In addition, we can't forget that NWSEO represents four other groups of NOAA employees - the employees at the Wallops Command and Data Acquisition Station at Wallops Island, VA; the attorneys in NOAA's Office of General Counsel; the staff at OAR's lab in Key Biscayne; and the civilians crews at NOAA's Aircraft Operations Center. This will be a forum for all NWSEO communities to learn about what each other is doing and what common issues we all face.
But most importantly, this blog needs to be a two-way street. So please give us you comments. You can begin today by telling us what issues you would like us to address, and what you think NWSEO's priorities should be for 2008.
Let's begin to talk.
23 comments:
I am all for communication. I wish all of us at the NWSEO a Happy New Year.
Congratulations!
There are two things that the NWSEO should lobby congress for this year that would be a tremendous help to NWS shift workers and the FERS retirement system.
First, ask congress to grant NWS shift workers the 50/20 retirement rule similar to what the FAA gets. It seems every month there is a new study out on how shift workers lives are cut short due to lack of sleep and rotating schedules. I believe the ability to retire at 50 years with 20 years service is a need for our workforce.
Second, ask congress to fulfill the bargin they made with federal employees when the Federal Employee Retirement System FERS was created . Congress and President Reagan told us that our retirement would be made up in one part by the government and another part social security which would make up the difference between CSRS and FERS. Since then we have seen cuts to social security funding and no corresponding increase to offset that loss to our retirement checks. Every cut to social security is a cut to our retirement and I believe congress has a duty to make up the difference by paying for higher retirement in the FERS calculation.
Thanks for listening,
Robert
This is a great idea. Of course I have a couple of thoughts such as looking at the issue of NWS employees under FERS losing their sick leave if they don't use it before they retire. Also...general and senior forecasters who work shift should get full overtime at 1and 1/2 times their regular pay when working during severe weather. And maybe some type of differential pay could be addressed for working Saturdays for shift workers.
Any news on the "Yesterday's Trash" grievance filed last fall? anon.
According to the 'Top 20 Things NWSEO has done for Weather Service Employees' item #18 lists: "Negotiated Alternative Work Schedules now in place at a third of all Forecast Offices." If the NWSEO believes in the AWS and has negotiated for it, what is being done by NWSEO in order to allow the AWS to be worked in NWS Southern Region?
I think this blog is a very good idea. I do see lots of people suggesting more or better pay for forecasters, so I am sure I will get lots of feedback about my comment. I think one item the union should pursue this year is to get the Electronics Techs converted from 0856 to 2210's. According to OPM to qualify as a 2210 we need to spend more then 25% of our time on computers. Personally I spend at least 50% on computer related items since the radar is about 75% computers now. Also the ASOS and NWR use computers more. This would not get us the 12 we deserve, but it would get us the 2210 IT bonus which is at least something.
A second item would be along the same lines as someone else pointed out with alternate work schedules. It seems that most people in the forecast offices can work AWS's except the ET side of the house. I think this should be addressed. By letting the ET's work 4-10's it would give them more time to get work done on the road instead of rushing to get back or taking overtime.
Thanks for these comments. NWSEO has limited ability to affect Civil Service wide changes to pay and benefits laws, but we have been doing some thinking about seeking legislation for early retirement. We generally focus our lobbying attention on NWS and NOAA issues, and let AFGE and other larger unions who represent employees in many different agencies handle government-wide civil service issues. I wish we could do it all, but we can't.
I am continuing to have negotiations with management over the HMT selection issues. We are trying to find some comprehensive solution to this problem, and we hope to have this ironed out in the next few weeks.
By the way, there is nothing stopping ETs from having an AWS. Just review Article 21, section 7 of the CBA and remember that the third and fourth paragraphs in the CBA as it is printed in the book are a misprint and should be deleted. There is no required "trial period" for AWSs.
Furthermore, SR employees have just as much right to an AWS as employees in any other region. If you want one at your office, your steward needs to propose one at the LOT meeting, and if you can't agree to one locally, it gets elevated to your regional chair.
As to the issue of ET classification, this is one area that is "non-negotiable" under Federal labor law, so NWSEO has little ability to affect this. And while being classified as 2210 will get you a special pay rate, it also jeopardizes your entitlement to time and one half OT under the FLSA.
Richard,
Your comments are not exactly what I would expect after these comments. Two issues in your comments.
First, True the CBA does state AWS's are approved. The problem is that things are not perfect in the field offices, and regions do have a little more say in what does and doesn't happen. I moved from an office that allowed 4-10's to one that only had straight 8's. When questioned about 10't I was informed that region has not allowed that for ET's in Western Region. Now if I am wrong, then I am sorry, but I am pretty sure the AWS's must be approved by management at each office Article 21, Section 7, B, Part 1. If the employer, or MIC, doesn't want AWS's then they don't have to approve them. This of course is just my understanding of the CBA.
Second issue is your quick dismissal of the ET's converting to 2210's. I know we, as the Weather Service, converted all GS-0856-12's at the RFC's to 2210's about 4 years ago. Why was that different then this suggestion? How are they different? With the increase in computers on the radar it would seem to me that is enough to push us over the 25% workload on computers. To me this seems like a double standard saying it is okay for them, but everyone else has to stay a 0856 because "this is one area that is "non-negotiable" under Federal labor law."
Thanks for you time.
Any employee who is not a rotating shift worker has a contractual right to work an AWS. The language of Art 21, section 7 states: "Employees may choose to participate in one of the following alternative work schedules:" Its the employee's choice - not the manager's.
As to the classification issue, I know we had a union team that studied this a few years ago and I will check with them and ask them to take a fresh look at this issue.
I would like to see the catagories for the Isaac Cline Awards reworked or catagories added. Many forecasters/staff develop software or do research that have a positive impact on operations or provide a better service to the public. I would like to see a catagory(s) to recognize those who make contributions in this area.
In my office, many significant contributions are done via a team. Is it okay to nominate a team?
Virgil,
It is quite ok to nominate a team for the Issac Cline award. Dan and I have seen this quite often the last few years.
I was on the team that reviewed the position descriptions 4 years ago, and would be more than happy to serve again, particularly knowing the process as I do.
Also, what is happening with the grievance filed concerning allowing ET's to attend the AWIPS System Managers course?
As for the AWS, I am an ET and we do work an AWS. One thing that would be very convincing to management should be the amount of overtime reduced when working an AWS. Having the extra time to complete a repair on the road or at the office reduces overtime.
There are offices to where the ET staff is on an AWS, I know as I work at one. In fact, this office also has the ESA working a 4-10 (which is allowable). It is more of the "outdated" mindset of management and their not seeing the benefits of an AWS. For example, an MIC in ER won't allow an AWS because they believe that it is a "morale" issue. This can be further from the truth. In fact, if the office I work at were to go back to an 10-8 type schedule, there could actually be a mutany. Plus, it has actually been beneficial during significant weather events, as it has allowed more people to be in the office. Again, many office MIC's are living in a "fairytale" world when they think an AWS is counterproductive. As the commercial once said, "Try it,you'll like it".
Actually, the "yesterday's trash" grievance should never have been come to that. Why? If NWSH would have lived up to their end of the bargain and utilized the wealth of knowledge and experience (as it was sold during the beginning stages of modernization), much of this would have been avoided. My point is, that when senior management official (s) tell you that, "We felt that HMT's could not handle the new technology", that was the beginning of the end for the HMT. No matter what a HMT does at a WFO from data acquisition, to updating GRIDS, to writing NOWCASTS, to doing the ever so popular GRAPHIC CAST, to issuing River Flood Warnings and Statements, and the list goes on and on and on. While some WFO's have been very proactive and providing much opportunity for the HMT to be a member of operation's team, many WFO's have gone to the elitist mindset, that HMT's cannot do the job. Of course, this is the same mindset at the regional and national headquarter's level too. When senior management tells those in the HMT ranks that the reaon why HMT ranks were being reduced due to a "shrinking of duties and responsibilities", it was not the technology that did this. What caused this reduction, was the decision of upper management to limit the HMT's training (ah can we say sub standard 88-D training), and trying to reduce where they could, their ability to perform more than just data acquisition and the coop program duties. To those MIC's that are advocates of utilizing the HMT to their fullest capacity, you should be commended. To those that continue to restrict what a HMT can do, you really do not belong in your position of authority.
Richard,
A comprehensive solution is this. When there is a HMT opening at a WFO and qualified HMT's apply for the position, then the MIC at the WFO should give first preference in the selection to the qualified HMT. Oh wait, there are MIC's that just want Interns, no matter what. When an office has no HMT's (including the DAPM/OPL), no problem. Let the MIC at the WFO put a stop to the career ladder of the GS-11 HMT that were given hope of a possible promotion. Also, let us not forget the GS-10 in Alaska that were upgraded from a 9 so they could bid on vacancies in the lower 48. Yet again, their aspirations have been dashed by their non-selection and passed over in favor of those with little or no experience in the field.
Also, when a DAPM retires and there are no qualified HMT's on station, I say we do not put out the position as a career ladder for other HMT's NWS wide. No, let us give it to an intern on site or a forecaster that does not want to work shift anymore. Yep, that is a comprehensive solution.
It is not true that ETs in the Western Region can not work an AWS. The ETs at the Las Vegas WFO work one.
Richard,
You said "SR employees have just as much right to an AWS as employees in any other region." Does this include meteorologists? If so, why have all the proposed AWS for mets in SR been turned down at the Regional level?
This is a great addition to the NWSEO information pipeline. I hope you all have time to keep the BLOG entries coming. It's great to hear directly from Rich, Dan and the rest on the latest goings-on, both on the Hill and throughout the union.
Any news on true (time + 1/2) overtime for all GS levels in the NWS rank and file?
===== Roger =====
I would like to know why 5-tier performance plan was implemented only for managers? After seeing the big bonuses given out to those on 5-tier while the worker bees get nothing, it doesn't seem fair. I can just imagine the big "chiefs" that are higher up are being given large amounts for bonuses based on their 5-tier even though NWS seems to always be short on funding.
Second issue: Why are Administrative Support Assistants (ASA) still stuck at GS-7? I do just as much work if not more and am just as important as anyone else in my office. I should not be categorized across the board with other ASA's who may not do beyond their current Position Description. The Navy and Coast Guard have GS-8 to GS-11 Administrative Assistants that have a less detailed Position Description and are hired based on the individuals experience. There should be a new Position Description created for those ASA's that qualify beyond the GS-7 level to move into based on recommendation from their MIC and possibly Director of their Region. ASA's are just as essential to the NOAA/NWS mission as everyone else.
Thank you. Denise
has any thought been given to a buyout request for hmt's?
it would seem that with the large number of boomer met's having left or leaving soon that a buyout could entice many older hmt's out the door. this could open positions for more interns to replace them adding to the pool
for upcoming met positions.
yes i am an hmt...40 years gov service. show me the money and they can show me the door. getting close to 80% csrs so i guess the door may find me soon.
Denise,
I believe that 5-tier performance standard is still being bargained over by NWSEO with management. The 5-tier system is just for non-bargaining unit individuals. Until both sides agree, then bargaining unit members will continue under the 2-tier system.
From what I understand, the managers in one region were, ah, rather ticked that their "bonuses" were rather small when compared to those SES'ers (Like RDs on up). Whether this be true or not, probably depends on what region those RD's are in. Either way, the 2-tier system is a better system (in my opinion) for bargaining unit members because it is dependent on performance throughout the year. When we were on the 5-tier system years ago, unles you received a "cash in your account" award, those that received an award at the end of the year were those that had a rating for commendable or higher. At least now, if you do an exceptional job during a severe weather event, or lead an outreach event, etc., you are recognized "now" and not at the end of the year, where a meet or exceed rating basically meant, thanks for all your hard work but it was not worth an end of the rating year award. Of course, it still depends on the mindset of the MIC at the office a person works at. It appears as if there are some MIC's that still like to "hold on" to that award money and only give it out on their own misery whim. Go Figure!
Richard,
You said "we have been doing some thinking about seeking legislation for early retirement." As a long time rotating shift worker, I say bravo to this idea and think the NWSEO could really get recruitment numbers up by actively pursuing this and other issues involving scheduling that is less impacting to the shift worker -- and there's plenty of medical evidence to support the negative health impacts on frequently rotating shifts. By the way -- WHY has the link to this blog been removed from the NWSEO web page??
Post a Comment