Federal Workers Protests Outside Social Security Offices Nationwide and Rally Against Wisconsin Governor

Workers Protest Outside SSA Offices Nationwide

The whole concept of public servants being able to unionize is abhorrent and should be outlawed. Public service unions and the politicians they "negotiate" with are not on opposite sides of the bargaining table like private sector unions and corporate management. They sit together and share a quid pro quo relationship over the plundering of public funds. The politicians that agree to deals with the unions have nothing to lose because it is other peoples' money they are negotiating with; and the unions' negotiating tools are campaign donations taken from the dues collected from its members whose incomes are paid for by tax dollars. The unions make donations in support or against the politician they are negotiating with. Any sort of relationship like this in the private sector would be considered 100% illegal. FDR was right when he declared public employee unions to be immoral, and Reagan was right when he fired the air traffic controllers. Unions have certainly done a lot for changing working conditions, compensation, and benefits for generations of workers in the private economy, and they have a place there; but when it comes to organizing in the public sector, they are fundamentally immoral and unethical due to the unique relationships that exist between workers, politicians and the taxpaying public. - Bill, February 25, 2011

March 2, 2011

govexe.com - Employees marched outside nearly 100 Social Security offices nationwide on Wednesday, according to a government workers union, to protest deep cuts -- including pay cuts and furloughs -- that officials warned would result from proposed budget reductions.

Legislation Congress passed to fund government for the rest of fiscal 2011 strips $1.7 billion from the Social Security Administration's $11.4 billion budget.

SSA officials said deep cuts will result in office and phone line closures, as well as furloughs of agency workers. The processing of claims, checks and disability appeals will take much longer, workers and union officials warned.

"As we await congressional action, we are doing what we can to minimize the budget uncertainties from interfering with your lives and work," SSA Commissioner Michael Astrue wrote in a Feb. 23 e-mail to administration employees. "We will do what we can to prevent furloughs caused by not having enough money to pay you. That strategy may mean tough choices like cutting back on or eliminating overtime and expanding the hiring freeze."

The agency could shut offices completely for a day or two at a time, or remain open and operate with a smaller staff, said Witold Skwierczynski, SSA representative for the American Federation of Government Employees. If offices close down, then the public won't have access to SSA services, while short-staffing would result in longer wait times, he said in a call with reporters on Wednesday.

SSA also will face additional furloughs, layoffs and possible office closings in fiscal 2012 if proposals to return to fiscal 2008 funding levels are approved, according to Skwierczynski.

Another AFGE official, Dana Duggins, estimated that SSA could lose as many as 8,000 jobs in the next two years.

"If furloughs take place, there would be a hiring freeze for this year, and we would be likely to lose about 3,500 [employees] for this year alone," Duggins said Tuesday in an interview with Government Executive. "If we go back to [fiscal] 2008 budget cuts for [fiscal] 2012, we would lose the staffing we'd gained since 2008. We're looking at another 4,500 next year."

SSA is offering an early-out option to employees thinking about retirement.

According to the Office of Personnel Management, Civil Service Retirement System workers who voluntarily take an early out will see their benefits reduced by 2 percent for each year under age 55 at the time of separation. Those under the Federal Employees Retirement System would not see a reduced annuity and would not be eligible for special retirement supplement payments until they reach the minimum retirement age.

According to Duggins, the goal of early-out offers is to reduce the size of the agency's workforce so fewer people are laid off. She noted it's not a popular option with workers, however.

"Typically, people are not leaving in droves when the economy is already suffering," Duggins said. "It's typically not something that is widely embraced, and the commissioner has offered it in the last few years."

SSA did not respond to requests for comment before publication.

Federal Workers Rally Against Wisconsin Governor

Since when is "collective bargaining" considered a "right"? If you think about it, I don't think it is explicitly stated anywhere in the U.S. Constitution that any worker has the right to bargain collectively. On the other hand, it certainly is a privilege. The liberal left too often get rights and privileges mixed up to the point where no one really truly knows what we rate. - Proud American, February 24, 2011

February 23, 2011

govexec.com - Federal workers joined hundreds rallying in front of the Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's Washington Office on Wednesday as part of a union show of support for Wisconsin's protesting public sector employees.

For two weeks, union members, public employees and activists in Madison, Wis., have protested a bill pushed by Walker that would confine collective bargaining rights for public employees to wages only, require unions to hold annual votes on whether to maintain the union, and limit unions' ability to collect member dues. The bill also would require state employees to pay half their pension costs and twice the health care costs they currently pay.

Activists and union members from both the private and public sectors rallied at the Wisconsin governor's office near the Capitol, carrying signs reading "Don't Slash the Middle Class" and "Union Busting Is Disgusting."

Asked why he attended the rally, Ben Butler, president of American Federation of Government Employees Local 2741, said,

"One word: solidarity."

The issue is "not about the budget," J. David Cox, secretary-treasurer of AFGE, told Government Executive during the rally.

"It's about denying workers a basic right" to collectively bargain. [Editor's Note: Collective bargaining is a labor agreement granted by law, not a human right.]

Union leaders in Wisconsin have said they would be willing to negotiate with Walker on fiscal issues, but Walker rejected the proposed compromise.

Many attendees said they feared that measures like the one being debated in Wisconsin would be proposed across the country.

"If Wisconsin goes, the rest will, too," said Sue Thomas, who works for AFGE's finance department and whose husband works at the National Gallery of Art in security.

Federal "workers are facing the same issues," said Tom Webb, a member of AFGE local 3615, in a view expressed by many federal workers at the rally.

Some federal employees on Wednesday also protested a potential government shutdown that could come when the current spending bill expires on March 4. Attendees at the rally carried signs reading, "No Union Busting, No Shutdown."

Saul Schniderman, a Library of Congress employee who is president of Council 26 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, which represents a portion of federal employees, said the potential shutdown was a big concern for members of his guild, recounting the last federal government shutdown in 1995.

It was "not a pretty picture," he said.

Ann Buchanan, a retired Census Bureau employee, said she feared a government shutdown this year would affect workers more, given the state of the economy. In contrast with the current uncertainty surrounding whether workers would be compensated for furloughed time retroactively, during the last shutdown "there was a sense that it would be resolved," Buchanan said.

"Government employees -- who want to work -- would be shut out of their jobs." said Cox, adding he thinks Republicans are trying to "starve [agencies] of the resources that they need" to fulfill their missions with their proposed budget for the rest of fiscal 2011.

"It's about clean water, clean air, veterans' health care" and the other services government provides, Cox said.

Federal Employees do not have collective bargaining and we're doing OK. We got a pay freeze this year, but all in all we're doing OK. We pay, like most in the private sector, 7 to 8% for our pension plans. We also pay quite a bit (depending on which plan you choose) for our health plans. There are just as many states in the USA that do not have collective bargaining as compared to those who do. Collective bargaining is not a "right" like so many commentators have stated during this debate. States are sovereign entities that may or may not choose to allow collective bargaining. When you think of all the time, effort and money spent on an annual basis connected with school boards negotiating teacher contracts with professional union negotiators, it's horrendous. The system has been stacked in a lopsided way to favor the unions. Then let's take a look at how things really work. Unions give boatloads of money to the democrats (legalized bribes - campaign contributions), the democrat lawmakers make sure legislation then favors the unions, unions then continue to collect forced union dues through public worker's paychecks, then that money then gets recycled back to the democrat politicians. The union reps are fat, dumb, and happy, the public employees get unbelievable benefits paid almost in full by the taxpayers, and it goes on and on. This is why collective bargaining needs to stop. This system is corrupt with union dues mandatorily being confiscated from union workers then laundered into campaign donations back to the democrats. My hat goes off to Governor Walker!! This is not about rights. It's about corrupt unions wanting to keep their coffers intact. - DOD Employee - Navy, February 24, 2011

Public workers, state or federal, should not be able to unionize. Unions have forced benefits that can not be sustained. Why should union employees not contribute to their health care or pensions? There should not be ANY defined benefit plans, and public employees should pay an appropriate portion of their benefit cost. It is time our entitlement society grew up and faced reality. One more thing -- it is not just Republicans that are trying to bring spending down to a sustainable level, but all fiscal conservatives, regardless of party. - Fedagainstunions, February 24, 2011