Page images
PDF
EPUB

Answer.

Question.

[blocks in formation]

In 1990, the Congress passed and the President signed the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act and the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990. What impact will these new laws have on

the Service?

Answer. The Administrative Dispute Resolution Act encourages federal agencies to use various dispute settlement techniques to resolve disputes prior to litigation. "Alternative means of dispute resolution," which are encouraged by this Act, include negotiations, conciliation, facilitation, mediation, factfinding, minitrials, arbitration, or any combination of these methods.

The Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990 authorizes federal agencies to add a new step to the rulemaking process prior to issuance of the proposed rule. This step is the negotiated rulemaking process--a committee is formed, consisting of representatives of the federal agency and representatives of all involved parties. These persons sit down together and try to reach a consensus on what the proposed rule will say. A "facilitator" or "convener" assists in these meetings. The purpose of the Act is to streamline the rulemaking process and avoid extensive and costly litigation.

The immediate effect of these two laws on FMCS has been that federal agencies are requesting information, consultation, dispute resolution systems design, training, and mediation. We have made every effort to meet the demand for these services.

Question. Will your work on Administrative Dispute Resolution offset or reduce the work of other federal agencies?

Answer. Yes, we believe that our work in the administrative dispute resolution (ADR) area will reduce the work of other federal agencies. Our longest running ADR project, the Age Discrimination Mediation Project, has reduced the Department of Health and Human Service's case backlog and the number of cases requiring full investigation. We believe that similar projects will produce similar beneficial results.

Question. How much funding is requested in the FY 1992 budget for Administrative Dispute Resolution work?

Answer. In FY 1992 the Service expects to receive $160,000 in reimbursable funds from other federal agencies for its work in alternative dispute resolution.

OFFICE MOVE

Question. I note that you have requested $558,000 for an office move. What does this move entail and if the funding requested is insufficient, how do you plan to make up for the shortfall?

Answer. The $558,000 that is requested for the mandated national office move includes $440,000 for the "Increased cost of office space, $35,000 for communication charges, $16,000 for postage, $55,000 for office repairs and alterations, and $12,000 for printing costs.

If the $558,000 requested for this move is insufficient, FMCS will have to absorb the shortfall with "regular" funds.

TRAVEL ALLOWANCE

Question. Your request for travel shows a decrease from FY 1991. How do you plan to carry out the mission of the Service with this decrease in travel funding?

Answer. Funds requested for FMCS travel in FY 1992 total $1,268,000, an increase of $30,000 over the FY 1991 travel allowance of $1,238,000.

1

The Service expects increases in travel during FY 1992 for field station assignments (+$20,000), official station transfers (+$2,000), and new mediator travel (+$18,000). FMCS expects an elimination of travel in FY 1992 for the Labor-Management Cooperation Project (-$10,000).

:། 1

:,་ met inch)

PAY COSTS

།:;།། CLACITY

Question. What effect has the executive pay increase and the geographic pay rates had on your agency, and how are you absorbing these pay increases?

Answer. To cover the costs of these pay raises, FMCS has diverted funds from other areas, primarily funds set aside for new mediator hiring. The FMCS full-time equivalent (FTE) level in FY 1991 has been reduced significantly from original staffing plans.

DISPUTE MEDIATION

Question. What criteria does the Service use in entering dispute mediation cases?

Answer. FMCS involves itself in those disputes which have interstate implications and where work stoppages in those disputes would have substantial impact on interstate commerce.

In addition, negotiations that involve national defense or national security are assigned for mediation. Mediation is provided in all health care and federal sector cases. Mediation is also provided for state and local sector disputes in those states or jurisdictions where no viable mediation service exists. Generally, in non-health care cases FMCS becomes involved at the request of the labor-management parties.

NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD

STATEMENT OF JOSHUA M. JAVITS, CHAIRMAN

ACCOMPANIED BY:

PATRICK J. CLEARY, MEMBER

KIMBERLY MADIGAN, MEMBER

BUDGET REQUEST

Senator HARKIN. We will now hear from the National Mediation Board concerning their fiscal year 1992 budget request. The Railway Labor Act as amended establishes the National Mediation Board whose principal goals are the determination of the choice of employee representatives and the mediation of collective bargaining disputes in the airline and railroad industries.

With us today is Mr. Joshua Javits, Chairman of the Board. The fiscal year request is $7,008,000, an increase of $494,000 over fiscal year 1991. Mr. Javits, on behalf of the subcommittee I welcome you today. We will put your statement in its entirety in the record, and if you would just summarize it we would sure appreciate it.

INTRODUCTION OF ASSOCIATES

Mr. JAVITS. I will be happy to do so. It is a pleasure to be here. Senator, if I could, let me introduce my colleagues and members of the Board.

Patrick Cleary is on my right. He has been with the Board for more than 1 year and I had the pleasure of introducing him last year. Kimberly Madigan on my left is the newest member of the Board. She has been on the Board since August 1990. She has had 10 years experience as a practicing attorney under the Railway Labor Act dealing with railroads and airlines on both sides of the fence, management and labor, and we are very pleased to have her on the Board with us.

Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, to summarize the submitted statement, the National Mediation Board is requesting an appropriation of $7,008,000 for fiscal year 1992, $494,000 more than is available for fiscal year 1991.

The primary functions of the Board under the Railway Labor Act include:

One, mediation in connection with collective bargaining and representation matters concerning employees in the railroad and airline industries. For this we are requesting $4,221,000.

Two, voluntary arbitration and the investigation of critical disputes through emergency Board procedures. We are asking $500,000 for this item.

Three, adjustment of employee grievances in the railroad industry. For this we are requesting $2,287,000 be appropriated for fiscal year 1992.

PREPARED STATEMENT

This completes a brief summary of my statement. If you have any further questions, I would be more than happy to answer them.

[The statement follows:]

[blocks in formation]

The total amount requested for Fiscal Year 1992 to administer the Railway Labor Act is $7,008,000, and a personnel complement of 58 positions.

The appropriation for the National Mediation Board is requested for expenses necessary to administer the provisions of the Railway Labor Act, as amended. This statute was designed to provide orderly procedures for the settlement of labor disputes

in

the railroad and airline industries, as well as to handle questions of employee representation and to administer the arbitration provisions of the Act.

When the Railway Labor Act was amended in 1934 it established the National Railroad Adjustment Board for the purpose of handling grievances arising under the terms of collective bargaining agreements in the railroad industry.

In 1966, the President signed Public Law 89-456, which further amended certain provisions of Section 153 of the Act. Under the Public Law, new grievances and those which have been on docket before the National Railroad Adjustment Board for a period of at least one year may be referred to local boards of adjustment. The purpose of this amendment was to reduce an overwhelming caseload of unresolved disputes pending before the National Railroad Adjustment Board.

The budget justification,

as submitted, identifies the

functions just discussed and the amounts requested for each. I

[blocks in formation]

questing $4,221,000, an increase of $448,000 over

Fiscal Year

« PreviousContinue »