DEEP STATE Biden administration abolishes ICE labor union

Buick Electra

TB2K Girls with Guns
This is a good precedent. The next Republican POTUS (unless a RINO) 'should' abolish all FedGov unions.


Biden administration abolishes ICE labor union

The Biden administration delivered a death sentence Thursday to the labor organization that represents thousands of employees at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The Federal Labor Relations Authority’s decision erases the National ICE Council and leaves its 7,600 members, mostly deportation officers, without a collective bargaining agreement or union representation, members said.

The move also dents a prominent critic of both the administration and the American Federation of Government Employees, the umbrella union that included the ICE Council.

AFGE moved to “disclaim” the ICE employees this summer after the council filed a complaint claiming gross mismanagement and hostile intentions at AFGE. AFGE President Everett Kelley said the ICE Council wasn’t a good partner in the labor movement.

FLRA Regional Director Jessica S. Bartlett agreed to AFGE’s request in a decision Thursday, saying that ICE also sided with AFGE in its battle to ax the council.

“Based on AFGE’s disclaimer of interest, I find that it is appropriate to revoke the certification for the unit of non-professional employees,” Ms. Bartlett wrote in her decision.

Chris Crane, president of the council, said the government colluded with AFGE to silence the organization and its members.

“There is no doubt that ICE and DHS leadership worked in unison with corrupt union bosses to make this happen,” he said. “DHS and AFGE leadership both wanted desperately to silence ICE Council whistleblowers. Without a union, it’s doubtful those whistleblowers will have jobs much longer.”


He also called the FLRA’s decision “the largest single act of whistleblower retaliation in United States history” by depriving union members of their representation.

“We did what we were supposed to do. We reported to the Department of Labor that union bosses at AFGE were allegedly spending dues money on prostitutes and strippers, sexually assaulting their own employees, engaging in payoffs and coverups, and other unlawful and egregious acts. It was supposed to be investigated. We were supposed to be protected,” he said.

He added: “Federal employees must be alerted immediately that they have no protection from corrupt unions when reporting allegations to the Department of Labor. This can’t happen again.”

Neither AFGE nor ICE responded to requests for comment Thursday.

When it filed to oust the ICE employees’ union last month, AFGE blamed the employees for the bad blood and characterized the disclaimer as acceding to the council’s wishes.

“It is clear that the AFGE Council 118 remains steadfast in their desire to no longer be a part of AFGE or the broader labor movement,” Mr. Kelley said. “As a result, we have made the difficult decision to disclaim interest in this unit. While we had hoped to avoid this outcome, today’s action begins the process of granting Council 118’s request.”

The council had sought independence. Instead, AFGE’s disclaimer abolishes the council and leaves its members back at the starting point.

They must now go through a new organization drive and renegotiate a collective bargaining agreement.

The council has long been critical of the direction of activities at ICE, including playing a key role in sinking nominees to lead the agency in both the Trump and Biden administrations.

ICE officers also have battled Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas over his attempts to refashion the agency and its mission. Just before the end of the Trump administration, the ICE Council signed a controversial agreement with the Department of Homeland Security giving the union chapter a say in policy changes that the Biden team wanted to make. The new administration “disapproved” of the agreement.

The ICE Council has battled AFGE. It argues that the 700,000-member union doesn’t deliver good service to its members and takes stances that are hostile to the members. That includes backing politicians who have called for abolishing ICE, which could effectively end the members’ jobs.

Beyond those service complaints, the ICE Council has claimed serious management issues at AFGE, including in a complaint filed with the Labor Department asking for an investigation.

The complaint, first reported by The Washington Times in June, cited accusations that AFGE leaders used union money to hush up claims of racial discrimination and sexual harassment and used union dues to pay for “strip clubs” and “pursuing prostitutes.”

In filing their complaint, ICE Council officials sought whistleblower protections, fearing retaliation. Weeks later, AFGE filed its notice of disclaimer asking that the council be dissolved.

Rep. Michael Cloud, Texas Republican, said that appeared to be just the sort of retaliation that worried the council.

He sent a letter late last month asking the Labor Department to investigate AFGE.

Mr. Cloud also asked AFGE to defend itself against the council’s accusations of mismanagement.

The FLRA didn’t give the ICE council a say in its fate. The authority said the two parties involved were AFGE and the Homeland Security Department — specifically ICE.

Mr. Crane said the agency’s decision allowed AFGE to get away with retaliation.

“The FLRA absolutely knew this was whistleblower retaliation, but purposely prohibited the evidence from being introduced. They need to be investigated immediately. This investigation is a complete sham,” he said.

The FLRA did not respond to a request for comment on the process.
 

Dobbin

Faithful Steed
How soon we forget.


On Thursday May 5, 2022 the Senate Budget Committee, chaired by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), held a hearing titled, “Should Taxpayer Dollars Go to Companies that Violate Labor Laws?” The hearing was held in response to the Federal Government’s virtually unchecked practice of awarding Federal Government contracts to companies that have and continue to engage in illegal, anti-union activities, such as Amazon.

I don't hear Bernie going to bat for the ICE Union...

Convenient - this Marxist Agenda.

Dobbin
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
I have no idea about this particular Federal Employee Union, but I will say things in that Agency, in general, seem to be a mess, and the Union may have been too.

But I've worked in both unionized and non-unionized Federal Offices and I preferred the Unionized. Remember Federal employees legally can not strike, so that isn't even part of what they are up to.

Instead, most of the time they aid employees in navigating the insane amount of government regulations that sometimes contradict each other when it comes to things like overtime, conditions of employment, rights of appeal, stuff that Agencies don't like very much but is very helpful if you are the employee with the issue.

For example, our union intervened when the Agency wanted all employees to stay at their desks while the office was being painted in hot weather, with no ventilation. After the second or third person started vomiting, the Union was able to step in and get everyone set home for the day and/or sent to another office if there was one (there wasn't we went home). In an office without a union, we would have stayed there until someone had a medical emergency at least (and they would have).

They are also useful for helping to solve inter-office disputes, I had a guy (a disability hirer who was deaf and not a nice person) who "wanted my desk because her desk is bigger." He started doing things to intentionally interfere with my job, both my boss and the union were able to help with that.

The other thing the unions do is to collectively use the legal right of employees in congress for hire wages (which doesn't mean they get them, but they can lobby) and working conditions. My non-union office canceled flex time when a new director came in and they "just didn't like it" (I was one of a number of people who quit and changed agencies) in my unionized office, flex time was part of the bargaining agreement as long as all public facing positions were covered during opening hours.

I suspect one reason this union was canceled by the Biden administration was that it might have been representing on behalf of those mounted agents on horseback that did nothing wrong, at yet the Biden administration loses face if they don't punish.
 

Dobbin

Faithful Steed
I suspect one reason this union was canceled by the Biden administration was that it might have been representing on behalf of those mounted agents on horseback that did nothing wrong, at yet the Biden administration loses face if they don't punish.
All of the above, but add the Union enforces "collective bargaining" laws - with the operative word "law."

Biden don't like no law - except when it is used to restrain conservative ideals and principle. In this case the law defends government workers and restrains government abuse of workers.

Just one more constraint removed on Biden Agenda.

And more of the "no law for me - another law for thee."

Dobbin
 

Knoxville's Joker

Has No Life - Lives on TB
With the union gone it will be clear sailing to abolish ICE
I don't think they thought that through entirely. If the democrats keep getting rid of unions they will make it all too easy for a republican controlled majority to consolidate and abolish agencies as what Reagan did?
 

subnet

Boot
I don't think they thought that through entirely. If the democrats keep getting rid of unions they will make it all too easy for a republican controlled majority to consolidate and abolish agencies as what Reagan did?
It was this one that was a target, not others..its all about demographics for them
 

db cooper

Resident Secret Squirrel
Once upon a time I was associated with AFGE. I quickly learned they were corrupt and a most definite democrat tool. My reading of the article suggests AFGE was in collusion with the gov to eliminate the ICE union. This is nothing more than dirty democrat politics, pure and simple.

I suspect AFGE will pick up the ICE people as members or, more likely, purposely want them without representation to make easier the elimination of the good ICE officers or to eliminate the agency all together.
 

Dobbin

Faithful Steed
I suspect AFGE will pick up the ICE people as members or, more likely, purposely want them without representation to make easier the elimination of the good ICE officers or to eliminate the agency all together.
This.

Without a formal union, the employees become "at will" employees. And like most at will - can be fired/terminated/ignored without even a review.

It won't prevent lawsuits - you know, before Judges like Brian Reinhart.

It is not nation of "rule of law" anymore.

You be "workin for da man" now.

You load 16 tons and what do you get, another day older and deeper in debt.


The line "another day older and deeper in debt" from the chorus came from a letter written by Travis's brother John.[2] This and the line "I owe my soul to the company store" are a reference to the truck system and to debt bondage. Under this scrip system, workers were not paid cash; rather they were paid with non-transferable credit vouchers that could be exchanged only for goods sold at the company store. This made it impossible for workers to store up cash savings. Workers also usually lived in company-owned dormitories or houses, the rent for which was automatically deducted from their pay. In the United States the truck system and associated debt bondage persisted until the strikes of the newly formed United Mine Workers and affiliated unions forced an end to such practices.

Coming soon to a socialist workers paradise near you...

Dobbin
 
Last edited:

Melodi

Disaster Cat
This.

Without a formal union, the employees become "at will" employees. And like most at will - can be fired/terminated/ignored without even a review.

It won't prevent lawsuits - you know, before Judges like Brian Reinhart.

It is not nation of "rule of law" anymore.

You be "workin for da man" now.

You load 16 tons and what do you get, another day older and deeper in debt.




Dobbin
Not if they are government employees, if they are contracted employees from an outside agency (very common these days) they can be fired at will. In the Federal Civil Service after an employee's "probationary" first year, firing with or without a union becomes extremely difficult. Not impossible, just difficult.

There are good aspects and some very bad aspects to this, but at the start of the 1930s, this was put in place in exchange for Federal Employees agreeing to give up certain legal rights that other citizens have. Such as not being allowed to run for office, not being allowed to work in a polling place, being allowed to join a political party but never serve as a delegate to a convention, and not to publically work for candidates (and a few other things).

You can vote, but legally a Federal Employee can't campaign, of course, this is often ignored, but it is still on the books.
 

Dobbin

Faithful Steed
Sorry. I laughed above (Horselaugh.) What you say may be true and fact - but when you "Own" the Just-Us Department and have a good hook into the Judiciary, you can have books which are ignored as easily as they are applied.

Dobbin
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
Sorry. I laughed above (Horselaugh.) What you say may be true and fact - but when you "Own" the Just-Us Department and have a good hook into the Judiciary, you can have books which are ignored as easily as they are applied.

Dobbin
Understood, but I worked at the personnel office of the DOJ and while the attorneys hated it (and most of us) while they could get away with some things (like shoving me off a secure computer to do illegal credit searches on a computer that was legal to only used for credit searches on people who had applied for jobs with the agency) there were some things even they had to put up with.

And yep, I can remember them screaming at my boss if they really wanted to fire someone or demanded that they hire someone when no money had been allocated for such a position that year or whatever.

In individual cases, sometimes really corrupted agencies do get away with things for a time - but I also saw some fairly high-up co-workers taken to court and facing jail time over violating some of the travel statutes (they were high enough up to have known better).

Even Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State found she couldn't "just fire" the White House Travel staff, she tried and it backfired - she was, however, able to get them reassigned (no one wanted to work there with her after that anyway, I gather most volunteered to leave) so they kept their basic jobs and paygrades they just went to work in another office. She had wanted to fire them outright and I heard through the grapevine she threw a massive tantrum when she was told she couldn't do that to civil service employees.

But you are right Dobbin things are changing so the rules may not mean much anymore...if they have started doing raids on the homes of political rivals all bets are off.
 

Knoxville's Joker

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Understood, but I worked at the personnel office of the DOJ and while the attorneys hated it (and most of us) while they could get away with some things (like shoving me off a secure computer to do illegal credit searches on a computer that was legal to only used for credit searches on people who had applied for jobs with the agency) there were some things even they had to put up with.

And yep, I can remember them screaming at my boss if they really wanted to fire someone or demanded that they hire someone when no money had been allocated for such a position that year or whatever.

In individual cases, sometimes really corrupted agencies do get away with things for a time - but I also saw some fairly high-up co-workers taken to court and facing jail time over violating some of the travel statutes (they were high enough up to have known better).

Even Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State found she couldn't "just fire" the White House Travel staff, she tried and it backfired - she was, however, able to get them reassigned (no one wanted to work there with her after that anyway, I gather most volunteered to leave) so they kept their basic jobs and paygrades they just went to work in another office. She had wanted to fire them outright and I heard through the grapevine she threw a massive tantrum when she was told she couldn't do that to civil service employees.

But you are right Dobbin things are changing so the rules may not mean much anymore...if they have started doing raids on the homes of political rivals all bets are off.
And a lot of thesse changes could benefit the right republicans if they get really edgy...
 
Top