Skip to main content

Lawsuit Filed Against the VA Over “Official Time” Dispute


Recently, the American Federation of Government Employees, the National Federation of Federal Employees, and the National Association of Government Employees filed a lawsuit against the Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) after the VA made a determination that Title 38 VA employees would no longer be able to perform any union representational activities while on “official time”.  Broadly speaking, official time is time granted by a governmental agency to allow an employee to perform representational functions on behalf of a union without requiring the employee to use personal leave or incurring a loss of pay while that employee would otherwise be in the course of their ordinary work.

In this instance, the unions claim that the VA has usurped its authority by unilaterally withdrawing official time from these Title 38 employees. According to the lawsuit, several collective bargaining agreements were entered into between the unions and VA and remained in effect at all relevant times.  That agreement set forth which employees would be allowed to utilize official time.  However, in November of 2018, it was alleged that the Acting Assistant Secretary for Human Resources and Administration of the VA improperly issued an Official Time Determination which prohibited these Title 38 employees from using official time (as noted, this is what this lawsuit turns on), contrary to what the collective bargaining agreements stated.

The lawsuit asks that the Official Time Determination be set aside, held to be unlawful and in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act, and return these employees back to the status quo.


A copy of the lawsuit can be found here:  https://www.afge.org/globalassets/documents/generalreports/2018/title-38-official-time-11-15-18.pdf

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...

Distance in a Non-Compete Agreement Measured "As the Crow Flies"

Ginn v. Stonecreek Dental Care - Court of Appeals, Twelfth Appellate District of Ohio Facts :  Dr. R. Douglas Martin ("Martin") sold his dental practice to an employee who worked there, Dr. David Ginn ("Ginn").  In doing so, Martin and Ginn signed a contract for the sale which contained a non-compete provision that prohibited Martin from engaging in business "within 30 miles" of the practice for five years starting from October 2010.  While Martin initially stayed on and worked with Ginn for a period, the relationship subsequently deteriorated between the two and Martin went to work for another dental office.  The new dental office was less than 30 miles away when measuring the distance in a straight line.  However, when driving between the offices, the distance was more than 30 miles. Ginn filed a claim against Martin on the grounds that Martin breached the non-compete.   At the trial court level, the court found that "within 30 miles"...

Breaking: Labor Secretary Rumored to Be Leaving Administration

A few hours ago, word leaked out that Labor Secretary Marty Walsh (“Walsh”) is in the midst of negotiations to head up the NHL Players Union and leave his position at the Labor Department. Walsh, who has served as the sole Labor Secretary under President Biden, has taken part in a labor renaissance of sorts as support for organized labor has increased during his term as Labor Secretary (although the number of workers that have joined a union over the past two years has not grown as mush as some expected.)  He has also overseen the ongoing negotiations with rail workers over a new contract, although that matter is still on shaky ground and playing out as we speak. As for who might step into the vacant Labor Secretary role, there are already rumblings that President Biden should nominate Deputy Labor Secretary Julie Su (a strong labor advocate) or even a progressive like Senator Bernie Sanders.  Until Walsh officially gives his notice, however, I would expect some/many potential...