FAQs about the EPA Anti-Employee Edict

Questions about the agency’s arbitrary and capricious actions

Management has blamed the union for this situation. Is that true?
No, that is patently false. Management has been using a standard set of talking points that
blame the Union for the agency’s failure to follow ground rules and bargain in good faith.

The cover of the document reads that this is an agreement between AFGE and EPA. Did AFGE
agree to this edict?
No, the Union will never sign an “agreement” or “contract” that hurts EPA employees.

Is this document a legal “contract?” Doesn’t a contract require a meeting of the minds
between two or more parties?
The Union does not consider this a legal contract. However, it is up the Union to prove that it is
not legal. The Union plans on doing so through the Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) complaint filed
with the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA). The FLRA is an independent agency of the
United States government that governs labor relations between the federal government and its
employees.

How can the agency unilaterally impose this edict on employees?

The agency seems to believe it can impose the edict by claiming the Union refused to bargain.
The Union is preparing for a long fight to disprove the agency’s claim.

What are AFGE’s rights?

The Union is pursuing our right to have the FLRA intervene through a ULP complaint. The
Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) protects federal employees’
rights to organize, bargain collectively, and participate in labor organizations of their choosing –
and to refrain from doing so. An “unfair labor practice” is conduct by agencies or unions that
violates rules established by or rights protected under the Statute.

What is AFGE doing to stop this edict? Who is leading the effort?
AFGE Council 238, which represents a Bargaining Unit of approximately 8,000 EPA employees,
has filed a ULP complaint against the agency. The ULP is filed with the FLRA, an independent
administrative federal agency that administers the labor-management relations programs for
2.1 million federal employees.

1
What are the next steps in the process of fighting this edict and how long will it take?
It is impossible to predict the timeframe for the FLRA hearing and ruling on the ULP. The FLRA
is currently without general counsel, which has resulted in significant delays in prosecuting
unfair labor practices.

Why can’t AFGE go straight to court?

AFGE must follow the required process for labor disputes, which starts with a ULP filed against
the agency with the FLRA.

What other actions are being taken to stop this?

A provision of the fiscal 2020 Financial Services and General Government appropriations bill
(H.R. 3351) would block agencies from implementing any collective bargaining agreement that
has not been “mutually and voluntarily agreed to by all parties” or was not the result of binding
arbitration. The ban is retroactive to April 30, 2019.

If enacted, the bill would prevent agencies from unilaterally implementing new union contracts.
The provision also would prevent the implementation of contracts as mandated by the Federal
Service Impasses Panel, which makes decisions on contested contract proposals if labor and
management cannot reach an agreement. The impasses panel recently has overwhelmingly
sided with management in disputes between the Health and Human Services Department and
the National Treasury Employees Union, and between the Social Security Administration and
AFGE.

What are other concerns in the process to fight the edict?

In general, the FLRA has taken on a dramatic “pro-agency” bent when it comes to settling
disputes. The result is a very challenging environment for unions. As federal agencies
negotiate new union contracts with their workers, many have been pressing for the same types
of anti-employee provisions sought through the executive orders struck down by the courts.
Enabling this process has been the seven-member Federal Service Impasse Panel, which is part
of the FLRA. When an agency and a union reach a stalemate, the dispute goes before the
impasse panel. In one recent case involving the Department of Health and Human Services, a
union representing 14,000 workers at the agency lost the majority of its arguments before the
impasse panel, which rewrote significant portions of the contract in favor of management.

EPA’s imposed edict hurts both employees and the agency. What is the motivation?
This is part of a strategy to dismantle federal unions and take away the bulk of meaningful
rights and benefits an employee gets from union membership. The agency wants to eliminate
the family- and worker-friendly programs and policies that the Union champions. The EPA Anti-
Employee Edict is a blatant act of union-busting, attacking the organization that represents the
largest number of EPA employees. It is a concerted attack that is the first step in taking out all
of the unions that protect EPA employees.

2
The agency has not communicated the real reasons for this unprecedented attack on
employees. Two motives are the most likely: The first is to force employees to leave the
agency. It is reported that the goal is to reduce EPA to 12,000 employees from our current
14,000. The second is simply to disrupt and aggravate the hard working, committed employees
of EPA.

Who wrote this “contract?” Who is driving this effort to hurt employees?
The agency has not identified the authors or champions of the edict. However, we do know
that the majority of career senior leaders at the agency support programs like telework that
provide opportunities for employees to have healthy work/life balances.

At least two other agencies have imposed similar anti-employee and union-busting edicts, and
it is likely to happen at more agencies and to more unions over the next year to 18 months.

Why were only a limited number of articles in the Master Collective Bargaining Agreement up
for negotiation and not all articles?
The MCBA limits the number of articles to six (6) for each party. That can change if both parties
agree.

Will agency senior leaders and the RA do anything to stop this?

No. The Regional Administrator is bound by his responsibility to support the Administration’s
decisions. However, both the RA and DRA have stated they will communicate employee
concerns to Administrator Wheeler and Henry Darwin, Associate Administrator of the Office of
Mission Services.

Does the agency understand the impacts of this edict?

We can only assume it does. Unfortunately, employees have yet to witness any action to
prevent the havoc this edict will wreak on employees’ professional and personal lives.

In addition to negative impacts on our families and personal lives, the edict strips rights of
employees and places a significant administrative and financial burden on the agency.
Completing hundreds of new schedule agreements, spending time evaluating and discussing
issues with supervisors, and significant increases in transit subsidies will strain already-scarce
agency human and financial resources. There will also be a significant increase in the agency’s
carbon footprint.

There is no return on investment for the taxpayer. The financial and administrative burden,
decrease in employee morale and quality of work environment, and the resulting potential for a
decline in customer service make this a losing situation for everyone but the authors and
proponents of the anti-employee edict.

3
How can we express our concerns to management?
Employees are sharing their concerns during all-hands meetings and to managers via email.
During the July 9, 2019, all-hands meeting in Region 2, an employee asked management if they
would provide a survey or other way to get feedback from employees. Management
representatives at the meeting responded that the Agency will not provide a survey or other
way for employees to provide feedback. However, employees were encouraged to
communicate their concerns up their respective chains of command.

Despite the agency’s limit on the time union representatives have to represent and advise
employees, management continues to direct employees to the union for clarification of the
edict’s requirements. AFGE is not a signatory to the edict and cannot provide information on or
justification for the agency’s arbitrary and capricious actions to hurt employees or limit the
Union’s ability to represent employees.

Has the Agency broken any labor laws by attempting to force this edict on employees?
The existing 2007 MCBA remained in place pending negotiations as a function of the language
contained in the MCBA, not as a function of statutory or legal requirement.

Article 41 of the MCBA established the condition:

- “[t]his Agreement shall remain in full force and effect for three (3) years from the date
of approval by the Agency Head or designee and may be extended in one (1) year
increments thereafter.”
- “If either Party desires to renegotiate this Agreement upon termination, it will notify the
other Party in writing no less than sixty (60) days but not more than ninety (90) days prior to
the expiration date of the Agreement (or anniversary date if the Agreement has been
extended). In the event neither Party requests negotiations, the Agreement will be
automatically extended for one (1) year.”
The negotiated ground rules under which the 2007 MCBA was negotiated, and that were
agreed to by both the Union and the Agency state:
- This MOU governs the procedures for negotiating the MCBA between the parties; it will
become effective on the date executed, and will remain ·in full force and effect until the
new MCBA is effective.
- All provisions of the current MCBA shall remain in full force and effect until a new
Agreement is signed and effective.

4
How does this edict impact the local supplemental agreement?
The agency is refusing to recognize existing local supplemental agreements in place prior to the
implementation of the new unilateral “contract” (EPA Anti-Employee Edict). However, it is
unknown if this has been consistently applied throughout the US.

In a recent arbitration decision on the local supplemental, the arbitrator sided with Local 3911
and directed the agency to return to the negotiating table. The 2007 MCBA established items to
be negotiated at the local level. Because the new EPA Anti-Employee Edict includes no such
conditions, the agency is using it to nullify all local supplemental agreements.

What other EPA offices are impacted by this edict?

The agency is imposing this edict on all AFGE bargaining units.

Why did the agency provide no guidance on this until the day they imposed it on employees?
Why is the agency implementing this so quickly?
Managers were provided with little or no information and were directed not to speak to
employees. Announcing the edict during a holiday week when many employees were on
vacation and implementing on a short time frame could be intended to cause maximum
disruption and negative impact on employees. This is an attempt to sow chaos in our ranks.

When will this new agency edict expire?

The agency has imposed an arbitrary duration of seven years for this edict. The 2007 MCBA
includes a duration of three (3) years from the date of approval by the Agency Head or designee
and may be extended in one (1) year increments.

Questions about what Bargaining Unit employees can do

What should I do about my schedule?

Employees are advised to change their schedules when directed to by management and include
the following statement:

“I am making this schedule change under protest in response to management’s

direction. The EPA Anti-Employee Edict does not constitute a contract or agreement.”

What can I do to help stop anti-employee actions like this edict?

Contact your Congresspersons and Senators to share how this has negatively impacted you,
your family, coworkers, and workplace. Contact information can be found at
https://www.contactingcongress.org/

5
Are there talking points for calling Members of Congress?
You are encouraged to express concerns in your own words. Focus on the strong business case
for family- and employee-friendly policies/programs and the adverse impacts to the
organization of eliminating employee protections. Some suggested topics:
 Impacts to your child’s school schedule due to unnecessary commuting time.
 You or you and spouse scheduling care for children and/or sick or elderly family. (Not
caring for family, which is covered under separate programs.)
 Attacks on federal employees’ rights disguised as saving money or improving the
government.
 Significant administrative burden and increased costs for agency (and taxpayers).
 Increased carbon footprint of unnecessary commuting, office light use, etc.
 Telework and flexible scheduling decrease absenteeism and improve morale, which
translate to a quality customer service for the public.
 No return on investment for taxpayers. There are no benefits to taxpayers from taking
away employee rights.
 The agency’s Employee Viewpoint Survey results reflect the success of the telework
program.
 Management and labor organizations working together will help meet the agency’s
mission.

Remember to include “asks” in your messages to Senators and Representatives. Suggestions:

 Take action to protect employee rights by stopping EPA’s edict.
 Seek support from Congressional leadership for legislation to stop agencies.
 Restore employee telework and save the taxpayers money.
 Protect American families by protecting programs that allow work/life balance.
 Force EPA to bargain in good faith.

Do I need to be concerned about Hatch Act or other rules?

Yes, potentially. As a best practice, do not use agency equipment to read email or other
communication from the Union.

Questions about provisions and requirements of the EPA Anti-Employee Edict

When does the agency claim this edict takes effect?

July 8, 2019. The Administration expects all EPA offices to comply with the edict by August 4.

What are the most significant ways this edict hurts employees?
Please see Table 1 for a list of the articles of the edict and impacts to employees.

6
How does the agency’s edict impact my schedule?
Employees on the 4/10 schedule are not eligible to work from home other than “situational
telework” (formerly called “episodic telework”). Approval of situational telework is at the
discretion of management.
Employees on the 5/4-9 schedule are eligible to work from home one day during the week that
does not include a flex day. Employees are also eligible for situational telework at the discretion
of management.
Employees on an 8-hour schedule are eligible to work from home one day per week and for
situational telework.

Will we need to complete and sign new telework agreements? Can the agency force us to do
that?
We will have to comply under protest. When managers direct employees to change their
schedules, we advise including the following statement with the completed form:

“I am making this schedule change under protest in response to management’s

direction. The EPA Anti-Employee Edict does not constitute a contract or agreement.”

What does the edict allow for maxiflex?

We have not officially received details of the program. For 5+ years, management obstructed
the Union’s attempts to get the maxiflex program for Region 2 employees, so employees may
experience obstacles in using maxiflex.

Does the edict change core hours?

Core hours are now 9 – 3. Human Resources indicated in the July 9 meeting that an employee’s
schedule would govern their start/leave times. The Union has not received clarification on that
statement.

Can we telework during a week we take leave?

Yes. Leave does not count towards the requirement to be in the office 4 days per week.

Is the agency changing medical or Reasonable Accommodation (RA) telework?

The agency has placed a time limit on medical telework. There is no time limit on RA telework.
Employees should consider EEO or legal action in the event their telework accommodations
have been canceled, disapproved, or changed as a result of the agency edict.

7
How does the edict impact member dues withholding?
The agency is using the dues article of the edict to reduce Union membership at EPA. They plan
to accomplish this through two mechanisms: First, the agency is stipulating that dues
withholding be the same across all Locals and that the Union make this change within 30 days.
If the Union doesn’t comply, the agency stops all dues withholding. The second is by forcing
employees to submit membership renewals each year, at least 45 days before the employee’s
enrollment anniversary date. The agency will cancel the dues withholding if the form is not
received in a “timely fashion.”

AFGE is transitioning to a new dues system that allows greater control and privacy for
members. More information can be found at www.AFGE.org/edues or via a YouTube video at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj7xemL16Z0. Locals will be assisting new members enroll and
current members transition to E-dues via the website.

See table 1 for more information on the requirements of the edict.

General Questions

Will the agency provide information sessions and/or training to assist employees?
During the all-hands meetings, management stated they would be providing some type of
training. Training has been provided to some managers in the agency.

Does this edict impact the consolidation?

Employees can expect a more disruptive, crowded workplace as a result of the agency’s edict.
Throughout the consolidation planning process, the Union identified and offered solutions to
remedy negative impacts of increased floor density resulting from the consolidation. The Union
has already received reports of various issues and management’s inaction.

Employees should discuss disruptive behavior, excessive noise, or refrigerator overcrowding

issues with your management. Document the discussion and management’s actions to resolve
the issues.

How do I contact Union officials?

You can email AFGE Local 3911 at AFGE3911@gmail.com. The Local is evaluating other
platforms to inform and connect with members and potential members.

8
Table 1 – Edict requirements and impacts on employees.
Article Change
1 – Recognition and The agency only has to deal with one
Unit Description union rep at a time for each matter.
2 – Union activities Union officials cannot represent
and official time employees in grievances, EEO
complaints, or Merit System
Protection Board complaints.
Official time for union
representatives severely restricted.
Official time to represent employees
must be requested and approved by
management and Labor Relations in
advance.
3 – Agency Facilities Unions are prohibited from
communicating with employees by
using internal email, equipment, and
bulletin boards.
Who Benefits Impacts/comments
Agency The edict places no limits on the
number of agency reps for each
matter. One union rep could be
dealing with 5 agency reps on a single
issue.
Agency Removes employee protections
against management abuse and
discrimination.
Management can deny official time to
represent employees at their
discretion. This puts employees at a
disadvantage, especially in cases
against abusive managers.
Agency Management wants to ensure
employees will not be able to receive
important notices in a timely manner.
9
 Unions will have no office or other
dedicated areas to speak
confidentially with employees.
4 – Union Dues Employees must renew dues each
year.
5 – Midterm Limits time Union officials have to
Negotiations represent employee interests in
consolidation or reorganizations.
6 – Negotiated The union is prohibited from filing
Grievance Procedure grievances on most situations where
employees are abused or
discriminated against.
The time for an employee to file a
grievance has been cut in half.
7 - Arbitration Agency will automatically withdraw a Agency
complaint if they feel the Union has
not taken “timely action,” which is
undefined.
Without dedicated, private areas to
meet with employees, management
will be able to listen to conversations
about union action to stop abuse and
discrimination.
Agency Management anticipates employees
will forget to renew and union
memberships will be canceled
automatically.
Agency Employees will have little to no input
on changes to their office spaces.
Agency No procedure in the edict has been
negotiated.
Employees are at greater risk of not
meeting filing deadline.
10
8 – Merit Promotion Agency only has to post a vacancy
announcement for 5 days.
Management can interview none,
one, or all candidates on the cert.
9 - Leave Employee must request leave before
start of duty day.
Management can request medical
documentation for medical leave of
fewer than 3 days.
Employees cannot challenge
requests for medical certification for
leave.
Medical certification must be signed
by a physician or PA and include
personal medical information about
illness or incapacitation.
Agency Limits the number of employees who
can apply for a vacant position.
Eliminates safeguards the Union
negotiated to help prevent rampant
preselection at EPA.
Agency Allows management to penalize
employees who may need to take
leave unexpectedly in cases of illness
of employee or child, injury, etc.
Changes allow management to harass
employees with medical issues and
request personal health information.
11
10 - Performance New PARS forms may be required for Agency
2020.
Eliminated Performance Assistance
Plans.
Performance Improvements Plans
timeframe cut in half to 30 days.
Eliminates undefined supervisory
“burdens” for managing perceived
poor performance.
11 - Discipline Letters of reprimand now in eOPF for Agency
3 years.
12 – Work Schedules Types of Alternate Work Schedules Agency
generally unchanged.
All employees on compressed
schedules are required to sign in/out
each day.
Tour of Duty must be between 6 AM
and 6 PM (max of 10 hours/day)
12
Potentially eliminates PARS forms
negotiated by the Union. Agency’s
refusal to bargain in food faith will
prevent the Union from negotiating
fair PARS requirements.
Makes it easier for management to fire
employees.
Potentially allows managers to fire
employees deemed “poor performers”
due to disability or parental status.
Agency reduction of official time and
grievance categories will prevent
employees from having
representation.
Disciplinary actions will remain on file
longer.
Participation in alternate work
schedules is at management
discretion: supervisors can change or
deny an employee’s AWS and
Maxiflex.
10 ½ hours including unpaid lunch.
 Credit hours can be earned (max 2/
day and 10/ pay period)
Maxiflex option allows employees to
vary the number of hours worked
each day and each week.
Region 2 core hours changed to 9:30
AM to 3:00 PM
13 - Telework Employees are expected to be in the
office 4 days/week
Credit hours earned only with
supervisor approval.
Maxiflex is the only schedule that
allows employees to earn credit hours.
Maxiflex increases administrative
responsibilities of supervisors and
employees. This includes submitting
advance schedules, completing a daily
time sheet, and new codes in
PeoplePlus.
This is a reduction for Region 2, which
has the longest at EPA (9:00 – 3:30).
Agency Regular telework must not exceed 1
day/week.
4/10 schedule – not eligible for
telework
5/4-9 schedule, 1 day of telework the
week not including flex day
8-hour schedule – 1 day of telework
per week.
Leave does not count towards the 4
day requirement.
All AFGE employees must complete
new telework forms before August 4.
13
“Episodic telework” is now called
“Situational telework.”
Employees may not conduct regular
telework outside the “local
commuting area.”
Medical telework must be supported
by medical documentation.
14
Telework that occurs on a non-routine,
occasional, emergency, or ad hoc
basis, and must be for a defined, finite
period.
The change to “situational” brings EPA
terminology in line with OPM.
An employee may be approved for
both situational and regular telework.
The Agency defines the local
commuting area “the geographic area
that usually constitutes one area for
employment purposes. It includes any
population center and the surrounding
localities in which people live and can
reasonably be expected to travel back
and forth daily to their official work
site.”
Temporary <90 days, but may be
extended.
The agency feels they have a right to
access personal medical information.
Management can approve limited
telework outside of a “local
commuting area.”
 Any telework-ready employee must
complete unscheduled telework.
The agency has the unreviewable
right to end an employee’s telework.
14 - Duration The agency claims that “the agency
and the union agree that for the full
term of the agreement. . . the
provisions of this agreement shall
remain in full force and effect and
unchanged unless the parties
consent to change in the Agreement,
or as required by applicable law.”
The agency will ignore past practice
under FLRA case law and may
require the union to follow this
edict.
This telework is required when the
agency announces changes to its
operating status (inclement weather,
early dismissal for holidays, etc.)
The agency will determine what is
“unscheduled telework.”
Management can end an employee’s
telework if the telework agreement
“no longer meets the organization’s
needs.”
Agency The Union has agreed to no part of this
document. The agency is unilaterally
imposing the requirements of the edict
with no attempt to bargain in good
faith.
This edict is not a legal “contract” or
“agreement.”
The agency will consciously ignore the
law if it contradicts the arbitrary and
capricious requirements of the edict.
15
The agency establishes a “duration
of agreement” of seven years in the
edict.
The agency identifies requirements
for negotiation of ground rules.
16
The agency is unilaterally imposing an
expiration date. The MCBA the agency
is ignoring “shall remain in full force
and effect for three (3) years from the
date of approval by the Agency Head
or designee and may be extended in
one (1) year increments thereafter.”
The agency and the Union were in the
process of negotiating a new contract
when the agency stopped adhering to
ground rules and walked away from
negotiations.