Bop Union Master Agreement

The intention of the parties can be seen as an indicator of the scope of an agreement. However, this situation is very different from whether the parties intended to achieve certain results in the application and application of the agreement. The Authority`s position confuses the issues of interpretation of the contract with the issues of the “construction” contract. “The application of the “covered by” doctrine is an exercise in construction.” Nat`l Treasury Emps. Union, 452 F.3d to 797. “[C]onstruction” determines [the] legal functioning” of the agreement; ‚ÄČ”Interpretation” of the agreement resolves any ambiguity in the terms used. Id. (original amendment) (citation Garden State Tanning, Inc. v.

Mitchell Mfg. Group, Inc., 273 F.3d 332, 335 (3d Cir. 2001)). Within the National Treasury Employees Union, the collective agreement at issue provided that the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) would resolve disputes over applications for annual leave planning on the basis of seniority of workers. 452 F.3d on 794-95. The union proposed a new policy allowing workers to “exchange” leave, but the IRS refused, saying the existing collective agreement covered the issue. Id. at 795.

An arbitrator found that the collective agreement did not cover the “leave swap” agreement because it “only regulates the way the Agency allocates annual leave in the first place” and does not speak of “the situation in which a worker chooses not to take advantage of authorized leave.” Id. (between internal quotes omitted). The IRS appealed to the authority that the judge considered to be an error. According to the union`s approach, “a worker with leave on the basis of seniority could take that leave from another employee than the one who had requested, but was refused, to leave for the same period,” which was recognized by the authority that this would circumvent the seniority regime. Id. at 797. Given that the collective agreement “defined the issue of seniority as the sole criterion for worker leave,” the Authority found that the proposed leave exchange policy was “extremely reasonable” at 798. Other participants included the executive staff of the Bureau of Prisons, the Executive Council of the Council of Prisons; J. David Cox, National President, AFGE; Eugene Hudson, Jr., National Secretary-Treasurer, AFGE; David Borer, General Counsel, AFGE; and Augusta Thomas, National Vice-President for Women and Fair Practices, AFGE.

The signing ceremony was given by videoconference to senior officials and union officials in all prison offices. Filing a national complaint is “not a particularly common thing” because “we try to reserve it when it`s a national matter,” Brandy Moore, treasurer of the national union secretary, told government management on Monday. In this case, it is the “covered-by” doctrine, which includes a well-established principle in labour law: when a union and a collective employer reach an agreement on a subject during contract negotiations, neither party has a duty to continue negotiations on this subject as soon as the parties enter into a collective agreement.