REDUCTION IN FORCE Page 1 of 4
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
This agreement applies only to the RIF of the employees occupying the positions within the competitive areas that IRS had identified in writing to NTEU prior to the submission of proposals. It applies to no other RIF and any proposal to conduct another RIF will carry with it the obligation on management to separately notify the Union and negotiate to and through impasse, if requested, absent an emergency as that term is understood in Title VII of the CSRA.
The AGENCY proposed the following:
This agreement will remain in effect until the termination date of the NORD IV Agreement and will apply to any RIF conducted by the Agency from its effective date to its termination date.
The ARBITRATOR adopted the UNION's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
Furthermore, this agreement will not apply to any Transfers of Function [ToF] that IRS may wish to do in connection with the announced RIFs and reorganization.
The AGENCY had no counterproposal.
The ARBITRATOR declined to adopt the UNION's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
The parties agree to formally sever from this dispute and agreement any continuing dispute they have over the application and termination of the redeployment agreement. Nothing in this agreement adversely impacts on any other rights the union may have to pursue disputes related to redeployment.
The AGENCY had no counterproposal.
The ARBITRATOR declined to adopt the UNION's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
A reduction in force (RIF) is the release of a competing employee from their competitive level by furlough for more than thirty (30) calendar days, separation, demotion, or reassignment requiring displacement, when the release is required because of lack of work; shortage of funds; insufficient personnel ceiling; reorganization; the exercise of reemployment or restoration rights or reclassification of an employee's position due to erosion of duties when such action will take effect after an agency has formally announced a RIF in the employee's competitive area.
The AGENCY proposed the following:
A reduction in force (RIF) is the release of a competing employee from their competitive level by furlough for more than thirty (30) calendar days, separation, demotion, or reassignment requiring displacement, when the release is required because of lack of work; shortage of funds; insufficient personnel ceiling; reorganization; the exercise of reemployment or restoration rights; or reclassification of an employee's position due to erosion of duties when such action will take effect after an agency has formally announced a RIF in the employee's competitive area and when the reduction in force will take effect within 180 days.
The ARBITRATOR adopted the AGENCY's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
In no case is IRS authorized by this agreement, implicitly or explicitly to reassign work in expectation of the reorganization and RIF. The parties agree that where a unilateral change has occurred prior to notice or the completion of bargaining the Employer will take all reasonable steps to return the situations to the status quo and make adversely impacted employees whole.
The AGENCY had no counterproposal.
The ARBITRATOR declined to adopt the UNION's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
A RIF within the Internal Revenue Service shall be carried out in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, all national and local contracts, past practice, and this Article.
The AGENCY proposed the following:
A RIF within the Internal Revenue Service shall be carried out in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, national contracts, and this Article.
The ARBITRATOR adopted the AGENCY's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
The Service is committed to taking all steps practicable to lessen the adverse impact on employees. One measure of this is a commitment to take the same steps to lessen the impact of the RIF on unit employees that it did nonunit employees unless it can be shown that to do so in a particular case would excessively interfere with a management right. Where the Employer believes it would excessively interfere with its rights, it will put all its reasons for that conclusion in writing at the time it denies the employee his or her request or within 15 days of the employee making the request, whichever is sooner.
The AGENCY had no counterproposal.
The ARBITRATOR declined to adopt the UNION's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
Additionally, IRS will mail via first class mail to the home address of all these employees in these competitive areas a package of material prepared by the Union.
The AGENCY had no counterproposal.
The ARBITRATOR adopted the UNION proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
With the implementation of this agreement, the Employer will cease or freeze all actions connected with filling the "needs jobs" or those jobs created by the reorganization to do the work of the abolished or moved positions. Moreover, nothing in this agreement authorizes or condones any earlier efforts to fill those jobs.
The AGENCY had no counterproposal.
The ARBITRATOR declined to adopt the UNION's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
All employees, and any involved Union representatives, will be given 1 hour of administrative time, or whatever additional time is considered reasonable, to be briefed on the RIF contract, procedures, benefits, rights, and related matters by the Union, irrespective of any formal meeting management may wish to hold with them. Management will provide space and other reasonable supplies for the Union to hold the meetings. It will also work with the Union to schedule employees for these briefings so that attendance is orderly. A management official may attend this briefing only by the invitation of the Union. These meetings will be scheduled at the convenience of the local Union officials and with the concurrence (on scheduling only) by management. However, they must be scheduled for the period after copies of the agreement have been distributed and before notices are distributed. The local parties will negotiate over whether they are to be scheduled before or after any management formal meetings. These briefings in no way impact on the right of management to schedule its own formal meetings nor the contractual and legal rights of the Union in those formal meetings.
The AGENCY proposed the following:
Any employee in a competitive area undergoing a RIF who is in a series at or below the grade level which is scheduled for some job abolishment will be given administrative time to be briefed by management on RIF procedures, rights, and related matters. Consistent with Article 8, Section 1 F of NORD IV, a Union representative will be entitled to attend the briefing. Immediately following the conclusion of the briefing, the Union will be provided with up to 30 minutes to meet with employees.
The ARBITRATOR adopted the AGENCY's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
The Employer will maximize the use of authority it has to grant early out retirements. It will grant an early out retirement to any applying employee whose position could be filled at any grade in the career ladder by a qualified employee in a noncontinuing position so long as the qualified employee has applied for that position or otherwise indicated he or she would move to the position once vacated.
The AGENCY had no counterproposal.
The ARBITRATOR declined to consider the UNION's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
Certificates of Expected Separation (CES)or CTAP letters will be provided to employees in noncontinuing positions 6 months prior to the effective date of one's removal from their competitive level. In no case will an employee have less than 6 months of employment with a CES prior to being Rif'd absent an emergency, as understood under 5 U.S.C. Section 7106(d).
The AGENCY proposed the following:
Career Transition Assistance Program (CTAP) certifications will be issued and provided to all competing employees as soon as possible after the completion of the personnel data verification process and not more than 6 months prior to the proposed effective date of a reduction in force.
The ARBITRATOR adopted the AGENCY's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
Once a CES/CTAP letter is granted to an employee, it will not be taken away from the employee, absent a written notice of the reasons for doing so, an opportunity for an oral and/or written reply, and a final decision in writing from the Employer. All the procedures of the oral and written reply process as found in the Adverse Action article of the contract will apply.
The AGENCY had no counterproposal.
The ARBITRATOR declined to adopt the UNION's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The Union proposes the following:
However, the parties agree that any dispute over CES/CTAP provisions not otherwise covered by the "Pre-RIF" dispute resolutions process, may be grieved (since it is not part of the RIF process) and that grievance will involve tile following: A- the second step of the term contract grievance process will be waived, B- if the grievance is unresolved it will be appealed to Expedited Arbitration, and C- to the extent possible, all cases in an appointing office will be consolidated for purposes of arbitration before one arbitrator. It is only with mutual agreement that any of these provisions May be waived.
The AGENCY had no counterproposal.
The ARBITRATOR declined to adopt the UNION's Proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
Prior to the issuance of Summary Statements or any other action outlined below that further implements the RIF, IRS will notify NTEU of the positions and locations of positions that will assume the work of the employees whose jobs are being reassigned or reorganized pursuant to the RIF. The notice will include decisions about any changes in critical elements or performance standards as well as other training and qualifications that will be needed to do the work. It will also include a flow chart showing what work moved from what employee and position to what new employee and positions. If the work of a noncontinuing position will no longer be done, that will be noted for each position. For example, it will detail how the work of each of the 59 noncontinuing positions in Columbia now scheduled for a RIF will be done by the 41 employees scheduled to be hired in Greensboro to do the work. The parties will complete bargaining over that prior to the implementation of the reorganization or any RIF that might precede the reorganization. In other words, no employee will be released from his or her competitive level until the negotiations over where his or her work will go is complete and the employee can make an informed choice about whether or not to follow the work. Any changes made unilaterally prior to these negotiations will be fully reversed and returned to the status quo, consistent with law.
The AGENCY offered no counterproposal.
The ARBITRATOR declined to consider the UNION's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
As part of those negotiations, the Union is free to submit proposals that address the numbers, types, and grades of employees that will be employed in the organizational subdivisions of the IRS after the RIF. This negotiations may include the use of any legal procedures that management used prior to the RIF. This bargaining right does not apply in those offices where management agrees to implement the transition plans that had previously been agreed to between the parties.
The AGENCY had no counterproposal.
The ARBITRATOR declined to consider the UNION's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
Any employee who is given a "directed reassignment" order as part of this reorganization will not be reassigned or ordered to make a decision about the reassignment until all the negotiations called for under the parties' term agreement are completed. In any case, the negotiations called for by the term agreement prior to implementation will be completed prior to any directed reassignment, unless the parties agree that those negotiation obligations are satisfied by these negotiations. Moreover, none of these reassignments may be made until the bargaining mentioned in Subsection A above is complete so the employee can make an informed choice.
The AGENCY had no counterproposal.
The ARBITRATOR declined to consider the UNION's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
Any employee who is reassigned to another post-of-duty inside or outside her normal commuting area pursuant to the RIF will not be ordered to report until the parties have negotiated over the applicability of AWS and local flexiplace options to that newly assigned position. Additionally, the parties will negotiate over the implementation of a "telecommuting" program for these employees similar to the one that management has implemented for nonunit employees. Finally, the Union will be permitted to negotiate over where work will be done within the bounds of case law. All these negotiations will be complete prior to the implementation of any reorganization.
The AGENCY proposed the following:
The Agency will comply with Article 23, sections 9-12 of NORD IV regarding flexiplace.
The ARBITRATOR declined to consider the UNION's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
No employee who is involuntarily moved out of his or her competitive level or otherwise the victim of a RIF will be ordered to move prior to the completion of the RIF.
The AGENCY had no counterproposal.
The ARBITRATOR declined to adopt the UNION's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
The local parties will have no more than 45 days to negotiate over the above listed issues. If they are unable to reach agreement, even with assistance of the FMCS, their dispute will be referred to the national parties, who will then resolve it.
The AGENCY had no counterproposal.
The ARBITRATOR declined to consider the UNION's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
Within 5 days of the implementation of this agreement, the Employer will provide to the Union the following data via a Lotus disk format:
- A list of all employees who have been issued CES (or other "impact") letters. This list will show the race, national origin, gender, disability status (targeted and nontargeted), and age (+/- 40) of these employees. It will further show this data by competitive area and level.
- A list, based on the results of the "mock-RIF" showing those employees likely to be impacted by the RIF. This list will show the race, national origin, gender, disability status (targeted and nontargeted), and age (+/- 40) of these employees. It will further show this data by competitive area and level. Finally, it will show the action taken against each impacted employee, i.e., terminated, downgraded, or remove from competitive level without termination or downgrade.
The data on each employee will be provided without names and in all other respects in a format similar to that provided to the union in the transmission of data in May 1997.
The Union will have the data at least 5 workdays before it has to make a choice between MSPB or grievance procedures or the date of that choice will be appropriately extended so that the Union has the data for at least 5 workdays before making the choice.
Simultaneous with the issuance of any specific Notice of a RIF, the Employer will provide to the Union the following data via a Lotus disk presentation:
- A list showing those employees who received Notices of a RIF. This list will show the race, national origin, gender, disability status (targeted and nontargeted), and age (+/- 40) of these employees. It will further show this data by competitive area and level. Finally, it will show the action taken against each impacted employee, i.e., terminated, downgraded, or remove from competitive level without termination or downgrade.
The data on each employee will be provided without names and in all other respects in a format similar to that provided to the Union in the transmission of data in May 1997.
Once the process of assigning employees has been completed, the Employer will provide to the Union the following data via a Lotus disk presentation.
- A list showing those employees terminated, downgraded, removed from their competi tive level without termination or downgrade or otherwise impacted. This list will show the race, national origin, gender, disability status (targeted and nontargeted), and age (+/- 40) of these employees. It will further show this data by competitive area and level. Finally, it will show the action taken against each impacted employee, i.e., terminated, downgraded, or remove from competitive level without termination or downgrade.
The data on each employee will be provided without names and in all other respects in a format similar to that provided to the Union in the transmission of data in May 1997.
The AGENCY proposed the following:
The Agency will conduct an analysis at the conclusion of the RIF regarding the impact of the RIF on women, minorities, and handicapped employees. This analysis will be shared with NTEU upon completion.
The ARBITRATOR adopted the UNION's proposal.
Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC and National Treasury Employees Union, Case No. 97 FSIP 31, August 11, 1997 (Release No. 400).
The UNION proposed the following:
The Union will be given up to 10 workdays after it has received the data in useable format to submit a comment to IRS which addresses how the potential adverse impact of the RIF on a protected class may be minimized or avoided. IRS will not issue any Summary Statements or Notice of RIF letters until the Union has had an opportunity to comment.
The AGENCY had no counterproposal.
The ARBITRATOR adopted the UNION's proposal.
Page 1 of 4 · Page 2 of 4 · Page 3 of 4 · Page 4 of 4
