Tuesday, June 16, 2009 9:00 a.m. – 9:30 a.m. …afgelocal2513.com/pdfs/Lmr/na090616min.pdf9:45...

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF FIELD LABOR LOCALSLMR AGENDA

June 16 - 18, 2009

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

9:00 a.m. – 9:30 a.m.

OASAM/HRC

Management Attendees: Suzy M. Barker, Director of Human Resources; EdwardHugler, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Operations-OASAM; Sue Ingram, Donna Smith,Craig Trowler, Kevin O’Doherty, Diane McFadgen, OELMR; Kelley Pettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, New York.

General Discussion on the following:

Scheduling: The NCFLL recommended adjustments to the Thursday June 18th

afternoon agenda. One-Third (1/3) of the agenda is for that afternoon. Mr. Huglerto work on the schedule and try to make adjustments.

Staff changes: Ms. Barker announced that Carol Qualls, OELMR Director, hasaccepted a position with ESA. Amanda Gill will be acting director of OELMR.

NCFLL President Dennis DeMay stated that the new Council is looking forwardin working with DOL. Ms. Barker stated that DOL is looking forward to workingwith the NCFLL.

NCFLL President DeMay stated that LMR problems with OFCCP Regionalmanagement continue in Region IV.

NCFLL VP Paul Tracy expressed Article 10 concerns with the addition of staff asa result of the ARRA hiring’s. VP Tracy emphasized the importance for the localoffice steward to be involved at the very earliest possible point. The NCFLLinquired about a flow chart that was promised to the Council at the February 2009National LMR meeting. RA Pettit stated that the flow chart will be shared withthe Council this week during LMR meetings

NCFLL VP Paul Tracy expressed concern with problems encountered by localand regional NCFLL representatives in being hit unusually hard on“particularized need” when making Information Requests.

NCFLL VP Jeff Darby expressed concerns with DOL unwillingness to usemediation in issues where they maintain a grievance is non-grievable/non-arbitratable. DOL management prefers to proceed directly to an arbitrablityhearing instead of mediation. RA Petit stated that new supervisory training isincorporating mediation training as part of the curriculum. Mr. Huggler stated thatDOL management should be receptive to mediation and appreciates thewillingness of the NCFLL in addressing this issue.

NCFLL Treasurer Wheeler raised concerns with the decentralization of LMRfunctions in the regions. The decentralization has resulted in an independentcontractor mentality in the regions with LMR. When the NO had centralizationover the LMR process, it was a better relationship.

9:30 a.m. – 9:45 a.m.

OASAM/OWLBP

Management Attendee: Brooke Brewer, Director of Work life and Benefits Program; Kelley Pettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, New York.

Please discuss how well your agency was prepared for continuation of its operationsduring the recent H1N1 (Swine Flu) outbreak. Information to include: lessons learned;changes being made should the outbreak reoccur; information that was and/or will beprovided to employees in the future to protect themselves from exposure since many ofthem have direct contact with the general public during the performance of their duties.(NN) (41)

Response: Pandemic Flu Information and Guidance is posted on the LaborNet. (SeeHandout “A”). Extensive planning has been done by DOL involving a Pandemic Flu(Asian Bird Flu) Epidemic. Agencies are required to come up with a Pandemic Plan,which are submitted to the Work life and Benefits Program. Each agency is required toprioritize their needs:

What is the critical work that must be done and who must do it? How EES can perform the work? (i.e., telework. Use of telework to

minimize exposure by keeping off public transportation, such as bussesand subways.)

The DOL Pandemic Flu Plan is applicable to a H1N1 (Swine Flu) Pandemic. Agencieshave been asked to gear up for possible problems later in the fall of 2009 when the H1N1Flu could reoccur with more severe results.

2

DOL acknowledges the concerns being raised by the NCFLL, they include: Ability of agencies to perform tele-work since many offices are not equipped to

allow employees to tele-work. Need to relax IT requirement for employee’s use of their personal computer to

perform government work. Have NCFLL representation on the DOL Pandemic Flu Committee.

Action Item: DOL will provide information to the NCFLL concerning the DOLPandemic Flu Plan.

9:45 a.m. – 10:15 a.m.

OASAM/HRC/OWPI

Management Attendee: Michelle Abellar, Project Manager-DOORS SystemKelley Pettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, New York.

Discuss the step by step procedures of the application and verification process inDOORS. Employees continue to be perplexed with this so-called "system". Pleasedelineate items that are handled strictly electronically and items that require the directhandling by people. Applicants are instructed to fax documents that are thenacknowledged electronically, while the application process itself is electronic andinvolves a separate verification process. (PT) (43)

Response: A handout was provided with the Step by Step procedures of the applicationand verification process. (See Handout “B”). The main steps of the DOORSapplication and verification process is:

Applicant applies on line. HR reviews applicant list. HR does quality review to ensure are best qualified. After QR, HR changes status of BQ applicant to BQ and generates a

CERT to mgr. Mgr. selects applicants and email back to HR. HR closes out job.

Written narratives are not scored by machines. As a result, an applicant’s score can bechanged by HR, either up or down, based on subjective criteria.

We acknowledge the concerns raised by the NCFLL with the DOORS process and theproblems being encountered with those who try accessing DOORS; however, theDOORS contract was just renewed.

3

Action Item: The NCFLL will be provided with a copy of the DOORS contract.

Please provide an update on the change to the National Business Center. (PT) (56)

Response: The transition to the National Business Center is in suspension. The transitionwill not occur for at least one year or longer.

10:15 a.m. – 10:45 a.m.

OASAM/S & H

Management Attendee: Macaire Carroll-Gavula, Program Manager, Acting Director ofSafety and Health: Kelley Pettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, NewYork.

Many BUES are unfamiliar with and not trained in SHIMS. Please discuss actions youragency is willing to take in order address this issue. (BT) (50)

Response: The Office of Worker Safety and Health is currently in the final stages ofpreparing a Safety and Health Information Management System (SHIMS) training coursewhich we plan to have available to all DOL employees via the Learning Link trai\ningsite by the middle of the summer. The SHIMS training is designed to give an overviewof the entire SHIMS application and walk an employee through the steps of filing anOSHA 301 Incident Report and a workers’ compensation claim. The training alsoprovides specific guidance to supervisors who must process all OSHA 301 and workers’compensation claims submitted to them by their employees. Also included is guidancefor the safety and health record keepers and the workers’ compensation coordinators whocomplete the electronic filing of their respective forms. The SHIMS training includes aglossary of terms and simulations, so employees may run through the processes in theactual training. The training is designed so that employees may complete it once or turnto portions of it on as as-needed basis.

Action Item : Office of Worker Safety and Health to provide information on the namescopied on the SHIMS emails.Follow-up email of June 16, 2009: At the meeting this morning, one of the NCFLLmembers asked about the names copied on the SHIMS emails. For OSHA 301 filings,SHIMS copies the employee, the selected supervisor, the workers’ comp coordinators toinclude the applicable regional safety and health managers, the OSHA record keeper andmembers of my safety and health staff here at the NO. For workers’ compensation casefilings, SHIMS copied the employee, the selected supervisors, the workers’ compensationcoordinators to include the applicable regional safety and health managers and membersof my safety and health staff here at the NO.

4

10:45 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.

BREAK

11:00 a.m. – 11:30 a.m.

OASAM/ITC

Management Attendee: Tonja Manning, OASAM; Jeff Kenyon, OASAM; KelleyPettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, New York.

Please discuss the impact that ARRA, the remaining budget for FY 2009 and theproposed budget for FY 2010 will have on your agency in the areas of hiring, travel,supplies, and work space allocation. (NN) (40)

Response: OASAM has done some hiring in the Regions but the bulk of the hiring’s arewith the enforcement agencies (EBSA, OFCCP, OSHA, WH). The plan is for allagencies to get back to their FY 2001 staffing levels. Each agency has developed a hiringplan.

BUES are currently taking the required Computer Security Training. According to thetraining, employees are NOT allowed to use their home computers for governmentbusiness. This is placing a “chilling effect” on the use of Flexi-place by BUES who donot have agency-issued laptops. Please provide guidance for BUES use of Flexi-placewhen they do not have agency issued-laptops. (JD) (46)

Response: DLMS 9-1209 addresses Usage of Sensitive Data on DOL Equipment asfollows:

Any information technology device (mobile or stationary) used to access or storeprotected PII and other sensitive data must either be the property of the governmentor government-authorized or leased, and must be configured to meet the requirementsof this and other applicable policies. Written authorization from the agency DAA isrequired in cases where use of government-owned equipment is not practical orpossible. Cases requiring DAA authorization include, but are not limited to:

Use of contractor-owned computers for storage or for remote/mobile access to aDOL system containing protected PII and other sensitive data;

Use of personally owned or public computers to access, handle, or store such datain mobile workforce arrangements;

Use of personally owned or public computers to access, handle, or store such datain emergency situations such as pandemic and contingency operations.

The DAA authorization of non-government equipment must acknowledge the DAA’sawareness of and acceptance of the risks inherent in using such equipment; describehow the agency intends to mitigate those risks; and impose appropriate stipulations

5

and rules of behavior. The DAA cannot authorize non-government equipment toaccess a system or application (e.g., universal applications) owned by another DOLagency, without the express approval of the owning agency.

Based on the above, employees are not permitted to use their personal computer toperform government work unless they receive prior supervisory approval.

Discussion on the formation of joint Information Technology Committee pursuant toArticle 50 section 1 of the CBA. (DD) (52)

Response: Further discussions between DOL and the NCFLL will be needed before aCommittee is formed. Issues raised by the NCFLL will need to be addressed, such as theprohibition by the NCFLL to bargain IT impact and implementation concerns per Article50 section 4 of the CBA; composition of management and NCFLL representatives on theCommittee.

11:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

OASAM/Job Corp.

Management Attendees: Esther Johnson, Director, Office of Job Corps; Al Stewart,Director, Business Operations Center (BOC),; Macaire Carroll-Gavula, ProgramManager, Acting Director of Safety and Health; Kelley Pettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; PeterBiel, LRO-OASAM, New York.


Response: Job Corps only received one percent of DOL’s ARRA funding. The budgetfor FY 2009 is adequate. No problems anticipated with the projected FY 2010 budget.Currently, there are two vacancies in Atlanta and one in San Francisco. Other regions areat their quota. No anticipated problems with space for new hires. Job Corps will followArticle 10 with any space issues


Response: Emergency Plans are in place and they have been shared with bargainingunit staff. The Emergency Plans are posted on the Regional websites.

6

Are the program mangers in Job Corps directed to be responsible for reviewing theCenters plans for compliance with applicable safety and health rules? If so, what form oftraining have the program mangers received? (ME) (24)

Response: Center Operators must develop and submit a plan to the Regional Office. TheNational Office reviews the plans to insure that they are in compliance. Contractors areconducting the S&H inspections.

Job Corp has decided not to participate in the regional safety and health reviews. Pleaseexplain. (ME) (25)

Response: These reviews are not shared with the Field Safety & Health Committee sincethere are no DOL EE’s working at the 124 Job Corps Centers. All work is performed bycontractors.

12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m.

LUNCH

1:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m.

OASAM/HRC/OELMR

Management Attendees: Cristina Frias-Brown, Tonya Manning, Jeff Kenyon,OASAM; Yolanda Owens, Dorothy Thomas, Craig , Sue Ingram, Donna Smith, CraigTrowler, Kevin O’Doherty, Diane McFadgen- OELMR; Kelley Pettit, RA-OASAM,Dallas; Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, New York.

Agenda Item #6: Action: DOL will provide further information on the unused “fitnesssubsidies” by region and what other purposes they have been reallocated for – ifanything. (withdrawn by PT via email 6/3/09)

Agenda Item #2: Action : DOL will check with OPA to see if they can change thecontract terms of the DOL/SAFE number to be activated more frequently – such as in thecase of major storms like Ike and Gustav.

Note: No information provided by DOL prior to, during, or after the June 2009 LMRmeetings on this action item

Action Item: Response needed from OASAM on action item #2.

Agenda Item #11: Action: Management will provide a flowchart of the steps in theoffice space procurement process as a common starting point for our next conversation on

7

how to fix the recurring problem of failure to notify and involve the union in a timelymanner under Article 10 of the National Agreement.

Response: A flow chart prepared by management was provided to the NCFLL by RAKelley Pettit. (See Handout “C”). Ms. Pettit invited the NCFLL to provide their inputon the flow chart. Once agreement is reached between the NCFLL and the NationalOffice on the chart, the next step will be for the Regions to comply.

Action Item: The NCFLL will provide OELMR with input to the Common Spaceprocess Chart.________________________________________________________________________

There is a new telephone service that "unblocks" previously blocked calls. This couldhave a significant impact on the ability of our field investigators to contact employeesfrom locations outside of the office and from their personal cell phones. Discuss theapplication of this technology and potential solutions that could ease the impact on theconduct of the agency mission. (PT) (44) (Will be answered by OSHA on 6/17/09 andESA on 6/18/09)

Provide information on the agency Records Management Retention Plan at DOL. Shareguidance on the schedule of records that are retained (electronic and otherwise) and forwhat length of time. (PT) (45) (Will be answered by OASAM/BOC on 6/18/09)

Please provide an update on the distribution of FY 2008 performance award monies toBUES. Please include the following information within your discussion: Date that awardfunds were paid; Were any funds not distributed? If not, why not; Were any portions ofthe funds allocated for performance awards returned by any Region to the NationalOffice? If yes, why? If excess funds were returned to the National Office, how were theyreallocated? (DL) (47)

Response: The performance awards were paid in December 2008. Some regions didnot fully utilize their performance awards monies. The unused award monies were notreturned to the National Office. The regions could reallocate the awards monies to otherprogram needs (e.g., training, travel). There is a separate object class code for payroll andawards, but the account is the same. The only expense type with a separate code is rentand security. As long as we stay within our overall allocation for an account, we complywith DOL policy and appropriations law.

It is the understanding of the NCFLL that a BUE will receive a minimum paycheck,through Quick Service Request (QSR), equal to 70% of their base wage for a 80 hour bi-weekly pay period if their People Time is not certified by their supervisor. Please explainthe procedures in place to insure that a QSR is generated when a BUE(s) People Time hasnot been certified by a supervisor prior to submission of payroll information to NFC.(DL) (48) (Will be answered by OCFO on 6/17/09)

8

Discussion on Secretary Solis ordering a review of all EEO complaints in DOL. (JD)(49) (Will be answered by CRC on 6/17/09)

Many BUES are unfamiliar with and not trained in SHIMS. Please discuss actions youragency is willing to take in order address this issue. (BT) (50) (Answered on 6/16/09 byOASAM/S&H)

Both labor and management, often state something like “good communication is the keyto good relations.” However, there seems to be a trend in the other direction – somethinglike “Don’t provide any notice of a change and if the union protests, just claim the changehas de minimus impact.” The union should be notified on all proposed changes. Thedegree of impact should be discussed after the notice is provided. Please discuss fully.(BT) (51)

Response: OELMR wants to keep the lines of communications open. OELMR wants tohear when the regions are refusing to provide notification on matters they consider deminimis. A dialogue needs to occur between OELMR, the LRO’s and the NCFLL on thisissue.

Action Item : OELMR and the NCFLL will work on the coordination of a date and timefor a conference call to discuss general and space specific notification issues with theLRO’s.

2:00 p.m. – 2:30 p.m.

OASAM/HRC/OHRPA

Management Attendee: Jerome Bonne, Director, Office of Human Resources Policy andAccountability; Cristina Frias-Brown, OASAM: Dorothy Thomas-OELMR; KelleyPettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, New York.

Please provide the NCFLL with the dates that each Performance Management Plan wasapproved by OPM. (JD) (42)

Response: The DOL Performance Management Plan has been approved by OPM. Thereis no requirement that Employee Performance Plans must be approved by OPM. DOL reviews its individual Employee Performance Plans.. Action Item: DOL will provide the NCFLL with information related to DOL’sevaluation of its Performance Management System.

Follow-up email on June 16, 2009: In response to the meeting today during the NCFLLQuarterly meeting, please see our response with respect to evaluating DOL’s performance

9

management system: According to the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) title 5Code of Federal Regulations, part 430, agencies are required to evaluate theperformance appraisal system(s) and performance appraisal program(s) in operation inthe agency (OPM does not prescribe how often an agency must review its evaluationsystem). DOL’s method for conducting its evaluation of its system and program asoutlined in Departmental Personnel Regulation 430 is by using a tool called thePerformance Evaluation and Assessment Tool (PAAT) and our ongoing accountabilityreviews. The PAAT was developed by the Office of Personnel Management and wasdesigned to help agencies evaluate their appraisal programs. It was released to allFederal agencies in December 2005. The PAAT consists of ten criteria/sections worth atotal of 100 points (each section is worth 10 points). The ten criteria/sections are:

1. Alignment - Employee performance plans align with and are designed tosupport organizational goals.

2. Results-focus - Employee performance plans hold employees accountable forachieving results appropriate to their level of responsibility.

3. Credible Measures - Employee performance plans provide for balance, sothat in addition to measuring expected results, the performance plans includeappropriate measures, such as quality, quantity, timeliness, and/or cost-effectiveness, indicators of competencies, and customer perspective. In addition,for managers and supervisors, performance plans should also incorporate employeeperspective.

4. Distinctions in levels of performance - The appraisal program provides formultiple levels to appraise performance and rating officials use those levelsto clearly describe distinctive levels of performance and appropriately rateemployee performance.

5. Consequences - The result of appraisal is used for recognizing topperformers and addressing poor performance.

6. Employee Involvement - Employees are involved in the design of theappraisal program and in the development of their performance plans.

7. Feedback and Dialogue - The appraisal program establishes a performancefeedback process that ensures a dialogue between supervisors, managers, andemployees throughout the year.

8. Training - The appraisal program requires that executives, managers,supervisors, and employees receive adequate training and retraining on theperformance appraisal program. In addition, supervisors must have thecompetencies necessary for managing performance.

10

9. Organizational Assessment and Guidance - The appraisal program requiresthat appropriate organizational performance assessments are made andcommunicated to rating officials, and that guidance is provided by the head of theagency or designee on how to incorporate organizational performance into theassessment process, especially regarding the appraisal of managerial andsupervisory employees.

10. Oversight and Accountability - The head of the agency or designee hasoversight of the results of appraisals and awards, ensures that the program operateseffectively and efficiently, and ensures that appraisals and awards are based onperformance. In addition, managers and supervisors are held accountable for theperformance management of their subordinates.

To meet OPM’s Green Standard for Success an agency must meet the following:

Certified SES program (provisional or full) Tested beta sites. Audit of representative sample of employee performance plans All manager performance plans, based on a representative sample, are aligned

and focus on results Awards data illustrates how the agency provides for consequences of

performance Overall PAAT score of at least 80 points PAAT score of at least 8 points on:

o Section 6 – Alignment o Section 7 – Results-Focusedo Section 8 – Balanced Credible Measures o Section 9 – Distinctions in Level of Performance

PAAT score of at least 6 points on:

o Section 10 – Consequences

As stated in the meeting today, DOL has met all of these standards and was one of thefirst agencies to achieve OPM’s green standard for success.

2:30 p.m. – 2:45 p.m.

BREAK

11

2:45 p.m. – 3:15 p.m.

WB

Management Attendees: Karen Furia, National Office Coordinator; Kelley Pettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, New York.

Please discuss the impact that ARRA, the remaining budget for FY 2009 and theproposed budget for FY 2010 will have on your agency in the areas of hiring, travel,supplies, work space allocation. (NN) (119)

Response: The Women’s Bureau received no ARRA monies for FY 2009. There will beone new bargaining unit employee each in Philadelphia and San Francisco.


Response: Each region has a COOP plan. The Women’s Bureau will be replacingdesktop computers with laptop computers. All bargaining unit employees will be able toaccess all databases on the laptops from remote locations.

Recently, the Women’s Bureau purchased some bags which contained tags that read“Made in China”. Please explain. (JD) (121)

Response: This was an error during the purchasing process.

3:15 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.

BLS

Management Attendees: Bob Gaddie, Associate Commissioner for Field Operations;Diane McFadgen, OELMR; Kelley Pettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, New York.


12

Response: BLS didn’t receive any ARRA funding. The FY 2009 budget was increasedby $50 million. The budget for the remainder of FY 2009 looks good. The FY 2010budget will be lean but operational. There will be an increase of 74 Economic Assistantsnationwide.

Please discuss how well your agency was prepared for continuation of its operationsduring the recent H1eN1 (Swine Flu) outbreak. Information to include: lessons learned;changes being made should the outbreak reoccur; information that was and/or will beprovided to employees in the future to protect themselves from exposure since many ofthem have direct contact with the general public during the performance of their duties.(NN) (6)

Response: There have been no direct incidents with the staff. However, a child of aBLS Employee in Chicago was diagnosed with H1N1 over the past week-en. Informationwas sent out to staff in Chicago on health reminders to prevent the spread of the H1N1virus.

Please provide an update and status on the distribution of FY 2008 performance awardfunds to all bargaining unit employees. Include the following information: Date thataward funds were paid; if any funds not distributed. If not, why not? If any portions ofthe funds allocated for performance awards were returned by any Region to the NationalOffice. If yes, why?; how any returned were they reallocated? (DL) (7)

Response: The FY 2008 performance awards were deferred until 2009 due to budgetaryconstraints. Once BLS received its FY 2009 budget in early 2009, the performanceawards were distributed in full to bargaining unit employees.

Please discuss the status of the FY 2009 budget and availability of funds for payout of FY2009 performance award monies. (DL) (8)

Response: Any decision on the payout of FY 2009 performance award monies will bemade in early fall 2009. It is possible that the award payouts may be done with FY 2009funds.

Discussion on recent changes made to the National Compensation Survey. (NN) (9)

Background Information: On May 5, 2009, the BLS national office conducted aWebinar conference call and informed NCF employees about new survey design in theNational Compensation Survey (NCS) and its collection requirements. Some of the newchanges involve additional collection of new jobs and new wage type information that theNCS program never previously collected. The additional job and wage collection are partof an integration effort between NCS and another survey called the OccupationalEmployment Survey (OES). The NCS and OES survey designs are different, which iswhy data collection of these OES jobs is extra work and could be more difficult for the

13

NCS field economists to collect. Some OES job occupations previously not collected inthe NCS survey design are: Owners ,Owners’ families, partners at law firms, brokeragefirms, and other similar institutions student workers

Impact: The Elements and Standards were not modified to reflect the extra time neededfor NCS field economists to collect this new data. Also, NCS field economists will nowbe accountable for any “non-responses” or "refusals" in their performance appraisals ifthey are unable to collect this new additional OES data. (Please note: The currentappraisal period runs from October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2009. Implementationof the change in survey design overlaps with the current appraisal period whichruns May 4, 2009 to October 19, 2009.)

Questions and Concerns:

a) Please explain the reason(s) that the NCFLL was not provided notificationof this change.

b) Discussion on the impact this change will have on the NCS fieldeconomists performance appraisals if they are unable to capture the wagedata for OES jobs.

c) Discussion concerning any plans for modification of regional standardsand productivity measures at mid-term (FY 2009) to account for thecollection of additional OES jobs.

Response: In the past, the additional OES positions were excluded from the surveys.Wage refusals are not a significant factor since this is a sample. Employee performanceon wage refusals is compared to the regional wage refusal rate average.

Action Item: BLS to provide the NCFLL with general information on wage refusalrates.

Recently, a BLS bargaining unit employee whose computer needed repaired shipped it tothe regional tech center and had to wait an entire week for its return. During that time,the BUE could get very little work accomplished. When the BUE sought managementinput on what to do, the BUE was told that leave could be taken. What is the correctpolicy for such a scenario? What status codes should be used? (BT) (10)

Response: The Employee should not be told to take personal leave. The Employeeshould be provided other work. If no work can be assigned, the Employee should beallowed to take administrative leave.

14


June 16 - 18, 2009

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

9:30 a.m. – 10:00 a.m.

OASAM/CRC

Management Attendees: Ramon Suris Fernandez, Civil Rights Center; Kelley Pettit,RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, New York.

Discussion on Secretary Solis ordering a review of all EEO complaints in DOL. (JD)(49)

Response: It would be a decision by Secretary Solis to order a review of EEO complaintsin DOL. Currently, DOL is processing complaints in compliance with the law. DOL hasa 100% compliance rate with the 40 day rule in issuing decisions. DOL is leading thegovernment in the timely processing of complaints. There may be a handful ofcomplaints going back more than two years. These complaints are most likely part of aclass action.

Action Items: The NCFLL will be provided with the following information concerningEEO complaints in DOL:

Information on the process for investigating complaints. Information on the number of complaints dismissed due to timeliness. Information on time taken to counsel employees on complaints. Final agency decisions on complaints. Final agency actions.

________________________________________________________________________

10:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.

OSHA

Management Attendees: George Barren, Acting Assistant Undersecretary-OSHA, DougGoddell, Joe Blake, Kelley Pettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, NewYork.

There is a new telephone service that "unblocks" previously blocked calls. This couldhave a significant impact on the ability of our field investigators to contact employees

15

from locations outside of the office and from their personal cell phones. Discuss theapplication of this technology and potential solutions that could ease the impact on theconduct of the agency mission. (PT) (44) (Added by NN)

Response: It is unclear if this is a service provider or customer side issue. OASAMtakes the lead on telecommunications issue and this issue will be addressed with OASAM.Action Item: OSHA to provide NCFLL a follow-up response on this telecommunicationsrelated issue, including any corrective actions that can be taken, after consultation withOASAM.


Response: Through the end of May 2009, 74% of the FY 2009 budget has beenexpended.There are no temporary hiring’s being made with ARRA funding; however,vacant positions are being backfilled with ARRA funding. We are moving forward withthe FY 2010 budget in restoring programs. Congress is scheduled to take up the spendingbill in July 2010. We have plans to hire 130 CSHO’s nationwide. Regional breakdownsare tentative at this time and still under review.

Space is and will continue to be an issue with the new hires projected. We are notreceiving the budget necessary to handle expansion of office space to accommodate thenew hires. As an alternative, we are exploring expanded use of telework, cubicle sharing,hoteling (Hoteling is a process where employees primarily work at home but have abilityto come into office to hook-up computers in a dedicated area. The employee would haveto reserve their office visits in advance.)_______________________________________________________________________

Please discuss how well your agency was prepared for continuation of its operationswork during the recent H1N1 (Swine Flu) outbreak. Information to include: lessonslearned; changes being made should the outbreak reoccur; information that was and/orwill be provided to employees in the future to protect themselves from exposure sincemany of them have direct contact with the general public during the performance of theirduties. (NN) (66)

Response: OSHA has a pandemic plan and is ready to implement if necessary.

Please discuss the reason(s) that CSHO’s are not allowed to have access to a citrixaccount. (DL) (67)

Response: All Citrix access issues are handled at a regional office level.

16

Please provide an update and status of the CSHO application system that is going toreplace NCR. Where is it at in development? When can we expect it to be implementedin the field? (ME) (68)

Response: The current plan is for deployment of the new system in October 2010.

Please provide an update on the progress towards full implementation of OSHA’s newinformation management system nationwide. Discuss the schedule for installing laptopworkstations in field offices and any positive/negative feedback received from officescurrently using the system. (NN) (69)

Response: Funding will be necessary in order to purchase the laptops. The paper workhas been submitted for replacement of laptops. The laptops will be leased. We areworking on having wireless connections for each laptop.

Is there currently a schedule for installing new workstations in the field offices? If so,please provide an update. (NN) (70)

Response: We are currently awaiting approval on the procurement process.

Please discuss the status and future of the Area Office and Regional CAS positions. (NN)(71)

Response: Monies are appropriated for these positions. The National Office is unawareof any CAS position(s) not being backfilled; however, the emphasis is on filling CSHOand IH positions at the present time.

The ARRA inspection tracking instructions are now being discussed at the Area Officelevel. Please discuss the plans on recording the ARRA information, including: specificinstructions given to the CSHOs who are required to fill out the ARRA tracking forms;the type of forms to be used (i.e., OSHA 1, 31, 55, PeopleTime, etc.); training to beprovided before implementation. (ME) (72)

Response: Changes are being implemented with People Time in pay period 14 to trackARRA monies on work being performed. A conference call is scheduled today (June 17,2009) and guidance will be provided on proper ARRA coding of inspections whereARRA monies is involved.________________________________________________________________________

Managers are not aware of and trained in the preparation of the CA-16 and OSHA 300forms for BUES. There are instances where BUES have to take their own leave. Pleasediscuss actions your agency will take to address this problem. (ME) (73)

17

Responses: We work through OWCP in the regions. The National Office concedes thatfield managers are not versed in the preparation of these forms but they should becontacting the Regional OWCP Coordinators for assistance.

The NCFLL understands that the agency is asking BUE volunteers from regions acrossthe country to conduct PSM inspections in the Los Angeles area. Please discuss yourplans involving these inspection assignments. Include the following in your discussion:frequency in which BUES will be allowed to travel back to their home region; the role ofthe volunteers on the team; any overtime required; any IH designation changes plannedlike there was in the 911 and Katrina response. (DL) (74)

Response: The original goal was complete all inspections in two years; however, wehave decided to extend the timeframe beyond the two year goal due to logistics issues.The National Office will contact Region VI management to discuss the changes made.

Action Item: The NCFLL will have a follow-up discussion with the National Office toinsure that the changes have been communicated to Region VI management.

Please discuss lengthy out of town PSM assignments (3 to 5 months) that BUES have toconduct in the Dallas Region. BUES are only allowed a trip home every two to fourweeks. Morale is suffering greatly. Several BUES have left the agency. Managementhas never provided notification to the NCFLL. (JD) (75)

Response: The National Office will follow-up with OSHA Region VI management todiscuss this problem.

Action Item: The NCFLL will have a follow-up discussion with the National Office toinsure that the discussion was held with Region VI management and the results of thatconversation.

The NCFLL recently learned of two OSHA employees injured in approximately March2008 during a refinery inspection in the Northeast. The injuries occurred while theOSHA employees were observing an operation involving the cleaning of unit equipmentwith walnut shale. CHSO’s in Region 6 were recently conducting a refinery inspectionand observing a similar cleaning operation but was unaware of the Northeast incidentuntil refinery personnel in the region 6 inspection informed the CSHOs.. Please providethe NCFLL with a full briefing of the Northeast incident and explain the reason(s) thatBUES in other regions were not notified of these changes. (JD) (76)

Response: The National Office notified the Regional Directors of the accident. Underthe circumstances, there was no need seen for widespread distribution to all OSHA staff.________________________________________________________________________

11:00 a.m. – 11:15 a.m.

18

BREAK

11:15 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

SOL

Management Attendees: William Thompson, Deputy Associate Solicitor; PeterConstantine and Diane McFadgen, OELMR; Kelley Pettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; PeterBiel, LRO-OASAM, New York.


Response: For the past eight years, the budget has been tight; however, changes areoccurring for the good of the Solicitors Office. We will be in better financial shape.Currently, hiring is good. By the end of FY 2009, our FTE level will be 650. In FY2010, our FTE level will increase to 690. With the increase in staff, space issues will be aconcern. Space issues will be discussed at the local level with the office steward.


Response: We are currently in a development mode to handle pandemic issues with a lotof recommendations being received. We do have more laptops, tokens, etc. to allow ouremployees to work offsite.

Please provide an update on the SOL Best Practices Committee Report. (BT) (101)

Response: The report was distributed to the Region’s. A copy of the report will beprovided to the NCFLL. We are currently in the process of providing to our staff.

Action Item : Copy of the SOL Best Practices Committee Report is to be provided to theNCFLL.

19

12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m.

LUNCH

1:00 p.m. – 2:30 p.m.

MSHA

Management Attendees: Richard Laufenberger, A/Deputy Administrator MNM; DebraDonovan, MAP MNM; Kevin Strickland, Deputy Administrator, Coal; Jane Tarr, MAPCoal; Syed Hafeez, Deputy Direcotr, PEIR; Ken Bullock, Program Analysis Officer;Brian Don, A/Director A&M; Lefawn Gaines, Chief LERB; Karen York, Chief Staffing& Classification; Ashley Taylor, Student Intern; Kelley Pettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; PeterBiel, LRO-OASAM, New York.


Response : MSHA did not receive ARRA monies. In the proposed FY 2010 Budget,MSHA will receive a $2.5 million increase over FY 2009.

Please discuss how well your agency was prepared for continuation of its operate ionsduring the recent H1N1 (Swine Flu) outbreak. Information to include: lessons learned;changes being made should the outbreak reoccur; information that was and/or will beprovided to employees in the future to protect themselves from exposure since many ofthem have direct contact with the general public during the performance of their duties.(NN) (27)

Response: MSHA has a pandemic plan and is ready to implement if necessary.Lessons Learned from the recent H1N1 Outbreak: Test Training is important with Tele-work. Problem with EE’s logging into the system. Tele-work exercises are beingconducted in the field.

Action Items: MSHA will provide the NCFLL with a list of offices who have or willconduct tele-work exercises.

Multiple contractors have access to and operate MSHA’s computer systems. Pleasediscuss the level of proficiency in English that is tested or evaluated for these contractor

20

positions; and the type of security measures in place to safeguard MSHA data that isaccessible to the contractors. (DD) (28)

Response: All contract Employees must undergo a background check. All contractemployees must follow Chapter 4 of the DOL Security Handbook. Contract employeesmust take PII, computer security and IT training. Monitoring of contract employees workis conducted through security audits.

Several supervisors are using the Key Indicators as guidelines for evaluating employeeperformance and limit first forty scheduling. Please discuss the purpose of publishing theKey Indicators on the MSHA Intranet and what, if any, guidance has been provided tomanagement and supervisors regarding how this information is to be used. (BN) (29)

Response: Guidance on key indicators is provided through the Assistant Secretary andDistrict Managers for MSHA. If any District Manager(s) is trying to increase individualnumbers by limiting first forty, the National Office wants to know this. Action Items: National Office will follow-up on any information received from theNCFLL on attempts being made by any MSHA District Manager(s) in limiting first forty.MSHA Management will respond back to NCFLL President Dennis DeMay, ExecutiveVP Jim Weyrauch and VP Bob Newberry.

An NCFLL representative was recently approached by management to discuss possibledrug screening of MSHA employees. The manager indicated that a company is offering ado-it-yourself drug screening kit. The manager indicated that MSHA has interest inutilizing this procedure should they feel the need since the screening could be conductedby non-medical personnel. Please discuss if MSHA is planning to implement a do-it-yourself drug screening program for MSHA employees. (BN) (30)

Response: Coal District 5 had an interest in implementing a “do-it-self drug screeningprogram for MSHA employees. This program was not implemented and there are nofurther plans in pursuing it.

Please discuss the personal liability of an inspector should an accident or fatality were tooccur at a mine and it could be shown that they were the last inspector there, knew aboutthe condition that contributed to the accident, and did not issue citations. (DD) (31)

Response: This is a legal issue; however, this has never happened where an inspectorwas personally sued.

Action Item : NCFLL to provide MSHA management with a sanitized copy of an emailreceived by an inspector from a MSHA manager stating they could be held personallyliable. MSHA management will review the email and provide a response to the NCFLL.

Please provide an update on the AED units in each field location. Include information onthe number of AED units ordered, number installed, training provided, refresher training

21

provided for those units that have been in place for 1-3 years, status of locations that noyet have AED units installed or on-order. (32)

Response: AED units are being installed at MNM North Central District Headquarters.Due to budgetary issues, no additional purchases and installations will be made for theremainder of FY 2009. The estimated cost for the additional AED units is $33,000.00.

Action Items: MSHA to provide the NCFLL with a list of locations for AEDinstallations and the number of AED units to be installed.Follow-up email of June 18, 2009: “…I told you that AED’s were going to cost $33,000but needed to verify that number. I was wrong. Our plan had been to ORDER 33 units inthis FY. The COST was approx $115k. I knew the 33 was significant-just is wasn’tdollars but quantity-sorry.”

Please discuss the impact of changes at http://www.opm.gov/fedclass/1800A.pdf willhave on the Mine Inspector positions. As a result of these changes, please discuss anyplans by the agency in elevating the mine inspector positions to a GS-13 level. (JD) (33)

Response: The changes are being reviewed and will be implemented by 2010. Thechanges fully meet the GS-12 but not GS-13 level. There are no plans to change the MineInspector position to a GS-13 level.

Some GS-13 CLR’s are in the bargaining unit and some are not. Please explain. (SW)(34)

Response: If the CLR doesn’t supervise a clerk, they remain in the bargaining unit. If theCLR supervises a clerk, the CLR will be outside the bargaining unit

Please provide an update and status on the distribution of FY 2008 performance awardfunds to all bargaining unit employees. Please address the following:

a) Date that award funds were paid.b) Were any funds not distributed? If not, why not?c) If any portion of the funds were not distributed for performance awards,

how we re they reallocated? (DL) (35)

Response: Award funds were paid out on 12/18/08. Less than $25 of the award fundswere not paid out.

MSHA- Metal /Non-Metal


Responses: See response in item #26.

22


Responses: See response in item #27.

During performance evaluations, inspectors are often criticized for having too much T-18(office time) and other time on regular inspections. Article 25 section 5 of the CBA statesthat an employee gets two breaks per day at 15 minutes each. This amounts to 2.5 hoursper week, 10 hours a month or 120 hours per year or 3 weeks per year. Article 25 section6 of the CBA allows for 15 minutes cleanup time per day while working in the field,approximately one hour per week or four hours per month or 36 hours per year,approximately one week. Based on both sections of this article, the total amount ofactive duty time attributed to breaks and clean-up time is approximately four weeks peryear. Please provide guidance on the proper coding of this time if T-18 (office) or othertime is not correct. (BN) (38)

Response: M/NM doesn’t record time. In speaking to the T-18 time in general, there maybe valid reasons for an inspector(s) T-18 time to be higher than the office average, such asimproper coding. Regardless of the reason(s), the supervisor should be raising theseissues with the inspector(s) during the year and not wait until evaluation time.

Please provide advice and guidance on the proper timesheet coding when an inspector isrequired to see a doctor as a result of a fitness for duty physical. Inspectors use the T-18(office) code at the present time. This is the same code used for agency hearing tests,physicals, etc. It is suggested in some offices that an inspector use his/her own sick leavefor the visit. (BN) (39)

Response: Further research will have to be conducted by the National Office on thisissue.

Action Item: NO to research and provide a response to the NCFLL on the proper codingof time spent by an inspector in a fitness for duty physical.

Added on via email 6/3/09

Please provide an update and status on the OIG Survey and Operations investigation atthe Mine Academy. (BN) (1)

Response: The purpose of the OIG survey is to insure that MSHA personnel arereceiving proper training at the academy. The Agency and not the MSHA employees isbeing held accountable. OIG has met with NCFLL Local President Charlotte Richardson

23

at the Academy concerning these surveys. OIG has interviewed academy staff. It isunknown if employees at the academy were required to participate in the OIG interviews.OIG plans to send out surveys to mine inspectors nationwide. It is unknown if employeesare being required to complete the survey. MSHA recognizes the concerns raised by theNCFLL on how the survey results will be used.

Please provide the status of and discuss the proposed splitting of District 4 into twodistricts. (BN) (2)

Response: Our intent is to split District 4. Pineville will be a separate District Office.We are currently putting together a cost benefit analysis for presentation to theDepartment. If the splitting of the District does occur, we will be looking for voluntarytransfers. Additionally, 21 new hires will be impacted by this split.


The following Information has come to the attention of the NCFLL concerning theissuance of citations by inspectors, please discuss. (DD) (3)

a) The National Office is reviewing the number of citations being written andif they were properly evaluated. It appears that someone is pushing formore citations and these citations may be evaluated for strongerenforcement.

b) If inspections are completed with no citations issued, the inspector’ssupervisor may go out and do another inspection to see if the inspectorwas doing their job properly.

c) Inspectors feel that the above procedures are designed to put pressure onthem to write citations just to make the management of the agency lookgood to congress.

Response: The National Office is required to review citations. There is no push formore citations but consistency must be insured based on facts. Supervisors are expectedto look at inspections when excess citations or no citations are issued.

2:30 p.m. – 3:45 p.m.

OCFO

Management Attendees: Bob Balin, Roy Abreu, Marella Turner- OCFO; Kelley Pettit,RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, New York.

It is the understanding of the NCFLL that a BUE will receive a minimum paycheck,through Quick Service Request (QSR), equal to 70% of their base wage for a 80 hour bi-

24

weekly pay period if their People Time is not certified by their supervisor. Please explainthe procedures in place to insure that a QSR is generated when a BUE(s) People Time hasnot been certified by a supervisor prior to submission of payroll information to NFC.(DL) (48)

Response: We will have to research this issue further and provide the NCFLL with aresponse.Action Item: The NCFLL will be provided with the procedures for Quick Servicepayments.

Follow-up email on July 13, 2009: Attached, please find the procedures for QuickService Payments you requested during the June 2009 quarterly meeting for item number48. Please note that all personnel offices were trained on this process in 2005 when DOLfirst migrated payroll to the National Finance Center. This is the responsibility of theService HR Offices. OCFO does not have access to this module. (See Handout “D”)


Response: Plans are to hire three temporaries in the National Office. There will be noimpact on space as a result of the temporaries being hired. The FY 2009 budget is havinglimited impact on travel and supplies. All of our bargaining unit employees are coveredby AFGE Local 12 in the National Office.


Response; All employees are located in the National Office. We have a pandemic planin place.

Some BUES are exempt from a Citibank government credit card due to their limitedagency travel. When these BUES are required to travel on agency business, E-2 issuppose to make payments directly to the airlines and hotels for the BUES travel;however, this is not happening. Please explain. (ME) (55)

Response: E-2 doesn’t make the payments to the airlines and hotels when an employeedoesn’t have a government issued travel card. The payments are made through a centralbilling account. The employee can be provided a temporary credit card in order to travelbut it would require supervisory approval. If there is a specific issue that the NCFLLwould like to discuss with the OCFO, we will be glad to discuss. We understand thatthere may be some confusion in the field with the central billing account method of

25

payment for airline and hotels for DOL employees who have not been issued agovernment travel card. We suggest this information be addressed in a future edition ofthe Spotlight”.

Action Item: The OCFO will draft information on the central billing account method ofpayment for DOL employees who do not have a government issued travel card. The draftwill be shared with the NCFLL before it is published in a “Spotlight”.

Please provide an update on the change to the National Business Center. (PT) (56)(Answered on 6/16/09 by OASAM)

Management Item – Recovery Act Fund – PeopleTime

Management Attendees: Sue Ingram, Yolanda Owens-OELMR; Robert Balin, RoyAbreu-PPTF; Traci Orange-PPTF

Response : A copy of the Recovery Act Reporting power point presentation has beenprovided for your review. (See Handout “E”) Training is being developed and willbegin next week. As a result of the presentation, we have noted initial concerns raised bythe NCFLL as the result of the presentation: 1) multiple entries being made on a dailybasis for ARRA and non-ARRA; 2) Early submission of PeopleTime before holidays; 3)Whether training can be completed before going live with pp 14. We understand from thediscussion that the NCFLL may request bargaining on the implementation of thesechanges to PeopleTime.

26


June 16 -18, 2009

Thursday, June 18, 2009

9:00 a.m. – 10:15 a.m.

ETA/OA

Management Attendees: Daphne Y. Jefferson, Administrator-Office of Financial andAdministrative Management; Walter Weatherington; Program Manager; Dina Rambert,Director, Office of Human Resources; Heather F. Lemay, Supervisory Support ServicesSpecialist; Donald E. Palmer Jr., Program Manager; Brian Pasternak, Program ManagerKelley Pettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, New York.


Response: ETA has received ARRA monies. One employee was hired in the NationalOffice and will be on board until 09/30/10. One hundred term appointments have beenmade in the regions. These employments will end by 9/30/09. The strategy has been tohire re-employed annuitants. We are experiencing problems in obtain travel funds for theregions but the National Office is actively addressing this problem.


Response: We follow guidance from OASAM which has been disseminated to theregions.

The NCFLL has concerns with ATR positions not being back-filled and offices beingclosed nationwide. Additionally, the NCFLL has concerns with ATR positions not beingback-filled and offices being closed nationwide. Additionally, the agency’s travel budgethas been reduced which is impacting the ability of ATR’s in performing their duties.Please discuss action being taken by your agency in addressing these issues. (JD) (3)

27

Response: There are currently 25 SAC and 25 non-SAC states. OA has made a decisionnot to backfill ATR positions in SAC states. OA has a $11 million deficit which is havingimpact on our travel budget. We hope the FY 2010 budget will make us whole. We areworking on the FY 2011 budget, which will be submitted to OMB in July 2009.

Recently, a job posting for the state director in Arkansas was announced. The positionwas announced under two hiring authorities: Merit Staffing (announcement number DD-09-004) and Delegated Exam (number DD-9-0036). A bargaining unit employee fromanother OA region was notified that she was the only one on the Merit Staffing list andwas at the top of the Delegated Exam list. A few weeks after the announcement closed, itwas announced that a GS-13 bargaining unit employee was being transferred by theRegional Director in Dallas Region 4 from Sioux Falls, South Dakota to fill the statedirector position in Arkansas. It is the understanding of the NCFLL that the bargainingunit employee in South Dakota had not applied for the Arkansas position nor had herequested any transfer to Arkansas. Please explain how a GS-13 bargaining unitemployee can be transferred into a management position without the agency using aproper hiring authority (JD) (4)

Response: OA posted the State Director position for Arkansas. After the posting, theState Director for South Dakota requested a lateral transfer to the State Director positionin Arkansas. OA approved the transfer. There are no plans to back-fill the State Directorposition in South Dakota.

ETA


Response: See item #1 for response.


Response: ETA has developed a pandemic plan. Our goal is to keep our employees safeand to carry out the mission of the agency. To keep employees working during apandemic would require $1.3 million to fully implement a telework solution. Currently,we don’t have the hardware and would need two additional servers. We currently havecentrix capability for our current employees but not for our new hires.

28

Discussion on hiring plans with your agency. To facilitate discussion, please provide alist of office locations and number of new hires to be assigned at each office. Also,please provide a current employee count for each office. (SW) (16)

Action Item: ETA will provide a list to the NCFLL with the following information: listof office locations and number of new hires to be assigned at each office; currentemployee count for each office.

With the upcoming addition of new employees, please discuss steps being taken toaddress space issues. (SW) (17)

Response: We have surveyed the Regions and there are no requests being made for additional spaceas a result of the increase in hiring’s. We note the concerns of the NCFLL related toArticle 10. National Office management will discus these concerns with the ETARegional Administrators while they are in town next week.

Flexi-place is being utilized by some regions and these offices are successful. Pleaseexplain the reason(s) that flexi-place is not being utilized/mandated in all regions. (SW)(18)

Response: All regions should be following Article 28 of the collective bargainingagreement as it relates to flexi-place. National Office management notes the concernbeing raised by the NCFLL related to the pushback in the SE Region for bargaining unitemployee’s being allowed to participatein flexi-place. The National Office will follow-up with SE Regional management to address this issue.

ETA-FLC

Please discuss the impact that ARRA, the remaining budget for FY 200.9 and theproposed budget for FY 2010 will have on your agency in the areas of hiring, travel,supplies, and work space allocation. (NN) (19)

Response: See item #1 Response. Additionally, FTE’s are being hired in the NationalProcessing Centers and National Office.

Please discuss how well your agency was prepared for continuation of operations duringthe recent H1N1 (Swine Flu) outbreak. Information to include: lessons learned; changesbeing made should the outbreak reoccur; information that was and/or will be provided toemployees in the future to protect themselves from exposure since many of them havedirect contact with the general public during the performance of their duties. (NN) (20)

Response: See response in item #2 above.

29

Please provide an update and status on the distribution of FY 2008 performance awardfunds to all bargaining unit employees. Please include: date that award funds were paid;were any funds not distributed? If not, why not?; If any portion of the funds were notdistributed for performance awards, how were they reallocated? (DL) (21)

Response: All performance award monies, except for $400, were distributed toemployees in December 2009.

Action Item: ETA to provide the NCFLL with the percentages used in determining theamount of performance award payouts to employees.

10:15 a.m. – 10:30 a.m.

BREAK

10:30 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.

EBSA

Management Attendees: Sharon Watson, Director of Participant Assistance; BrianMcDonnell, Administrative Officer; James Hampton; Jeff Kenyon and Tonja Manning –OASAM; Kevin O’Doherty, OELMR; Kelley Pettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel,LRO-OASAM, New York.


Response: As a result of ARRA funding received, we were authorized to hire 25 tempsto handle the increase in COBRA calls. We began recruiting for the temp positions butcould not bring them on immediately. Currently, all 25 temps are on board. We havebeen authorized to hire an additional 19 temps. (See Handout “F“)

FY 2009 was a lean year but we plan to get up to our ceiling before the end of FY 2009.In FY 2010, we plan to have a $13 million increase in our budget. This increase willresult in the hiring of 75 additional full time employees. With the additional hiring’s,space will be an issue. Some offices have adequate space to accommodate the additionalhiring’s and some do not. The offices needing additional space is working with OASAMto secure additional space.

Please discuss how well your agency was prepared for continuation of its operationsduring the recent H1N1 (Swine Flu) outbreak. Information to include: lessons learned;changes being made should the outbreak reoccur; information that was and/or will beprovided to employees in the future to protect themselves from exposure since many of

30

them have direct contact with the general public during the performance of their duties.(NN) (12)

Response: EBSA was previously positioned to handle an outbreak. BUES are able towork at alternative sites in the event of a pandemic. Benefit Advisors can tele-work asthey can retrieve their voice mail messages from alternative work sites. Benefit Advisorshave some laptops which would allow them to work from home; otherwise, they areauthorized to use their personal home computers to gain access to the EBSA system.Also, calls can be diverted from one Regional Office another if a pandemic would impacta particular Regional Office City.

Please provide an update and status on the impact that the COBRA calls and the COBRAappeals process generated under ARRA is having on Benefit Advisors (BAs) and otherbargaining unit employees in the regions. As part of the discussion, it would be helpfulto have any trend data broken down by region with the following information: number ofBAs; number of calls generated per day; number of COBRA appeals forwarded. (DL)(13)

Response: The weekly OPA call volume has decreased since the new COBRAprovisions under ARRA took effect in February 2009. The OPA call volume prior toFebruary 2009 was in the 4,000 per week range nationwide. The calls peaked during theweek of April 26, 2009 at 13,395 and have declined to 7,775 as of the week of June 7,2009. (See Handout “G”). All of the temporary Benefit Advisors hired under ARRAare charging their time to ARRA. All EBSA Regions, except for Atlanta, has onesupervisor for the Benefit Advisors and one lead Benefit Advisor. Atlanta has twosupervisors.

11:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

OASAM/BOC

Management Attendees: Karen Nunley, DOL Records Officer; Kelley Pettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, New York.

Provide information on the agency Records Management Retention Plan at DOL. Shareguidance on the schedule of records that are retained (electronic and otherwise) and forwhat length of time. (PT) (45)

Response: The Federal Records Act, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 31 forms the framework ofrecords management programs in federal agencies. DLMS Series 1, Chapter 400 governsthe Records Management Program for DOL. (See Handout “I”)

There is a records manager for each DOL agency. For a list of the DOL agencymanagers, go to: http://labornet.dol.gov/records/dol_records_site/people/hq.htm

31

(See Handout “J”)

The length of time that records must be maintained is dependent upon whether it is atransitory or unscheduled record. A transitory record is a record of short term interest(180 days or less) which have minimal or no documentary or evidential value. Transitoryrecords can be destroyed immediately. An unscheduled record is a record not covered byan approved records retention schedule and its final disposition has not been approved bythe National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).

12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m.

LUNCH

1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.

ESA/OFCCP

Management Attendees: John Lawrence, Director, Branch of Program Management andInformation Development; Patrice Rachel Torres, Director, Division of Management andInformation Development; Galen Yoder, OELMR; Kelley Pettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas;Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, New York.

There is a new telephone service that "unblocks" previously blocked calls. This couldhave a significant impact on the ability of our field investigators to contact employeesfrom locations outside of the office and from their personal cell phones. Discuss theapplication of this technology and potential solutions that could ease the impact on theconduct of the agency mission. (PT) (44) (Added by NN)

Response: See OSHA item #44 response.


Response: OFCCP was apportioned $7.2M and 50 FTE for ARRA-related evaluationsand intensive outreach to train contractors that may not have been previously covered.The plan consists of new hires and the reassignment of current employees to conductARRA-related compliance evaluations. The apportionment also included funding fortravel, supplies and other discretionary spending related to ARRA activities.

Since OFCCP received only an additional $1M in FY 2009, the program has been limitedin its hiring capability. Only critical vacancies have been may be filled during this time.Discretionary spending remains at the FY 2008 level.

32

In the proposed FY 2010 budget, OFCCP requested an additional $23.6M for anadditional 213 FTE, which will be distributed among the regions and the National Office.The increase will cover additional funds for travel and supplies and will allow spacealterations where necessary to accommodate the additional hires.

Discussion: The NCFLL has concerns with SE Regional Management refusing to allowlocal managers to discuss any new hires in the office with the local office steward. Thisis problematic since space allocation and/or alterations may be necessary in order toaccommodate the new hire(s). The National Office will address this with SE RegionalManagement.


Response: The OFCCP has, for the past several years, been positioning itself for thesafety of its employees, while still addressing the continuation the mission of theprogram. Since FY 2001, the OFCCP has transitioned to a PC hardware platform from acombination of Desktop/Notebook PCs to the singular Notebook PC hardware platformto provide greater flexibility and portability for employees to conduct the mission of theprogram in a “remote” capacity in the event of a natural disaster, terrorist or pandemicevent. It is anticipated that “direct contact” with the general public will be limited to thegreatest degree possible. For those identified employees (currently management officialsonly) that may have contact with the general public, this contact will be controlled to thegreatest extent possible.

OFCCP has developed a National Business Continuity/Pandemic Plan, and has alsorequired its Regional Offices to prepare Plans of a similar nature. This Plan will occur inthree phases: (1) Notification/Activation; (2) Recovery; and (3) Restoration. While therecovery and restoration of DOL’s OFCCP’s business operations is a priority, the healthand safety of DOL staff is of utmost consideration. All identified activities stated in theBusiness Continuity/Pandemic Plan will be performed under the assumption that thehealth and safety of OFCCP staff can be assured. If the health and safety of OFCCP staffcannot be assured at the location designated, an alternate location would be provided orthe tasking delayed until it was safe to proceed. These Plans, upon activation, willinstruct employees regarding their responsibilities and actions to take in the event of anemergency event. Information is available to all OFCCP employees on our Intranet WebSite (http://esa/ofccp/ITB.html) regarding emergency preparedness and personnelreadiness regarding a disaster, terrorist or pandemic event. Flu prevention informationhas also been distributed to all field office locations for dissemination to staff to assist instemming the spread of this strain of the flu virus.

33

At the last LMR meeting, the Council explained the problems it was encountering withyour agency and some of its district offices and regions. Has anything been done toaddress those concerns? (59)

Response: Discussions addressing the issues raised have been held by the ActingDirector with the involved Regional Directors.

Action Item: A follow-up telephone conference will be scheduled between the NCFLLand Acting OFCCP Director Lorenzo Harris for further discussions on this agenda item.

Will COs now be classified as GS-1860 Equal Opportunity Investigators? OPMapparently took action to establish this new classification. Information can be found athttp://www.opm.gov/fedclass/1800A.pdf. Please discuss. (JD) (60)

Response: OPM recently established the GS-1860 Equal Opportunity Investigatorsclassification, but did not eliminate the GS-360 Equal Opportunity Specialist. TheProgram is currently reviewing the matter and has not yet made a decision on the use ofthe GS-1860 classification.

The NCFLL has received information that OFCCP is prohibiting its employees from“cutting and pasting” MS word documents and instead wants them to use Adobe whencommunicating with the public. We believe that the NCFLL is entitled to notice of thischange. We also believed it is negotiable as it has more than a de minimis impact onbargaining unit employee conditions of employment.. MS Word has been the standardword process program within the Department for quite a few years. Please discuss. (JD)(61)

Response: The information/issue that is referred to above is not accurate or correct. TheOFCCP has not “Prohibited” its employees from using the functionality described above.To provide clarity to issue, the following information is provided regarding the initialsecurity incident which occurred in December 2008:

On December 4, 2008, the employee emailed a confidential excel file from herwork email to her personal email address. This inappropriate transmission (whichis considered a security breach by the DOL) resulted in the following officialgovernment information being exposed for potential unauthorized use: 1,313electronic records to include: names, dates of application, gender, race, dates ofhire and 16 other data fields, such as interview dispositions, relating toapplications for employment. Since the email was sent to an external emailaddress, the email was not encrypted.

The OFCCP Information Security Officer (ISO), upon notification of this securityincident, issued an e-mail message on March 27th. The content of this message providedbelow:

34

Due to several electronic communication events that have occurred over the pastmonth within the OFCCP and regarding the transmission of information to thepublic, I would like to remind everyone of their responsibilities regarding theappropriate use of the government-provided IT Services.

Annually, all OFCCP employees participate in the mandatory Information SystemSecurity Awareness and Personally Identifiable Information (PII) Trainingsessions conducted by the DOL. These training sessions provide information toall DOL employees regarding an employee’s responsibility to protect the datacollected and/or disseminated by the federal government. Upon completion of thePII Training, every employee was to sign the Acknowledgement Agreement Formwhich describes the personal responsibility and potential liabilities that anemployee may face if it is determined that any PII data is accessed, breached,used, etc., in an in appropriate and/or unauthorized manner.

The following issues should be considered and/or addressed by all employeesprior to the transmission of any electronic communication to the public:

OFCCP employees must not transfer any government collected information,for official business purposes, to their personal e-mail accounts.

OFCCP Managers should review and authorize the transfer of any electronicinformation transmission (electronic or hardcopy), to a public (electronic orphysical location) location and/or recipient.

OFCCP employees must use either the pre-established personal network driveand/or network shared drive if government information is required to beaccessible while in TDY status from their official duty office location. Thesefolders are designated and designed to be used as repositories for the storageof mission-critical information and can be accessed in a secure manner byOFCCP employees while working at an off-site location.

OFCCP Employees must ensure that no MS Word documents areelectronically communicated/transmitted to the public via a non-governmente-mail service and/or PC. Converting MS Word documents to Adobe PDF fileformat documents will ensure the integrity of the contents of the documentand also that no internal “work product” information isinappropriately/inadvertently made accessible to the public.

The DOL (OFCCP) provides for the secure encryption (using the POINTSECencryption software) of data on all government furnished PC equipmentassigned and used by OFCCP employees. In addition, the ESA provides asecure is Remote Access (CITRIX) environment which is available for use byOFCCP employees. These services help to ensure the protection of allgovernment information.

35

Please ensure that you conduct your official business and communicationwith the public appropriately and that you perform the measures necessaryto mitigate the Risk of the inappropriate and/or inadvertent release ofelectronic information the public.

OFCCP is mandated to ensure that all protection(s) enacted for the security and/orconfidentiality of data provided to the government is protected to the greatest extentpossible. It is also the responsibility of all government employees to abide by thesemeasures and not to circumvent established security protocol. The intent of this messagewas to inform OFCCP employees of their (and OFCCP’s) liability regarding any breachof security and the potential release of Personally Identifiable Information (PII), and toalso offer alternatives regarding the mitigation of such security breaches.

Discussion: OFCCP maintains that this was not a change in working conditions but areminder to protect PII. The NCFLL maintains that this is a change in workingconditions and is subject to notice and bargaining. OELMR expressed interest in havingfurther discussions on this issue with the NCFLL.

Action Item: Tele-conference to be scheduled between OELMR and NCFLL concerningmanagement’s duty to notify the NCFLL and bargain the change made by OFCCP inprohibiting its employees from “cutting and pasting” MS word documents and insteadwants them to use Adobe when communicating with the public. The NCFLL Officers toparticipate on the teleconference will include President DeMay; Treasurer Wheeler, andVP Walters.

Discussion on restrictive flexi-time language being incorporated into flexi-placeagreements. (SW) (62)

Response: More specificity is needed in order to address this issue.

Discussion: The NCFLL provided an example of supervisors requiring employees toinform them of the hours they plan to work while on flexi-place the day prior to actuallyworking flexi-place. OFCCP indicated that they will follow-up on this and provide aresponse.

Action Item: OFCCP will provide the NCFLL with a response concerning BUES beingrequired to inform their supervisors of the hours they plan to work while on flexi-placethe day prior to actually working flexi-place.

Offices throughout the country continue to experience IT problems. It would bebeneficial to develop a regional coordinator to work in conjunction with John Lawrencein the National Office on IT problems. Let’s discuss the development of an IT coordinatorin each region. (SW) (63)

36

Response: OFCCP would certainly welcome the opportunity to discuss any issuesand/or concerns that employees have shared regarding the level of service provided andexperienced throughout the country. OFCCP recognizes that technology alone does notsolve problems, but that people using technology effectively solves problems. We lookforward to this dialogue.

Discussion: OFCCP maintains that a Regional IT coordinator would involve a costfactor. The NCFLL pointed out that this agenda item doesn’t expect someone to be hiredspecifically to perform IT work only. OFCCP will review and entertain the possibility ofa regional IT coordinator role if there is specific issues/information the NCFLL wouldlike to present OFCCP to support creation of such a role/position for a current OFCCPemployee.

Action Item: The NCFLL will prepare specific issues/information and send to OFCCPin the National Office to review and explore the possibility of a regional IT coordinatorrole.

OFCCP Region IV is implementing changes to the manner in which chronological logsare maintained. It appears that a portion of the change is designed to thwart the release ofFOIA information. How does this portion of the change comport with President Obama’spledge to make FOIA an effective tool for the American public? Were the changes inRegion IV mandated by the National Office? Will those changes be adopted by otherRegions? (DW) (64)

Response: Since the installment of computers in field offices more than 12 years ago,the Case Chronology Logs (CC-53) like other common regulatory forms used in ourregional and field offices have transitioned from paper to electronic format. The CC-53is listed in our Federal Contractor Compliance Manual (FCCM). The use of theelectronic CC-53 has been a long standing and accepted practice within the SoutheastRegion like other Regions within OFCCP.

The change that the Region has requested is not designed to thwart FOIA. Staff have beenasked to include only external contractor communications/events/actions listed on the CC-53’s. References to internal meetings/ notes /discussions / instructions are to be kept in aseparate tab in the case file. These internal documents are part of our internal workingpapers in the official case file. Internal notations, memoranda, e-mail, correspondence,drafts of OFCCP documents and predecisional documents are withheld from release pursuantto Exemption 5. Exemption 5 of the FOIA protects “inter-agency or intra-agencymemorandums or letters which would not be available by law to a party … in litigation withthe agency.” 5 U.S.C. §552(b)(5). Included within Exemption 5 is information subject to thedeliberative process privilege, attorney work privilege and attorney-client privilege. Because the internal meetings/notes/discussions/instructions can be legally withheld underExemption 5, there is no intent to thwart the release of FOIA information. ________________________________________________________________________

37

ESA/OWCP

Management Attendees: Nancy Flynn, Deputy Director; Galen Yoder, OELMR; KelleyPettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, New York.


Response: This question is not applicable to OWCP.

Discussion: Further discussion of the agenda item included the response from OWCPmanagement that the FY 2009 is tight and the FY 2010 budget will be at the same level asit is for FY 2009.


Response: OWCP was well prepared for continuation of its operations during the recentH1N1 (Swine Flu) outbreak. OWCP has been preparing for a pandemic outbreak for thepast two years and has measures in place to both protect its employees and ensure thecontinuity of its critical operations. During the initial outbreak OWCP participated in theDepartment’s ongoing meetings to ensure communication of important information andan effective response to the potential challenges surrounding the H1N1 outbreak. To educate employees, OWCP posted educational material on the prevention andcurtailment of the spread of the influenza virus prominently throughout OWCP officesnationwide. Further, OWCP is postured to utilize various types of Personal ProtectiveEquipment (PPE) provided by the Department including hand sanitizers, antibacterialwipes, etc., that will help mitigate the risk of exposure among our employees. In someregions, OWCP has also supplemented this equipment with additional PPE. During the outbreak, OWCP performed an analysis of the risk of exposure from thepublic associated with each OWCP position along with an identification of employeeswho perform essential functions. Per departmental guidance, it was determined that allessential personnel not required to be on-site would telework from home during apandemic. Only an extremely small component (3) of senior management would berequired to report to work in the FPB for coordination and Departmental communicationpurposes. Over the past two years, OWCP has conducted telework exercises to ensure

38

that essential personnel are trained to perform their duties from home in the event of apandemic.

Lessons learned:

The primary lesson learned during the H1N1 outbreak is the importance of beingprepared for a pandemic before it occurs. Remaining agile in our response is alsoessential to ensure OWCP continues to provide vital services for its customers. Inorder to maintain a high level of preparedness and agility, OWCP continues toupdate its business continuity and pandemic-related plans as the environmentevolves. An example of this was the decision to draft language ahead of time,announcing the closure of local offices to the general public, so that in the eventoffice closures are called for, the announcements would be ready for posting asappropriate. Additionally, OWCP will continue to perform telework exercises inaccordance with the Department’s telework testing program to ensure that OWCP’sworkforce remains trained and able to service our customers during a pandemic.

Changes being made should the outbreak reoccur:

Any changes in operations should occur according to the strategy reflected in theESA Pandemic Influenza Implementation Plan; however OWCP’s response is agileenough to allow us to respond on a case-by-case basis, according to the severity ofthe outbreak in a particular region of the country. If the outbreak should recur orincrease in severity, the first change likely to occur would be the closure of affectedOWCP offices to the public. This would allow the continuation of operations whileprotecting our employees from the risk of exposure from the general public.Depending on the severity of the outbreak, the next step might be to sendemployees home in the affected region, in accordance with OPM and Departmentalguidance, until the outbreak subsides. The focus would be to perform only MissionEssential Functions (as defined in the Federal Continuity Directives (FCD) 1 and 2)and any Government Functions that are able to be performed remotely or fromanother district office that is unaffected by the pandemic.

OWCP recently updated its portion of the ESA Pandemic Influenza ImplementationPlan that lays out a detailed strategy for continuing operations in the face of apandemic outbreak resulting in a 40 percent reduction in staff capability over a 12week period. In general, OWCP Programs are prepared to continue providing basiclevels of service in the event of a pandemic through the following:

- Scaling operations to reflect the severity and depth of the outbreak;- Prioritizing work as required to those areas deemed most mission critical;- Reallocating resources to priority functions;- Utilizing technology solutions where practicable, and- Employing redundant systems when necessary.

39

The Plan was also revised to include checklists to assist managers in managingcontinuity of operations during an outbreak period.

information that was and/or will be provided to employees in the future to protectthemselves from exposure since many of them have direct contact with thegeneral public during the performance of their duties:

OWCP’s most vital asset is its workforce, and OWCP is committed to protecting ourworkforce to the greatest extent possible. To that end, educational material on theprevention and curtailment of the spread of the influenza virus were emailed to our staff,and were and continue to be, displayed prominently throughout OWCP officesnationwide. Additionally, all OWCP employees have access to LaborNet, which containslinks to the DOL Pandemic Influenza Plan along with links to the Centers for DiseaseControl (CDC) and other federal resources. OWCP can also supplement all of thisinformation with additional Department and OPM guidance directly to our staff via emailas the need arises. As stated above, OWCP will also rely on closure of affected OWCPoffices to the public to protect our employees. OWCP will continue to stay abreast of thelatest information and provide employees with relevant, timely information.

Discussion: Based on the response received from OWCP, The NCFLL pointed out thefollowing concerns: 1)) Transferring work to another overworked office is not going towork; 2) the agency’s reluctance to allow its employees to perform tele-work sets up theagency for failure in the event of a pandemic flu event; 3) Whether BUES will continueto receive their pay during a pandemic flu if they are available to work but do not havethe equipment and resources to tele-work and are told not to come into the office. OWCPmaintain that they will do its best.

Action Item: At the request of the NCFLL, OWCP will provide a copy of the agency’sPandemic Flu Plan to the NCFLL unless there is a prohibition. If there is a prohibitionfor providing the Plan to the NCFLL, it will provide a written reason.

Recently, OWCP-FEC has begun allowing some agencies to electronically file CA-7s.Please explain how this electronic filing is more secure than regular e-mail. (BT) (79)

Response: CA-7s are submitted to DFEC through an application added to the AgencyQuery System (AQS). All AQS users must register with our program and are grantedaccess only to appropriate agency information controlled by their chargeback code. Aseparate enrollment is required to use the CA-7 submission process. The applicationrequires the user’s signed agreement to maintain the privacy of the information andrequires a manager’s signature authorizing the user to be enrolled. Prior to deployment,the system was certified to be secure by the Department’s Chief Information Officer.

What safeguards are in place to assure that all required info is included in electronicallyfiled CA-7s? Are some fields required to be filled in or the program will refuse to send it(like most travel arrangements)? (BT) (80)

40

Response: The electronic CA-7 process has required fields to include the necessaryinformation we need to make a payment. If the required fields are incomplete, the systemwill not accept the CA-7 and it will be rejected to the submitting agency.

Is each federal agency responsible for assuring that every CA-7 is signed? (BT) (81)

Response: The enrollment application includes the user’s signed agreement to maintainthe original, signed CA-7 and to make these documents available for DFEC review uponrequest.

On 3/1/09, the flexplace pilot expanded to all DOs. By 6/1/09, the flexplace pilot willinclude fiscal staff. Please provide an update on this progress and plans for furtherexpansion. (BT) (82)

Response: DFEC expanded the flexi-place pilot to include senior claims examiners in alloffices. We subsequently further expanded to include rehabilitation specialists, staffnurses, district office troubleshooters, medical coding specialists and fiscal operationsspecialists. The regional directors are reporting to National Office on a monthly basisregarding progress made with the pilot expansion. All regions have confirmed thatinterested individuals in each of these categories have enrolled, obtained tokens andbegun participation. There are no plans for further expansion at this time.

Discussion: The NCFLL its disappointment with their decision not to expand flexi-placeopportunities to other OWCP BUES at the present time.

In the past, problems with the remote use of iFECS was the major reason given for notincluding all FEC employees in the flexplace pilot. It has now been shown that mostiFECS functions are remotely usable. What is the barrier to expanding the pilot toinclude CEs? (BT) (83)

Response: iFECS barriers continue to exist that preclude or limit employees’ ability toparticipate in flexi-place. Documents cannot be bronzed to case files from home, whichwould greatly impact our ability to issue decisions and development letters. Mail cannotbe weighed and metered from home so outgoing letters would be delayed beyond the dateindicated. Most iFECS fiscal functions are not available with remote access. We alsohave continuing communications concerns. One large concern is that telephone callscannot be rerouted to or returned from employees’ homes. We have stringent programcustomer service goals to promptly return calls.

Discussion: The NCFLL pointed out that there must be a way to bronze remotely.OWCP doesn’t disagree. OWCP will have a progress report by the October 2009National LMR Meeting. The NCFLL indicated that if this issue has not been resolved bythe October LMR meeting, the issue will have to be addressed in a different forum.

41

Action Item: OWCP will provide the NCFLL a progress report at the October 2009National LMR meeting on its progress in addressing bronzing issues remotely.

The process for authorizing Physical Therapy has become more time consuming sinceACS now requires the Claims Staff to determine and/or calculate the number of units perCPT code of physical therapy to be authorized when the provider does not specify. Thishas led to additional time spent on billing issues by Claims Staff. Please clarify the roleof the Claims Staff with regard to educating the provider how to properly request and billfor physical therapy modalities. Should ACS modify their Request for Authorizationform to ask for specific # of units and provide instructions on how to bill for them? (BT)(84)

Response: The physical therapy authorization requires the provider to provide thenumber of units per CPT code. When the CE receives the request via the thread processthe total units will be visible to the CE. The claims examiner does not need to calculatethe units of therapy to be authorized.

Discussion: The NCFLL pointed out that the response sounds nice but this is differentfrom what is being heard from the field. The NCFLL expressed concerns withcontractors not doing the job they were hired to do and throwing it back to BUES._________________________________________________________

With the hiring of new Claims Examiners, it is noted that no additional time or traininghas been allotted to learn how to use the IFECS program. What are the plans forproducing an IFECS manual or User Guide? (BT) (85)

Response: The National Office does not require a new claims examiner training plan ortime schedule. The district offices’ hiring practices vary and this impacts training. Forinstance, a large office may hire a group of examiners and have a full-time classroomtraining session. A small office may hire an individual examiner and rely more onreading and one-on-one mentoring. These are local management decisions. The NationalOffice does facilitate the training through the provision of claims examiner trainingguides. These are in the process of being updated and put on line, to include discussionof iFECS functionality where appropriate. There are also “How to” guides on line forvarious iFECS tasks, although recent deployments will require these guides to beupdated.

On or about 2/3/09, the computers were updated with the latest installment of IFECSwhich included an AutoZoom feature in Imaging. This feature allowed the Claims Staffto preset the Imaging system to have the documents automatically appear on theircomputers “enlarged” so that the name on the document could be more easily identifiedto make sure it belonged in the case you were working on. However, on or about 3/3/09,this feature was disabled which means all documents are viewed in an “enlarged” formand the option to enable or disable was taken away. To change the document to regularviewing size you must left click on the document and it will automatically change. The

42

problem: Left clicking on the document to size and resize requires your eyes to focusand refocus which has led to complaints of eye strain and headache. What considerationwill the Department give to reverting back to allowing Claims Examiner’s the option toenable/disable the AutoZoom feature? What accommodations have been made to addressthese health and safety concerns? (BT) (86)

Response: The feature was added to avoid PII violations. Examiners indexingdocuments were failing to recognize misfiled documents while screening and indexingmail, causing multiple PII violations. By highlighting the portion of the incomingdocument most likely to carry the claimant’s name and/or claim number, we believed thatthat we had a better chance of recognizing differences between the case header and thedocument, and thereby avoid violations. However, making this optional causedexaminers not to use the function leaving us more vulnerable to PII violations. We haveno plans to disable the auto zoom feature without a better mechanism in place to catchmisfiled documents. We have received no substantiated complaints of medical impact,and do not see where this process significantly differs from other aspects of our work –for example, the print size, style and format varies in each incoming document reviewed.

The Staff Nurse has been presented with a new contract (Memorandum of Agreement~MOU) for Field, COP and Telephonic Nurses. This contract contains new language and issupposed to supersede their current agreement. Their current agreement was for 2 yearswith options in years 3-5. In the past, these option years never required a new agreement.Now, if they are in an option year (3-5) they must sign a new agreement. The problemsare: 1). The Staff Nurse must initiate a new contract with the Field Nurse, COP andTelephonic Nurses which could represent a breach of the original (current) agreement andput her in harm’s way in the event there is litigation over this issue; 2). The Staff Nurse isrequired to enforce the new agreement on the contractor’s anniversary date even thoughthere has been no prior explicit notification to the contractors that the current contract willbe null and void or that the Department will exercise its option to not renew the agreementas it stands; 3). The Staff Nurse’s credibility is adversely affected with the current Field,COP and Telephonic Nurses because she is forced to initiate the new agreement withoutformally resolving the current agreement and this is expected to hamper retention efforts; 4).If the Field, COP and/or Telephonic Nurses refuse to sign a new agreement, the Staff Nursewill be without a Nurse in a particular area and this will severely hamper her in assigningfield work and meeting performance standards. The trickle down affect will have adeleterious effect on the entire Office. Please address the concerns created by requiringthe Staff Nurse to initiate a new contract prior to the expiration of the currentcontract. (BT) (87)

Response: The new language in the revision expands upon and addresses mandatoryrequirements for compliance with PII policies and procedures for contract nurses workingon FEC cases and handling FEC claimant case files (Section VI). The revisions also addressthe actions and scope of involvement of companies providing billing services for FECcontract nurses as it relates to claimant case files which is another significant PII concern.(Section IV).

43

The contract nurses are not signing a new agreement because they are in an option year (3-5). The option year renewal timeframe is the vehicle to introduce the revisions to the MOA.In consultation with SOL, the signing of the revised MOA (in the anniversary or optionyear) is a mutual modification between DOL and the contract nurse. DOL will not extendservices without this mutual agreement.

There is no breach of the original contract. The original contract is signed for 2 years with 3one-year renewable options. At the expiration of the initial 2 years, the contract has expired.The first option year can then be exercised based on the staff nurse’s overall satisfactionwith the provision of services by the contract nurse. It is at this time that the revised MOAis introduced. The revised MOA will not need to be signed again if the remaining optionyears are approved. The option year renewal letter serves to invite the nurse to continuewith the program.

The revised MOA is being issued to contract nurses for business reasons deemed necessaryby the Department of Labor. The essence of the old MOA has not changed. Sections havebeen expanded for clarification purposes and to comply with policy. Under advisement ofthe SOL, the MOA revision is a mutual modification between DOL and the contract nurse.

With respect to compliance with PII policies, the revised MOA affords the staff nurse theopportunity to ensure that the contract nurse has been provided adequate knowledge andinformation and has been made aware of his/her responsibilities regarding PII and thesecurity of case files.

All contract nurses must be in compliance with current FECA policy to functionappropriately in the nurse intervention program. This is not a change in policy. If thecontract nurse does not sign the MOA or abide by the policies and procedures of theprogram, he or she is precluded from acceptance or continuing participation in the nurseintervention program. We do not anticipate any significant level of refusal to sign whichwould impact our ability to provide services in a particular geographical area.

In OWCP-FEC Denver, the following statement was made, in writing, by a supervisor:“In each of the elements the rating is equal to that of the lowest rating in the sub element.For example if there are 5 sub elements and 4 are exceeds and 1 is needs to improve, theoverall element rating is needs to improve.” The same (il)logic is used in the overallperformance rating: if one element is needs to improve, then the entire rating is needs toimprove. Please discuss fully. (BT) (88)

Response: DFEC does not have standardized performance standards and questionsregarding standards and appraisals are better addressed at the local level. The DL-1-384provided with the last contract specifies that if a “Needs to Improve” rating in just oneelement translates into a “Minimally Satisfactory” rating overall – this is not optional forDenver or any office. The number of standards within an element, the weighting of thestandards and the performance measured is determined locally.

44

Discussion: The NCFLL expressed its outrage with this response. The NCFLL indicatedthat the response is unconscionable and totally unacceptable. The NCFLL points out thatgood employee are leaving the agency over this. OWCP understands the concerns raisedby the NCFLL and will see what she can do to address it.________________________________________________________________________


Response: This question is not applicable to OWCP.


Response: This question was answered in #78 above.________________________________________________________________________

Recently, ENERGY offered flexplace to the Technical Assistants (Technical Writers).Please discuss the future expansion of flexplace in ENERGY. (BT) (91)

Response: Effective June 1, 2009, flexiplace has been offered to several groups in theEnergy program. At the district office level the Technical Assistants and ManagementOfficers are participating in flexiplace and at the National Office level, all of the health-science staff (e.g., Toxicologist, Health Physicist, and Industrial Hygienist) areparticipating. Management is developing a plan which will allow the Program Analystsin the National Office to also participate in flexiplace. We expect implementation tooccur in early September 2009 and once implemented, approximately twenty-two (22)individuals will be afforded the opportunity to utilize flexiplace. Energy management isaware of the benefits of flexiplace and will continue to look for ways to expandparticipation.

Discussion: The NCFLL put OWCP on notice that if no further progress is made onallowing all OWCP BUES to participate in flexi-place by the October 2009 NationalLMR Meeting, the NCFLL will let the agency address it before a third party.

Please provide an update on the status of Claims Examiners being upgraded to GS-12.(BT) (92)

45

Response: Energy management was advised by the OASAM HRC that the career ladderupgrade for the Energy Claims Examiners from GS-11 to GS-12 has been approved. Management is working with the OASAM HRC and OMAP to determine whether thesepositions will need to be competed or if the accretion of duties will allow us to non-competitively promote staff to the higher grade level.

Discussion: The NCFLL expressed disappointment with the response. The NCFLLexpressed concern on the impact it will have on the FTE ceiling if the GS-12 positionshave to be competed. OWCP indicated there would be impact on the FTE ceiling but theBUE who competes for the position would not lose their job if they are not selected.OWCP hopes to have the issue resolved within the next two months.

ESA/OWCP


Response: This question not applicable to OWCP.


Response: This question was answered in #78 above.

iFECS site management in most FEC Offices is usually performed by one non-management GS-13. That is not the case everywhere. What is the rationale for eitherkeeping the Site Manager at a lower grade or making him/her a supervisory GS-13? (BT)(95)

Response: The iFECS site manager was a new position that grew out of the need tocoordinate iFECS activities throughout the program. Some of the offices already hadOasis coaches that previously coordinated imaging activities and these folks moved intothe site manager position. Some of offices felt that an existing manager best knew thistype of work and assigned the site manager responsibilities, while maintaining employeemanagement activities. Some offices posted for a new GS-13 outside of the bargainingunit when authorized to do so. Local offices’ needs differed in this area, due to size of theoffice and other variables. The position evolved to meet local needs and National Officedid not dictate a standardized plan.

Discussion: The NCFLL questioned OWCP concerning some offices posting the GS-13positions outside of the bargaining unit. OWCP will review and provide a response.

46

Action Item: OWCP will provide the NCFLL with the reason(s) for some officesposting the iFECS site manager positions outside of the bargaining unit..

On 5/7/09, OPM Director, John Berry, sent a memo to agencies regarding tele-work.Director Berry listed five key elements of the tele-work initiative:

a) Advisory Group . Who makes up this group in OWCP? When/how often dothey meet? How well does it function?

b) Policy review . Who performs these duties? How often? c) Telework Managing Officer . Who is this?d) Appeals Process . Is there a process at the national level? Is so, what is it?

How is it accessed?e) Training . Is there training available? If so, where/when? How is it accessed?

In that document, he called for the submission of an agency telework policy by5/25/09. Please provide a copy of that policy to the NCFLL. (BT) (96)

Response: This is the response from OASAM/HRC/OWLBP:a. The advisory group consists of agency reps to an OPM telework group-not an internal agency groupb. As requested DOL sent our policies to OPM-they are reviewing all federalagency policies to identify best practicesc. We have a Telework Program Manager who is our WorkLife Program Manager-Currently Pam Buddad. Appeals-We follow our negotiated agreementse. Training-Spotlight 885 reviews training. We have been doing some agency and smallgroup training and are working on other initiatives.http://labornet.dol.gov/DCS_FileSystem/Spotlights/Spotlight885.doc

Both labor and management, often state something like “good communication is the keyto good relations.” However, there seems to be a trend in the other direction – somethinglike “Don’t provide any notice of a change and if the union protests, just claim the changehas de minimus impact.” The union should be notified on all proposed changes. Thedegree of impact should be discussed after the notice is provided. Please discuss fully.(BT) (97)

Response: This is an OMAP issue.

Discussion: The NCFLL is concerned about the response. Changes in workingconditions are to be communicated to the NCFLL. Management needs to provide noticeto the NCFLL of changes in working conditions, even if management considers it deminimis. We can discuss the issues on whether a matter is de minimis in another forum, ifnecessary.

47

Many BUES are unfamiliar with and not trained in SHIMS. Please discuss actions youragency is willing to take in order address this issue. (BT) (98)

Response: This was addressed by OASAM/Safety & Health under agenda item #50.________________________________________________________________________


Please discuss the following issues related to iFECS. (BT)

For over 4 years, Claims Examiners (CE) do not have the ability to create a paymentworksheet without having to go into a different task, change the case status, go back tothe comp task, and enter the figures for the worksheet. Once this is all done, the CE mustgo to the adjudication task and change the status back to what it was. The CE shouldhave the ability to hit a single "button" in iFECS which will allow for the creation of aworksheet. The creation of the worksheet has no effect on anything as it is just acalculation, and not a payment.

Response: The true worksheet function that will not necessitate a claims status change isalready in the planning stages to be included in a subsequent release. The releasenumber which will include this enhancement is not yet determined.

Since iFECS was created, the National Office has not fixed problems being encounteredby the CE with changing addresses and direct deposit changes in all existing death claimsand legacy claims that have been on compensation for extended periods. As theclaimants or survivors age, they decide to move and we have to change the address or thebank information. To make these changes, the CE must delete all the information in thesystem and re-enter it from scratch. The CE cannot edit anything through iFECS in thesecases. In other newer cases, the CE can actually edit all this information.

Response: The most recent iFECS release of June 8, included an enhancement forchange of addresses in occupational and traumatic injury claims wherein the change onlyneeds to be entered in Case Administration and, once certified, it will populate in alladdress fields. A similar fix is in planning for death claims at this time, but the releasedate is not established at this time.

ESA/WH

Management Attendees: Russell Harris, Deputy Administrator; Tom Markey, AssistantAdministrator; Galen Yoder, OELMR; Kelley Pettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel,LRO-OASAM, New York.

There is a new telephone service that "unblocks" previously blocked calls. This couldhave a significant impact on the ability of our field investigators to contact employees

48

from locations outside of the office and from their personal cell phones. Discuss theapplication of this technology and potential solutions that could ease the impact on theconduct of the agency mission. (PT) (44)

Response: See OSHA item #44 response.

Please discuss the impact that ARRA, the remaining budget for FY 2009 and theproposed budget for FY 2010 will have on your agency in the areas of hiring, travel,work space allocation. (NN) (106)

Response: Tom Markey is best suited for this. According to Mr. Markey, WHD has received ARRA monies. The goal is to use theARRA monies to hire 100 new wage and hour investigators nationwide. The 100 FTEinvestigator hours will be captured through ARRA work performed on Davis-Baconinvestigator. By 10/01/09 we should have an additional 250 employees on board.Allocation of new hires will be based on office workload.

There have been temporary GS-13 Senior Investigator/Advisor positions advertisednationwide. There will be six temporary GS-13 positions per region. Plans are to havethe selections made within the next two to three weeks. The GS-13 positions are withinthe bargaining unit and their appointments are not to exceed two years. There will beextensive and training involved with those selected for these positions.


Response: Response: This is to be answered by ESA/OMAP.

Discussion of the recent GAO Report on complaint intake and its aftermath. (JD) (108)

Response: Response: It is really too early to discuss at this point. WHD does not havethe final report from GAO. Once WHD has the final report we will be glad to share ourresponse and discuss the final report and the steps WHD will be taking as the result of thereport. One would expect from listening to the testimony that the GAO will, among otherthings, expect WHD to more closely follow the FOH in complaint intake especiallyentering every “complaint” into WHISARD.

[Note: Four weeks after the testimony a WHT would not accept a complaint from anemployee who had worked for a firm that closed and had not been paid for 4 weeks,

49

along with 27 other employees. That employee contacted Chairman Miller’s staff andthat complaint is being handled. The continuing failure to follow direction and theFOH will have consequences for the entire agency.]

Discussion: The NCFLL raised concern with the over-reaction going on in some DistrictOffices (i.e., managers requiring each call to be logged). Additionally, the NCFLL raisedconcern with the “Note” above. Do we now investigate complaints involving a companythat is now out of business?

Please provide an update on the status of all agency training for wage and hour staff onnew complaint intake procedures. (DL) (109)

Response: WHD is still waiting for the final recommendations from the GAO, oncethese are received WHD will design an all employee WEBINAR and will discuss anychanges in the complaint intake process with the NCFLL.________________________________________________________________________

The NCFLL has learned that managers are requiring BUEs to enter much moreinformation in WHISARD as a result of the GAO audit. There will be an increase in theamount of time on investigations, "Complaint Screening", and "Technical Assistance". With the 90-day standard and other time and quality standards, the NCFLL is concernedthere will be adverse impact. WH has not notified the NCFLL of these newrequirements. Please discuss. (JD) (110)

Response: Please be specific, we can’t address an issue if we don’t know whatinformation you are referring to in this item. The information required for a complaint isspecified in the FOH & WHISARD.________________________________________________________________________

Please discuss the reason(s) for WHI’s being rated on collection of back wages (CriticalElement #1) when they cannot compel an employer to pay. (JD) (111)

Response: Element #1 was subject of negotiations and has been in effect for 7 years.The collection of BWs is part of the WHI job, WHI have never been able to “compel anemployer to pay” but the ability of a WHI to convince an employer to voluntarily complyand pay in appropriate situations is an indicator of good performance. The element refersto cases that are to be “administratively” settled and excludes litigation cases. Managershave been advised that one or two large cases should not have an overly adverse impacton the rating under this element.

Discussion: The NCFLL pointed out that the union can’t negotiate performancestandards as indicated in management’s response.

50

Please discuss the reason(s) that the National Office still pushes the 90-day standard(Critical Element #2) when management wants “quality” and more entries in WHISARD.The more work required on a case will lengthen the time it takes to do the case. (JD)(112)

Response: The inference that “quality” work takes a longer period of time to submitseems to be specious. Time management is an essential function of the WHI job. GAOcriticized WHD for, among other things, the lack of timely resolution of investigations.Again this standard was negotiated and has been in effect for 7 years, surely during thistime WHIs have been doing “quality” cases.

[Note: In 1983 the standard was 75-95% of all investigations were to be completed within45 days and all investigations were to be completed within 180 days to meet thetimeliness element]

Discussion: The NCFLL pointed clarifications to management’s response: 1) thestandards were not negotiated with the NCFLL as the union can’t negotiate standards,only its impact and implementation; 2) The “Note” above on the 45 day standard. Underthe 1983 standards on 45 days, the 45 day clock did not start until six hours was chargedon a case.

Discussion on granting exceptions to WHI’s for completion of their case assignmentswithin the 90-day limit. Please address the following questions:

a) Is there national guidance on how these exceptions are granted? If yes, pleaseprovide a copy of and/or discuss.

b) If there is no national guidance provided to the Regions and District Offices,what efforts are being made by the National Office to insure consistent andstandard application by the District Offices in granting exceptions. (DL) (113)

Response: Managers were told that circumstances beyond the WHIs control were to betaken into account. Again this standard was negotiated and has been in effect for 7 years.

Discussion: The NCFLL pointed out that these standards should be uniform. Wage andHour agreed to review the standards to insure its uniformity. Once again, the NCFLLpointed out that the standards were not negotiated with the union.

Most WHI openings are advertised as GS-0249 "Wage and Hour Compliance Specialist"but a few in the Chicago Region are advertised as GS-1849 "Wage and HourInvestigator". OPM apparently took action in March to cancel GS-0249 and replace itwith GS-1849. Information can be found here http://www.opm.gov/fedclass/1800A.pdf.What is the difference? What is management's rationale for this change? When was theNCFLL notified? Please provide a copy of this new PD. (JD) (114)

51

Response: We have been advised that the only change is that the series is now 1849instead of 0249. WHD has provided copies of these PDs, which have been updated tomore accurately reflect the WHI job, such as eliminating the Whistleblower statutes andadding OSH Field Sanitation, FMLA, H1B, etc.

Discussion: The NCFLL raised concern on the performance evaluation process for thoseselected for the temporary GS-13 position since they will not assume their position priorto July 1, 2009. Wage and Hour indicated that their current GS-12 performanceevaluation rating would have to be closed out before they assume their GS-13 position.Another performance evaluation for their GS-13 position would be done at the end ofSeptember 30, 2009.

________________________________________________________________________

Please discuss the temporary GS-13 Senior Investigator/Advisor positions. The NCFLLhas not received copies of the position descriptions and performance standards for thesepositions but understands that Wage and Hour plans to announce them soon. If copies areavailable, please provide; if not, when will the information be shared with the NCFLL?(DL) (115)

Response: WHD has provided copies of the Positions Descriptions. PerformanceStandards are in development and copies will be provided as soon as possible.

Discussion: The NCFLL acknowledges receipt of the Position Descriptions received.(See Handout “K”).

Action Item: Wage and Hour to provide the NCFLL with the Performance Standards forthe temporary GS-13 Senior Investigator/Advisor position.

Some district office managers are requiring WHI’s to use the serial sign-in/out sheetwhen they arrive at their office even though they began their workday in the field.Likewise, if the WHI leaves the office to work in the field for the remainder of the day,they are required to sign out on the serial sign/out sheet when they leave the office.There appears to be some difference in interpretation of Article 27 section 4(a) of theCBA by some district office managers. Please discuss. (DL) (116)

Response: This may be a matter of interpretation, the CBA does say “…showing timesof arrival and departure to record and report attendance.”

Action Item: Further discussions between OASAM and the NCFLL needs to bescheduled to discuss this agenda item.

Please discuss the reason(s) that “Right to Work” information is still on the Wage andHour website at http://www.dol.gov/esa/esa/whd/state/righttowork.htm. (JD) (117)

52

Response: We don’t know the reason that this information was on the website, it hasn’tbeen raised before and it appears that it has been up for some time (2002). It has beenremoved.________________________________________________________________________

Please discuss the reason(s) that “Right to Work” information is still on the Wage andHour website at http://www.dol.gov/esa/esa/whd/state/righttowork.htm. (JD) (118)

Response: See answer above________________________________________________________________________

4:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.

VETS

Management Attendees: John M. McWilliam, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Operations andManagement and F. Paul Briggs, Director, Office of Agency Management and Budget (VETS);Kelley Pettit, RA-OASAM, Dallas; Peter Biel, LRO-OASAM, New York.

Agenda Item #1: Action: Will gather more information on the denial of flexi-place for aVETS employee in the Atlanta case. (withdrawn by PT via email 6/8/09)


Response: VETS did not receive any ARRA monies. The FY 2009 budget is good. TheFY 2010 budget is very good. VETS have held to the same FTE level for the past threeyears.


Response: A significant amount of time has been spent on the planning of the continuityof operations in the field and at the National Office in the event of a health relatedpandemic. Plans are in place to operate and execute essential functions in the event of amajor H1N1 outbreak. All EE’s have laptops to perform their work away from the office.

53

The laptops have wireless capability for Employees to work at home if they don’t haveaccess to the internet. All 230 EE’s will be receiving laptops and docking stations.Enough spare laptops are being purchased to allow a swap out when repairs are needed.

Discuss the impact of changes proposed in the Veterans Employment Rights RealignmentAct of 2009 in the filing of USERRA complaints directly to the Office of Special Counselrather than through the Labor Department. (PT) (104)

Response: The Veteran’s Employment Rights Realignment Act of 2009 has passed theHouse and is currently before the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee. The bill wouldrequire the USERRA complaints to be filed directly with the Office of Special Counsel(OSC) instead of DOL. Approximately three and one-half years ago, GAO did a reviewof half of the complaints going to OSC and the other half going to DOL. GAO made noconclusion on its review. Currently, USERRA complaints can be taken OSC (federalemployees) or Justice for prosecution. One hundred investigators perform these USERRAinvestigations for VETS and accounts for approximately 10% of their time.

Discuss any changes made to the FY 2009 Performance Standards for Veteran’s ProgramSpecialist and Veteran’s Program Representative. If changes were made, please explainthe reason(s) that the revised performance standards were not shared with the NCFLLVeteran’s. (DL) (105) (withdrawn by DL on 6/17/09 due to institutional grievancefiled)

54

Tuesday, June 16, 2009 9:00 a.m. – 9:30 a.m. …afgelocal2513.com/pdfs/Lmr/na090616min.pdf9:45...

Documents

Transcript of Tuesday, June 16, 2009 9:00 a.m. – 9:30 a.m. …afgelocal2513.com/pdfs/Lmr/na090616min.pdf9:45...