|
Voluntary Relocation Program (VRP) -
Current News
July 16, 2011
As per the VRP agreement, the Office of Border Patrol (OBP)
provided the selection lists to the National Border Patrol
Council (NBPC) on June 29, 2011 for review. The NBPC reviewed
the selection lists, as required by the agreement, and
identified three problems with the selections. The NBPC sent
comments back to the Office of Border Patrol last week and
received a response regarding one of the issues. The following
is a synopsis of the review and the response received to date:
1. Numerous Supervisory Border Patrol Agents applied for VRP's
and were selected. This is a direct violation of the VRP
agreement. Some have claimed other SBPA's did this during the
last VRP rotation, but if so, the NBPC was not aware of it. Jeff
Gutow, Human Resources Assistant from the Office of Border
Patrol misrepresented the situation in the following email that
is being circulated:
"In this latest round of the
VRP the NBPC objected to CDI's being rated as eligible for the
journeyman level VRP. CDI's have been rated eligible in past
VRP's, because the promotion is temporary and the last permanent
grade held is a journeyman agent. However in discussions between
the NBPC and USBP, it has been decided that because the CDI is
promoted out of the bargaining unit, the CDI is not eligible to
apply to the journeyman level VRP.
Therefore, CDI's who
applied to the most current VRP have been rated as ineligible.
And, CDI's will not be eligible to apply to any future
journeyman level VRP announcements.
Please note the VRP
MOU - 5.1.f. Promotion out of Bargaining Unit. Upon promotion
out of the bargaining unit, agents are disqualified from
participation in the VRP established under this MOU and their
names will be removed from consideration."
To
clarify, the NBPC objected to Supervisory Border Patrol Agents
being selected because it violates the agreement. The NBPC was
not aware of any SBPA's appearing on the selection lists or
being selected in prior VRP's. If management was aware of it,
then management knowingly violated section 5.1.f., which Mr.
Gutow cited in his email. However, he omitted the second half of
5.1.f., which says: "If a selection certificate is issued
with an agent's name who was promoted out of the bargaining
unit, management will strike the agent's name and replace it
with the next name on the list, to include ties (the exact
seniority date)." Therefore, the matter of Supervisors not
being eligible was not "recently decided," as Mr. Gutow
claims, but instead was decided when the VRP agreement was
negotiated. If the "last permanent grade held" was a
determining factor, as alleged by Mr. Gutow, then all
supervisors would be eligible.
Furthermore, the NBPC
received information from a few academy instructors regarding an
agreement that the instructors signed with the academy.
According to that agreement, if an instructor remains at the
academy for three years, the instructor is eligible for a
full-paid relocation. The NBPC is currently researching this
matter to verify the terms of the agreement and identify how
many instructors may have signed the agreement.
2.
Selections went too far down on the list and beyond what was
allowed. As per the VRP agreement, for one vacancy, OBP will
have a list of seven agents from which to select. For every
vacancy thereafter, OBP will add one more name to the list. So,
if OBP selected three agents, the selection should have been
from the top nine agents on the list. The NBPC identified
numerous locations where OBP appeared to go beyond what was
allowed under the agreement.
3. No-cost relocations -
Many agents on the selection lists appeared to have been no-cost
relocations, but for unknown reasons, were not selected.
Furthermore, some sectors had too few no-cost relocations or in
the case of El Paso Sector, none.
As of this date, OBP
replied and said they will remove the Supervisors who were
selected and make new selections. OBP also said they intend to
make some selections for no-cost relocations for El Paso Sector.
They are still reviewing the information provided regarding #2
and #3 above and are expected to have a response this week. The
NBPC is confident OBP will make the right decision and resolve
the matter without any unnecessary challenges or delays.
|
