cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/26471893

Summary

Trump is revoking collective bargaining rights at the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), ending union protections for thousands of airport security officers.

The Department of Homeland Security claims the move will improve efficiency and security, but unions argue it is a retaliatory attack on federal workers.

The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) plans to challenge the decision. TSA workers fear the rollback will worsen working conditions and retention.

The policy reverses union rights granted under Obama and expanded by Biden.

  • Empricorn@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    2 days ago

    Does the president actually have the power to union-bust, or is he just continuing to do what he wants…? I realize it’s largely an academic question, since no one will resist this guy’s illegal actions…

    • DontTreadOnBigfoot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      The implication of the summary text is that the protections were granted by executive mandate, not through legislation, so presumably they could be revoked the same way.

      • Empricorn@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m largely uninformed on the specifics, but it’s insane that he can use EOs to give himself the authority to do a thing, then go do the thing he previously wasn’t allowed to do. What the fuck, America!?

        • sleepydragn1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          It’s a little bit confusing, but from what I’ve read, the collective bargaining rights that they previously enjoyed were granted from the beginning by the agency’s administrator, so it follows that they can be revoked by the agency’s administrator in turn.

          Here’s a 2011 NPR article covering when they were initially granted those rights.

          As always, this is the danger in allowing such rules to be set by the executive branch instead of codified into law — when the next guy is in office, they can always easily undo it.

    • splinter@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      No, he doesn’t. This is Trump just hurling executive orders at things he doesn’t like.

      • splinter@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        That’s incorrect, and these situations aren’t close to comparable.

        When Biden was in power, eight out of twelve unions had already ratified the contract, and the senate passed a bill to force the final four to accept it. It passed 80-15, so Biden couldn’t have vetoed it if he wanted to.

        Trump is attempting to ban unions altogether, by executive order.

        • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          OP’s point stands though, whether it’s right or not, it seems to be within the President’s power.

          • splinter@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            I clarified further. In the rail strike case, it was a senate bill, not an executive action. And the bill passed 80-15. Biden signed the bill, but that isn’t the same thing at all.

          • splinter@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            With such a high majority it would have just been overturned immediately, so no, he couldn’t have vetoed the bill. An attempt to do so wouldn’t have helped at all and might have undermined future cooperation.