More than 200 lawmakers urge EPA to negotiate new union contract

More than 220 lawmakers are urging the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to go back to the bargaining table as employees fight against a contract they say was imposed on them.

The push comes after the EPA sought to implement a new contract for the agency’s employees without agreement from the union. A federal labor court has since told the EPA it should go back to the bargaining table with the union.

The bipartisan letter to EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler, signed by 228 lawmakers, called on the agency to return to negotiations.

“We are concerned about potential unfair labor practices and refusal to bargain in good faith with union representatives at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,” the letter states, adding that they “strongly urge EPA’s management to return to the bargaining table with union representatives and negotiate in good faith.”

The letter also slammed the EPA, saying the lawmakers understand that the agency “unilaterally imposed a new contract” for its employees. 

The contract, according to the lawmakers, evicts union representatives from office space and severely restricts the amount of time they can devote to union activities while also eliminating the employee grievance process, something they argue strips workers of due process and a way to hold their managers accountable.

The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), EPA’s union, has been fighting that contract since it took effect in July. One EPA employee protested the contract while receiving an award from Wheeler. 

The Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) recently sided with AFGE, saying the EPA may have violated the law by seeking to impose its latest contract on workers.

The authority proposed a settlement agreement that would require the EPA to abide by a 2007 union contract while agreeing to go back to the bargaining table to negotiate a new deal.

But since the FLRA notice dropped in late October, the EPA and the union have yet to formally begin new negotiations, though both sides said there has been some progress.

The EPA stressed it was willing to go back to the bargaining table but questioned the validity of the FLRA’s determinations. 

“The agency remains dedicated to bargaining in good faith with its unions, and is happy to engage with the Federal Labor Relations Authority to address any of its concerns. However, it should be noted that the FLRA has only suggested a settlement at this point, and has not officially made any determinations. Further, as the Union has noted, the FLRA currently does not have the authority to prosecute unfair labor practices,” EPA said in a statement to The Hill. 

The EPA also said it has been engaged in talks with the AFGE since unveiling the contract in July — something the union disputes.

Cathie McQuiston, deputy general counsel for the AFGE, said she has been in communication with the EPA to discuss negotiations, but any meaningful discussions about the contract have yet to begin.

“We’ve made progress towards that but we have not agreed with them nor would I say we’ve been in negotiations with them. We’re negotiating about going back to negotiate. To the extent they’re saying that means meaningful negotiation that’s not true,” she said.

The union also views the FLRA decision differently.

“The FLRA investigation validated our position that we were within our legal rights to not be bullied by the agency into doing something we didn’t legally have to do,” McQuiston said of accepting the imposed contract.