Niche News

OPM Says Federal Agencies Reported $181.6 Million in Taxpayer-Funded Collective Bargaining Costs for FY2024

Interesting: 0/0 • Support: 0/0Log in to vote

Key takeaways

  • OPM released a supplemental report on taxpayer-funded collective bargaining expenses for Fiscal Year 2024.
  • Federal agencies reported approximately $181.6 million in collective bargaining-related expenses.
  • OPM reports the majority of those costs stem from personnel compensation tied to time spent negotiating, processing grievances, and resolving disputes.
  • Other reported costs include arbitration fees, travel, technology, office space, and penalties or settlements.
  • OPM Director Scott Kupor called for transparency and a review to determine whether these costs are reasonable and aligned with agencies' missions.
  • The report and a director’s blog are linked in the OPM news release for further detail.

Follow Up Questions

What specific expense categories and definitions does OPM use for "collective bargaining-related expenses" in the report?Expand

OPM defines “collective bargaining‑related expenses” broadly in the FY2024 supplemental report to include: (a) personnel compensation for agency time spent negotiating, processing grievances and resolving disputes (including official time/pay for union representatives and related payroll costs); (b) arbitration and other third‑party fees; (c) travel and per diem related to bargaining/representation; (d) technology and office space devoted to representational activities; and (e) penalties or settlements tied to bargaining/representation. The report’s appendices spell out line‑item definitions and the categories agencies were asked to report.

Which federal agencies reported the largest shares of the $181.6 million, and how is that distribution broken down?Expand

OPM’s FY2024 supplemental report lists agency‑level totals. The report (and OPM news release) present the governmentwide $181.6 million figure but do not publish a full, agency‑by‑agency breakdown in the news release itself; the PDF contains tables that show how agencies reported costs by category and include per‑agency data (see report tables/appendices for individual agency shares and rankings).

Does the $181.6 million figure represent payments made to unions, payments made by agencies (e.g., arbitrators, travel), or both?Expand

The $181.6 million is government‑reported collective‑bargaining‑related expenses paid by agencies (taxpayer‑funded). It includes agency payments for personnel compensation tied to negotiating/grievances, arbitration fees, travel, technology, office space and settlements — i.e., costs paid by agencies, not a single line for payments to unions only.

What statutory or administrative protections do federal civil servants have without union representation, as referenced by OPM Director Scott Kupor?Expand

Kupor was referring to statutory and administrative protections federal employees have regardless of union membership: merit‑system protections and appeal rights under Title 5 (including appeals/rights for adverse actions under 5 U.S.C. chapter 75 and RIF protections), protection from prohibited personnel practices (5 U.S.C. §2302), and statutory whistleblower and equal‑employment rights. Those statutory appeal and due‑process channels (e.g., MSPB appeals, EEO processes) exist independent of collective bargaining.

How did OPM collect and verify the data for this supplemental report — is it self-reported by agencies, audited, or otherwise validated?Expand

OPM collected the FY2024 supplemental data via a formal data call to agencies (see OPM/CHCO memo); agencies submitted the figures to OPM. The data are agency‑reported (self‑reported) using OPM’s data call templates; the report notes the information expands prior official‑time reporting. The supplemental report and OPM data‑call memo describe required fields and what to report (and state OPM’s use of those agency submissions to compile totals). The report does not indicate OPM performed an independent financial audit of every agency submission in the supplemental report.

What authority or levers does OPM have to change collective bargaining practices or reduce these reported expenses across agencies?Expand

OPM’s levers are administrative and advisory rather than unilateral elimination of bargaining: OPM issues governmentwide reporting requirements and guidance (data calls, memos) and can analyze and publish cost data; it can advise or require agencies on report submissions and interpret Title 5 authorities. Substantive changes to bargaining rules or statutory rights generally require legislation, changes in collective‑bargaining regulations, agency bargaining (or Executive Branch policy), or Department of Justice/administration enforcement actions. OPM can, however, propose regulation or guidance, provide model policies to agencies, and use reporting transparency to push reforms.

Comments

Only logged-in users can comment.
Loading…