outbreak. Depending on the employer’s response, it may necessary to propose alternative language. Such “what if” language would apply only during an outbreak or equivalent disruption, and would have been determined jointly in advance, rather than by the employer alone.
|
|
Labor Relations |
OPM’s guidance states: “In an emergency, management has the right to alter working conditions without bargaining prior to implementing the change. However, post-implementation bargaining may be required. In this regard, if management follows applicable procedures contained in existing collective bargaining agreements, bargaining would not be required over the procedure. In situations where an agency wishes to use different procedures, or where there are no existing contractual procedures or past practices covering the action, an agency may have post-implementation bargaining obligations. With regard to any of these situations, supervisors and managers should seek guidance and advice from their Office of General Counsel and human resources personnel.”
OPM’s guidance is misleading at best. Although 5 U.S.C. § 7106(d) does provide for management to take actions in an emergency that it might not otherwise be able to take, “emergency” is interpreted very narrowly. In other words, many or most labor-management obligations are capable of being discharged without interfering with that right. OPM’s guidance emphasizes post-implementation bargaining, which is the exception rather than the rule – even during a flu epidemic. Therefore, in general Locals and Councils should continue to insist that their counterpart agencies in the labor-management relationship follow the requirements of the Statute with respect to bargaining.
|
|
Overtime |
OPM emphasizes that employees who work at home cannot receive overtime pay for work not authorized under either the “suffer and permit” (for FLSA-covered employees); or the “officially ordered or approved” (for title 5) frameworks. Although back pay disputes depend on the facts surrounding the work, and not where the work was performed, it would obviously benefit employees who work at home because of a flu outbreak to have clear communication with their supervisor about how many hours they are working.
Communication about employees’ being approved for overtime pay, or not being approved for it, is an aspect of training and of an agreement covering individual employees’ Telework. Therefore, any collective bargaining agreement that covers pay administration or agency expectations during a flu pandemic may be improved by requiring that employees’ training and any agreements covering individual employees will include specific procedures for assuring that overtime approval is present when requested by the employee and acted upon in a timely manner; or directed by the supervisor and understood by the employee.
|
|
Health and Safety |
Immunization programs – OPM’s guidance references “new programs, under which an agency may establish periodic examination or immunization programs to safeguard the health of employees whose work may subject them or others to significant health or safety risks due to occupational or environmental exposure or demands. The discretion to establish such programs should be exercised through a negotiated provision that provides such programs “will” be established. Such provision also should describe which employees/occupations are subjected to the health or safety risks as a result of their work, particularly during a pandemic flu outbreak.
|
|
|
Protective equipment – Please read References 1, 2, and 3 below. An agreement should include acknowledgment by the parties that flu may be spread by droplet (liquid), contact, or airborne forms of transmission. It should further say that employees who may be subjected to such exposure will be protected by appropriate measures and equipment. The minimum level of protection required for employees who are exposed to potential transmission on the job is the N-95 respirator, which must be provided by the employer.
|
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A. SAMPLE DIALOG ON BARGAINING
OVER RESPONSES TO A FLU PANDEMIC
Agencies may be resistant to bargaining at all over the responses that will be taken to a pandemic flu outbreak. They will try to assert that “management rights” allow them to take whatever actions they wish in response to this emergency and they have no obligation to negotiate with the union over this. Below are some responses the Union can make, either at the bargaining table or in written correspondence with management.
|
If Mangagement Says: |
The Union responds: |
|
Management can take whatever actions it needs to in an emergency. We have no obligation to bargain with the Union. |
While 5 U.S.C. 7106 (a)(2)(D) gives the agency the right “to take whatever actions may be necessary to carry out the agency mission during emergencies,” 5 U.S.C. 7106 (b) says that this right does not preclude the agency from “negotiating appropriate arrangements for employees adversely affected by the exercise” of that right. Even when our proposals interfere with management rights, the agency must negotiate with the union if there is a counter-balancing benefit to employees that outweighs any interference with your rights. See NAGE Local R14-87 and Kansas Army National Guard, 21 FLRA 24 (1985). Our proposals are intended to be such appropriate arrangements for the employees who are affected by decisions to change operations in the event of a flu pandemic. As such, they are mandatory subjects of bargaining. |
|
But this is an emergency. We can’t wait around to bargain with the union before we take action to fulfill our mission. |
There is no emergency today. Fortunately, there has not been a pandemic outbreak of flu. This is precisely why we want to negotiate over this matter now, before any possible flu pandemic occurs. It is best that we be prepared in advance so that mangers and employees alike can know what will be required and expected of them. The agency is planning its policies and procedures in advance and is not waiting for a flu outbreak before it starts. So, we should also work now to determine the procedures and policies as they affect the employees.
Furthermore, an emergency cuts both ways: agencies may need extraordinary measures to assure the work gets done, but extraordinary measures are therefore appropriate to assure that employees who do the work are protected. |
|
OPM has determined in its Guidance that because a flu pandemic would be an emergency, the only negotiations with the union that are required are “post-implementation.” |
OPM’s Guidance is only that; this Guidance is not a government-wide regulation that can bar negotiations. There is no emergency today, so it makes no sense to bargain after management might act some time in the future. Finally, the mere existence of an emergency does not relieve the agency of its obligations under 7106 (a)(2)(D) to negotiate appropriate arrangements. Post-implementation bargaining should be an exception, not a rule. Otherwise, it constitutes a waiver of the union’s right to negotiate. |
APPENDIX B. SAMPLE BARGAINING PROPOSALS
The proposals a Local or Council make to address a possible flu pandemic will be largely agency and workforce-specific. Different proposals might be necessary for first responders. Some work, like that done by correctional officers or meat inspectors, cannot be done in alternative worksites. So, proposals on telework may not be applicable. The following proposals are meant to be a starting-off point for Locals and Councils to use when developing their own proposals.
Telework
1. The parties’ existing telework (telecommuting, alternative work site) agreement will remain in effect in the event of a flu pandemic, except as modified in this agreement. The agency agrees to use telework to the maximum extent possible in the event of a flu pandemic.
2. The number of days each week or pay period that an employee is expected to report to the official duty station may be altered depending on the specific circumstances during the pandemic. The agency will not act to put employees at unnecessary risk of contracting or spreading illness.
2. All employees who participate in telework will be trained in the use of telework. Employees beginning telework will be instructed on how Workers’ compensation, Federal Tort Claims cover those working at home or another alternative worksite. Reminders will be provided to those already on telework. Employees will be instructed on the specific expectations of the employee, including what the employee is required to know and do under the agency’s Continuation of Operations (COOP) program. Employees will be instructed concerning how to contact those in the employee’s supervisory chain for leave approval, discussions of work assignments and obtaining information on the status of agency operations.
3. Any agreements between the employee and the union concerning telework will be approved by the union before they can go into effect. Discussions between employees and management regarding such agreements are considered to be formal discussions, and will not be held without allowing the union an opportunity to be represented during the discussions.
Alternative Work Schedules
1. The parties’ existing agreement concerning Alternative Work Schedules will remain in effect in the event of a flu pandemic, except as modified in this agreement. In the event of a flu pandemic, employees will be authorized to work schedules that allow them to come to the duty station fewer days each week and fit their work hours to meet any need to provide care for family members. Alternative work schedules will be made available to the maximum extent possible.
Leave
1. The parties’ existing agreement concerning annual and sick leave will remain in effect in the event of a flu pandemic, except as modified in this agreement. Doctor’s certificates will normally not be required for approval of sick leave in less than three days’ duration. To the maximum extent possible, employees will be given the benefit of the doubt when they report incapacity due to the flu.
2. Any discussions with employees regarding leave usage or approval, other than the initial request, are considered to be formal discussions, and will not be held without allowing the union an opportunity to be represented during the discussions.
Discipline and Adverse Actions
1. The parties’ existing agreement concerning annual and sick leave will remain in effect in the event of a flu pandemic, except as modified in this agreement. Discipline and adverse actions will be based on just cause.
Evacuation Payments
1. In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 5522, the Agency will make advance payments of salary, allowances and differentials available to employees when they or a member of their immediate family are authorized or ordered to leave any place where there is imminent danger to the life of the employee or the lives of the dependents or immediate family of the employee.
Overtime
1. The agency will ensure that an official with authority to approve requests to work overtime will be available to all employees and that such requests are acted upon in a timely manner. Employees will be notified of the chain that they must follow to reach an official with such authority.
Health and Safety
1. The parties’ existing agreement concerning occupational health and safety will remain in effect in the event of a flu pandemic, except as modified in this agreement.
2. The agency will establish programs to offer any and all immunizations that become available t those employees whose work may subject themselves or others to significant health or safety risks due to occupational or environmental exposure or demands. These will be offered at no cost to the employee.
3. The parties acknowledge that flu may be spread by droplet (liquid), contact, or airborne forms of transmission. Employees who may be subjected to such exposure will be protected by appropriate measures and equipment. The minimum level of protection required for employees who are exposed to potential transmission on the job is the N-95 respirator, which must be provided by the agency. As required by OSHA regulations, employees who are provided respirators will be trained in their proper use and care.
Labor-Management Relations
1. The parties’ existing agreement concerning labor-management relations will remain in effect in the event of a flu pandemic, except as modified in this agreement.
2. The Union and the Agency will keep each other informed of any changes in their designated representatives or means of contact during a flu pandemic.
3. Whenever the agency’s obligations to notify
the union of a change in working conditions and to bargain over such changes may
be met without interfering with the ability of the agency to conduct its
mission, the notice and bargaining procedures the parties have already
established will be followed.
Resources
There are a number of organizations that have produced material that will be useful in supporting the Union’s position in bargaining.
1. Office of Personnel Management
We have attached excerpts from the Human Capital Planning Manual (August 2006 and later), as well as other guidance OPM gave to agencies on individual subjects. This shows you what the Administration’s thinking is regarding how a flu pandemic should be handled in federal work places. The guidance can be used to bolster the union’s arguments, particularly the guidance on the availability of telework and alternative work schedules.
2. AFL-CIO
http://aflcio/org/issues/safety/pandemic_influenza.cfm
The AFL-CIO website has general information on pandemic flu, including a fact sheet on avian flu. It has links to other documents that address specific occupations and their potential for exposure, particularly first responders. One of the links is to the Department of Veterans’ Affairs pandemic flu plan, which is considered one of the best, providing good worker protection for the health care setting. Other worker groups include emergency responders and poultry workers.
3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
http://www.pandemicflu.gov/index.html
The government’s pandemic flu website, managed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has general information on the pandemic, resources for panning and response, and what the federal, state and local governments are doing. It also posts news articles relating to avian flu.
|