Originally Posted by
Boggie Dog
I want to be sure I fully understand, there should be no surprise to TSA workers that TSA screeners are considered essential employees and sign documents to that effect acknowledging they cannot enter into any form of strike or walkout? Is that correct?
I'm happy the people in your community are supporting you guys.
If I am not mistaken, any sworn federal position that is deemed essential/emergency personnel have to acknowledge the strike walk-out clause - I know that it has been explained to me many times as part of official communications/training. This has been the case (admittedly with a much lower profile) since Taft-Hartley. It is a part of your intake as an employee, the explanation of what it means to be designated essential employees.
Originally Posted by
petaluma1
Trying to stay away from going OMNI, no one ever anticipated a government shutdown driven by an individual -------------------------------- (fill in the blanks). If all TSA/ATC/FAA inspectors walked off the job, there is no way they could all be fired and replaced.
That's very nice that the community has come together to support you - but what about the family at home? Feeding individual screeners doesn't do much to help feed their kids and spouses.
Sure there is, the President can institute a National Security Emergency, roust the National Guard and Military services and place them into the situations to augment any that didn't walk out, some of the military members are already certified on the same equipment we use. The same thing that Reagan did with the Air Traffic Controllers. It would be a short term answer to the immediate problem, and then the path they walk afterwards becomes a bit more difficult, but the immediate solution is an easy one.
There are also food banks in the area that have opened their doors to furloughed employees (not just TSA), and that helps some families with no strings attached, and without violating any applicable regulations pertaining to gifts. I anticipate that if we go past another pay period without pay, that the level of support from those organizations will increase. Many local Churches have been helping out families as well, and not just their congregation, any of the people that are in need have been helped.
Originally Posted by
WillCAD
Since you're describing the document, I think we can assume that it's not SSI, so could you answer me this - does the explanation of the designation emergency/essential employee position include an explicit statement that such personnel will be required to work with delayed pay during a partial government shutdown?
Keeping the screener force working at full strength during a shutdown is certainly a point in favor of privatization, since contractors typically invoice the government at 30 or 45 day intervals, rather than the 15-day intervals of the federal pay cycle. Contractors are set up to get their money from the gubment with longer lag times than individual federal employees.
Still, a long shutdown can still screw up the budget of a contractor if the shutdown happens to intersect with a scheduled invoice date and delays the invoice.
There are other factors to consider when discussing privatization, too. I'm on the fence about it myself.
I can not recall the exact wording, but that point was explained a few times too, first at my intake to the organization, intermittently since then, and consistently as shutdowns happened in the past.
*Disclaimer - the last time I signed an official form on this was probably over 10 years ago, as part of a yearly form festival we used to have to do. I have heard this consistently from my management, and it is my understanding that the explanation is still a part of the intake process. There has also been tons of direct communication from HQ with the prohibitions on strikes, and I have even heard local AFGE shop stewards warning their members against strike talk/actions.