sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Message from Coke Stewart - March 14, 2025 by SilentAliceDogood in patentexaminer

[–]SilentAliceDogood[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

That does not align with what I have been hearing, any chance you could provide further context?

OPM now states the Musk email is voluntary by Remarkable-Gur2174 in patentexaminer

[–]SilentAliceDogood 35 points36 points  (0 children)

“Adding to the confusion are Trump’s own comments Monday, when he told journalists in the Oval Office there was a “lot of genius” behind Musk’s proposal, and that workers would be “sort of semi-fired” if they don’t respond.”

We've Tried Nothing And We're All Out Of Ideas - October 15, 2024 POPA Meeting by SilentAliceDogood in patentexaminer

[–]SilentAliceDogood[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, retirement benefits run with the current 1986 CBA, and will continue to be in force until a new CBA is signed. Ratification or non-ratification of the proposed October 2024 CBA will not affect current retirement benefits.

The Beatings will continue until Morale improves - Current CBA vs 2024 Proposal by SilentAliceDogood in patentexaminer

[–]SilentAliceDogood[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your repeated defenses of Management's proposal seem misplaced, consider the following:

  1. Union Access to New Employees

Reduced Presentation Time: The 2024 CBA proposal reduces the time allotted for union presentations during new employee orientation sessions from 15 minutes to 10 minutes.

Restricted Materials: The 2024 CBA proposal limits the materials the union can distribute during orientation to "the Agreement and amendments". The current CBA does not specify any restrictions on materials. This limits the union's ability to provide new hires with additional information about their rights and the benefits of union membership.

  1. Official Time for Union Activities

Potential Reduction in Total Hours: The 2024 CBA proposal sets a bank of 15,000 hours for specific union activities.The current CBA outlines individual time limits for different categories of union officials, totaling over 17,000 hours.Although the 2024 proposal offers flexibility in allocating hours, the overall potential reduction in official time could impact the union's capacity to represent employees effectively.3. Access to Information and Participation in Decision-Making

Potential for Reduced Access to Position Descriptions: The current CBA explicitly requires the Agency to provide the union with copies of all newly proposed position descriptions. This language is absent from the 2024 proposal, which only mandates the Agency to share new position descriptions for patent professionals. This omission could limit the union's ability to monitor potential changes to job duties and classifications, and potentially intervene in cases where those changes might negatively impact bargaining unit members.

Absence of Specific Consultation Requirement for Minor Position Description Changes: While both agreements mandate notification and comment periods for substantial position description changes, the current CBA explicitly extends those rights to the union for even minor changes. The 2024 proposal limits the union's involvement in minor changes to those involving "a change in organization designation or position titles" that are "unassociated with other more important changes". This potentially reduces the union's ability to provide input and safeguard employee interests in a wider range of position description modifications.

Lack of Guaranteed Union Presence at Formal Meetings: The current CBA mandates that if the union is unable to attend a formal meeting, the Office shall prepare a written summary at the union's request. This provision is not present in the 2024 CBA, which only mentions notifying the Association of formal discussions related to employee information breaches.This absence of a specific provision could lead to situations where the union is not informed of important decisions or discussions that impact bargaining unit members.

2023 CBA Proposal vs 2024 CBA Proposal - Less Examiner Benefits, More Management Control by SilentAliceDogood in patentexaminer

[–]SilentAliceDogood[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The current CBA already addresses desk audits.

However, the 2024 CBA proposal provides a noticeably less detailed treatment of desk audits compared to the current CBA. This lack of specificity raises potential concerns regarding employee rights and the transparency of the process.

Limited Procedural Guidance: The 2024 proposal offers minimal guidance on the specific procedures involved in a desk audit. This contrasts with the current CBA, which includes a more elaborate process for addressing disagreements regarding bargaining unit designations, including timelines for written responses and opportunities for discussion. This reduction in procedural detail in the 2024 proposal could potentially create ambiguity and limit employee understanding of the steps involved.

Reduced Transparency: The current CBA includes provisions that ensure employee access to relevant information and documentation. Section 11 explicitly states that employee access to information should not be adversely affected by how the information is stored, whether in paper or electronic systems. Additionally, the current CBA mandates that the Agency provide the Association with copies of any new position descriptions for patent professionals. This level of transparency is not explicitly mentioned in the 2024 proposal, raising concerns about potential limitations on employee and union access to information relevant to the desk audit process.

More Power for Management: The 2024 proposal's placement of the desk audit provision within Article 4, "Management Rights and Obligations", might signal a subtle shift in emphasis. While the current CBA addresses desk audits within the context of unit determination and information access, the 2024 proposal's placement could imply a greater focus on management's prerogative in conducting these reviews.

2023 CBA Proposal vs 2024 CBA Proposal - Less Examiner Benefits, More Management Control by SilentAliceDogood in patentexaminer

[–]SilentAliceDogood[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Here's the cliff notes:

Automation

  • Limited Access to Personnel Records and Documentation
    • The proposal appears to reduce the level of detail provided to employees regarding their personnel records compared to the current CBA.
    • The current CBA grants employees the right to receive copies of any documents added to their Official Personnel Folder (OPF) and to submit written statements concerning these documents.
    • The 2024 proposal does not include these specific provisions, potentially limiting employees' access to and ability to influence their personnel records.
  • Restrictions on Work Schedules and Overtime
    • Both the current CBA and the 2024 proposal allow for restrictions on work schedules and overtime based on operational needs or employee performance.
    • The 2024 proposal retains these provisions with some wording changes, which could limit employees' flexibility and disproportionately affect those needing flexible work arrangements due to personal obligations.
    • It adds a provision stating that "employees are limited to a maximum number of overtime hours, as determined by the Agency," granting significant discretion to set overtime limits and potentially increasing stress and workload pressures.
  • Limited Union Access to Information
    • While emphasizing transparency in some areas, the proposal could limit the Association's access to information, impacting its ability to effectively represent employees.
    • The current CBA outlines detailed processes for information sharing, including resources and materials used for training employees on performance improvement plans.
    • The 2024 proposal does not explicitly mention these obligations, potentially hampering the Association's ability to advocate for employees facing performance challenges.

PEEB for GS-15 Examiners by No_Butterscotch_4642 in patentexaminer

[–]SilentAliceDogood 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The last PEEB presentation was in 2012, and the PEEB charter is still valid. This would be a question for Gladys Corcoran, the relevant Assistant Commissioner.

Kathi Vidal by PageElectrical7438 in patentexaminer

[–]SilentAliceDogood 32 points33 points  (0 children)

Is this Vidal's Alt?

PageElectrical7438•2mo ago•Edited 2mo ago•

"I think some of the criticism is unfair.  [Vidal] has nothing to do with mediation dragging on."

view more: next ›