Department of EnergyFederal Labor-Management Forum

Annual Report FY 2015

Table of Contents

I. Executive SummaryII. Message from the Secretary

III. MetricsIV. Benefits Derived from LMF/Results/OutcomesV. Attachments

Attachment A – Executive Order 13522 -- Creating Labor-Management Forums to Improve Delivery of Government Services, December 9, 2009

Attachment B – Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments/Agencies and Labor-Management Forums, from John Berry, Director, Office of Personnel Management and Jeffrey D. Zients, Deputy Director for Management, Office of Management and Budget -- Executive Order 13522 – Establishing Labor Management Forums and Pre-decisional Involvement, January 19, 2011

Attachment C – DOE LMF Charter

Attachment E- Listing of DOE LMF members (identifying co-chairs, steering committee, subcommittee, ad-hoc committees and working groups, etc.)

Attachment D – OMB/OPM/Whitehouse Presidential Personnel Office memo of December 23, 2014 (OMB M-15-04) – Strengthening Employee Engagement and Organizational Performance

Part I. Executive Summary

In accordance with Executive Order 13522 – “Creating Labor-Management Forums to Improve Delivery of Government Services,” the Department of Energy (DOE) initiated action to reinvigorate a department wide Labor Management Forum (LMF) that had inactivated in 2001. In June 2013, then newly sworn in Secretary of Energy, Ernest Moniz, requested to meet with representatives from the various local levels of federal recognition to emphasize his support for positive labor-management relations and the dividends they could yield the Department. On August 27-29, 2013, on behalf of the Secretary, the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer (OCHCO) hosted a Federal Labor-Management Forum (LMF) kick-off at the Department’s headquarters in Washington, D.C.

During this kick off meeting, Labor and Management representatives from all fifteen (15) local federal unions across the Department attended. The Federal Mediation Conciliation Service (FMCS) facilitated the meeting. The three day kick-off meeting included training exercises, assessing the current status of federal labor-management relations at DOE and resulted in consensus to reinvigorate another department wide LMF and draft a controlling LMF charter. During this three day meeting the kick-off group established a framework for a charter and assigned a team of labor and management representatives to finalize the charter on behalf of the group. The writing team consisting of Tom Pansky (LIUNA 335, BPA), Kim Parker (NTEU), John Clark (AFGE 1104, NETL ), Kristopher Muse (Management, Oak Ridge), Erin Walkowiak (Management, Idaho) and Jennifer Carter (OCHCO Representative and Department LMER.) The charter draft was finalized and submitted late 2013 and on April 27, 2014, the charter was adopted and signed by Secretary Moniz and a Secretarial memorandum supporting this effort was circulated.

The LMF’s mission was established as “build[ing] and maintain[ing] a collaborative relationship to meet Agency challenges and develop joint solutions that will enhance workplace safety, productivity, and employee quality of life to better accomplish the Department’s mission.”

A number of logistical LMF meetings were held in 2014 with the two primary LMF meetings under the charter being held July 31, 2014 and the in person meeting being held October 21-23, 2014.

Major 2014 accomplishments include establishing a roles and responsibilities document and slide deck; electing permanent management and labor Co-Chairs and Steering Committee members; developing subcommittees; use of the LMF to address the 2013 DOE Cybersecurity breach; efforts to define what pre-decisional involvement is for the DOE LMF; briefings on new Department policy (an effort never previously undertaken due to the nature of local recognition and no national labor representative at the Department level, i.e. Workplace Violence, Phased Retirement; DOE Directives Program); pre-decisional solicitation of items of interest for change on DOE O331.1C (Employee Performance Management and Recognition Program); and solicitation of LMF input for Phased Retirement forms. Due to a late start in year 2014, an annual yearly report was not compiled.

During 2015, there were 60 designated LMF representatives (4 per bargaining unit: 2 management and 2 labor). Additionally, there was managing staff from the OCHCO, and other active members for a total of 84 active participants. 2015 quarterly meetings were held in February, July and October with several additional working meetings called to address pressing matters such as the Office of Personnel Management Cybersecurity Breach, 2015 Employee Viewpoint Survey participation rates, and other pre-decisional involvement efforts.

Several informational briefings were provided by the Department on areas of LMF interests such as: The Presidential Memoranda for Modernizing Federal Leave dated January 15, 2015, and 5 CFR 1400 requirements for the Designation of National Security Positions and Negotiability of Department Orders. The FMCS provided training in the following areas: Executive Order 13522 (Creating Labor Management Forums to Improve Delivery of Government Services), Metrics, Pre-decisional Involvement (Pros and Cons) and Post Pre-decisional

Involvement (How to add value for both Parties after PDI –The Agreement), and Group Problem Solving Techniques and Consensus and Active Listening (Team Building).

During 2015, the Secretary’s LMF had several successes including finalizing a document which captures the LMF’s understanding of Pre-Decisional Involvement (this document has been utilized by local LMF’s to assist in their pre-decisional efforts), and utilization of the LMF to solicit input and insight on changes to its Performance Management Order which resulted in a draft Order that currently is pending approval through the DOE directives process. Cooperative efforts have been undertaken to use Pre-Decisional Involvement to improve and streamline Impact and Implementation (I&I) bargaining and a pilot is currently underway to determine the timeframe by which local I&I efforts on a Department wide order is cut down by active use of pre-decisional involvement at the department level.

LMF input was used to educate DOE senior management on employee concerns regarding the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) cybersecurity breach and this input was used to solicit responses from OPM to better educate DOE employees and others regarding questions and concerns raised by the breach.

Another overwhelming Federal LMF success was the unprecedented participation rate increase in the 2015 Employee Viewpoint Survey (EVS) of 18%. The Secretary’s LMF was instrumental in developing a communications package and slogan to promote EVS participation within DOE. The DOE EVS banner designed by LMF member Lilas Soukup (NETL –AFGE 1916) was immensely influential and was showcased to other federal agencies by OPM at EVS related meetings.

The Department of Energy has striven to embody the President’s vision of Creating Labor-Management Forums to Improve Delivery of Government Services; we have tied that vision into meeting the Department’s mission to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions; and we are assisting DOE in its mission by “build[ing] and maintain[ing] a collaborative relationship to meet Agency challenges and develop joint solutions that will enhance workplace safety, productivity, and employee quality of life to better accomplish the Department’s mission.”

We hope you will be as proud as we are of the progress and successes we have achieved during 2015 and we look forward to our continued success in this valuable endeavor.

Part II. Message from the Secretary.

Part III. Metrics

Metric Number 1 – Increase participation in Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey

Summary Results – Increased participation by 18.2% (from 50.2% to 68.4%). DOE vaulted from the bottom quartile (#18) in 2014 to the top ten (#9) this year. This is an unheard of success in the increase of participation rates for federal government surveys and is largely due to the LMFs grass root efforts to garner support and participation of the survey. This is a significant example of how positive labor-management relations can yield dividends for agency efforts.

LMF Actions to Effect Change

– Designed and executed DOE-wide communication plan: “Let it all out!”– Posters and banners outside the cafeterias, building entrances– Folded cards on all conference room tables– Flyers on public bulletin boards throughout the buildings, cafeteria, union offices– Flyers on all LMF and union officials doors/office walls– Joint labor-management participation at local town-hall meetings– Revolving images in the featured area of several DOE local intranets– LMF representatives sent emails to supervisors and bargaining unit employees explaining the benefits of

participating in the survey – Word of Mouth

Examples of promotions:

Headquarters (HQ) – National Treasury and Employees Union (NTEU):

National Energy Technology Laboratories (NETL) - American Federation of Government Employees (Locals: 1104; 1916; and 1995):

Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) – American Federation of Government Employees, Local 928; Laborers International Union of North America, Local 335; and Columbia Power Trades Council (CPTC):

Why did the LMF choose to work on this metric? –

This metric was receiving significant attention by leaders at the highest levels of Government. On December 23, 2014, the Director, Office and Management and Budget; the Deputy Director, Management, Office of Management and Budget; the Director, Office of Personnel Management; and the Deputy Director, White House Presidential Personnel Office, issued a joint memorandum on Strengthening Employee Engagement and Organizational Performance. This memoranda established the President’s Management Agenda (PMA) and Cross Agency Priority (CAP) goals on people and culture, which included the directive to conduct a comparable review of EVS data by February 25, 2015 and the dissemination of break out reports. Upon review of this data it became clear that DOE needed more meaningful results in order to use EVS data to improve engagement and performance throughout DOE. This directive aligned with National Council’s recommendation for forums to seek ways to contribute to accomplishments of agency goals listed on the site performance.gov and aligned with a FMCS recommended effort to contact the Department Performance Metric Officer to see how the LMF could assist with agency goals.

As a result, the LMF found it worthwhile to obtain useful EVS data through increased participation in 2015, in order to be able to use the results to identify areas in which the LMF may further improve employee engagement within the DOE.

The LMF looks forward to what it has termed as “phase 2” of this effort (to take place in 2016), where break out reports are disseminated to the lowest levels of management, and labor and joint labor-management efforts are made to improve employee engagement scores on future EVS.

Metric Number 2 – Increased instances of courtesy briefings and pre-decisional involvement

As described in the Executive Summary, increased instances of departmental informational briefings and Pre Decisional Involvement have occurred:

Summary Results –

Briefing on Human Resources Service Delivery (HRSD) Placement Process – Bob Gibbs, DOE Chief Human Capital Officer

Pre-decisional involvement for HRSD Placement Process business rules

Briefing on Presidential Memoranda for Modernizing Federal Leave dated January 15, 2015

Briefing on 5 CFR 1400 requirements for Designation of National Security Positions

Multiple briefings on OPM cybersecurity Breach and solicitation of employee concerns via the LMF to forward up to OPM for response

Multiple Briefings on Employee Viewpoint Survey and solicitation of LMF assistance to increase participation efforts for 2015 resulting in a unheard of 18% increase in participation of the EVS survey between 2014 and 2015.

Negotiability of Department Orders

Multiple pre-decisional involvement discussions/solicitations on Employee Performance Management and Recognition Program, DOE O 3331.1D (sessions resulted in some substantive changes to the performance management order based on LMF input that lead to an improved product for the Department)

Solicitation for input on Phased Retirement forms and FAQs

Open discussion of LMF concerns with CHCO, Secretarial Designee

Why did the LMF choose to work on this metric? –

This metric was worked on in order to improve labor-management relations, trust, and joint efforts. The result of these efforts was a tremendous success in the 2015 EVS participation rate increase, as well as fostering more collaboration and trust on a number of Department ventures. These efforts allowed for solicitation of input that improved overall Department products and continues to showcase the dividends of positive labor-management relations.

Metric Number 3 – LMF Meetings

Summary Results –

DOE Complex-wide Official LMF Meetings

Several complex wide LMF meetings have been held since inception of the LMF:

August 9, 2013 -- Kickoff meeting/FMCS training July 31, 2014 -- Virtual meeting (1st) Oct. 20-23, 2014 – In-person meetings in Washington, DC Feb. 5, 2015 -- Virtual meeting July 15, 2015 -- Virtual Meeting Oct. 20-22, 2015 -- In-person meetings in Washington, DC

There were also numerous less formal meetings held on behalf of the LMF for items such as the OPM cybersecurity breach, Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, co-chair and Steering Committee Meetings.

The LMF purposefully piloted experimentation with virtual meetings. Given the various networks and systems for a DOE nationwide audience, this was a difficult task. However, the LMF embarked on this pilot to ensure technology was utilized to the greatest extent possible in order to maximize cost savings to DOE in this era of fiscal restraint. The LMF is happy to report that over 67% of its business is successfully conducted virtually, and as evidenced by the EVS “Let it all Out!” campaign, the LMF is showing that virtual meetings can be just as effective as in person meetings as long as they are balanced with appropriate training and there is at least one in person meeting a year. As the LMF continues to meet and conduct its business, it will continue leveraging cost saving resources for the benefit of the Department.

Additionally, as provided in the executive summary, several LMF gold standard trainings were provided by neutral third party’s such as the Federal Mediation Conciliation Service (FMCS) in the areas of: Executive Order 13522 (Creating Labor Management Forums to Improve Delivery of Government Services), Metrics, Pre-decisional Involvement (Pros and Cons) and Post Pre-decisional Involvement (How to add value for both Parties after PDI –The Agreement), Group Problem Solving Techniques, and Consensus and Active Listening (Team Building). The LMF was also privileged to hear from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) on their labor-management relationship turnaround story and participants learned how the USPTO went from 172nd in 2007 to #1 in 2013 and #2 in 2014, in the Partnership for Public Service’s BEST PLACES TO WORK IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT survey.

Why did the LMF choose to work on this metric? –

Effective results are intricately dependent on regular and effective communications in which all members are valued, respected and heard. This coupled with top tier labor-management training and the use of facilitators for issues of sensitivity have allowed LMF communications to be effectively maximized.

Part IV. Benefits Derived from LMF/Results/Outcomes.

Site labor management forum data: Labor-Management representatives from eight DOE elements/administrations (Bonneville Power Administration, Headquarters, Idaho, Oak Ridge, National Energy Technology Laboratory, Richland, Southwestern Power Administration, Western Area Power Administration) with 15 locally recognized bargaining units (BU) all dispersed at approximately 19 DOE nationwide sites, are involved in the LMF. There are a total of four designated labor-management representatives (2 labor and 2 management) per BU for a total of 60 representatives, in addition to designated OCHCO staff and labor and management SMEs. In 2015, the LMF body constituted 84 members.

A Labor-Management Relations survey is conducted annually. The 2013 and 2014 results indicate that the labor unions are slightly more positive about then LMF then management; yet, unions give an unfavorable assessment of labor-management relations. Survey results indicate most members are comfortable voicing opinions and are also comfortable asking questions. Survey results indicate a lack of training; however, it is believed that this was due to LMF members mistakenly responding to the question while referencing on local efforts and not department LMF training efforts. Department training efforts have been a robust centerpiece of nearly every formal meeting held under the Charter and is also a Charter requirement. This training is provided by neutral third party facilitators, such as FMCS, in accordance with the Charter. It is our hope that the 2015 survey results will bridge the gap between management and labor on the utilization of the LMF and will reflect the positive communication, trust and collaboration gains based on the robust pre-decisional efforts that were undertaken in 2015.

The LMF is committed in showing its utility to the Department and its employees, and will continue to engage in efforts that assist in meeting its mission to: “build and maintain a collaborative relationship to meet Agency challenges and develop joint solutions that will enhance workplace safety, productivity, and employee quality of life to better accomplish the Department’s mission.”

A special thank you to FY 2015 Co-Chairs: for Management: John Hairston (BPA); for Labor: Tom Pansky (BPA-LIUNA 335); the FY 2016 Co Chairs: for Management: Heather Quedenfeld (NETL); for Labor: Lilas Soukup (NETL-AFGE 1916); Doug Aoyama (Richland-Mgmt.) and Kim Parker (HQ-NTEU); for their contributions to this report.

Part V. Attachments

Attachment A:

For Immediate Release

December 09, 2009

1. Executive Order 13522 -- Creating Labor-Management Forums To Improve Delivery of Government ServicesBy the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to establish a cooperative and productive form of labor-management relations throughout the executive branch, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Policy. Federal employees and their union representatives are an essential source of front-line ideas and information about the realities of delivering Government services to the American people. A non-adversarial forum for managers, employees, and employees' union representatives to discuss Government operations will promote satisfactory labor relations and improve the productivity and effectiveness of the Federal Government. Labor-management forums, as complements to the existing collective bargaining process, will allow managers and employees to collaborate in continuing to deliver the highest quality services to the American people. Management should discuss workplace challenges and problems with labor and endeavor to develop solutions jointly, rather than advise union representatives of predetermined solutions to problems and then engage in bargaining over the impact and implementation of the predetermined solutions.

The purpose of this order is to establish a cooperative and productive form of labor-management relations throughout the executive branch.

Sec. 2. The National Council on Federal Labor-Management Relations. There is established the National Council on Federal Labor-Management Relations (Council).

(a) Membership. The Council shall be composed of the following members appointed or designated by the President:

(i) the Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and Deputy Director for Management of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), who shall serve as Co-Chairs of the Council;(ii) the Chair of the Federal Labor Relations Authority;(iii) a Deputy Secretary or other officer with department- or agency-wide authority from each of five executive departments or agencies not otherwise represented on the Council, who shall serve for terms of 2 years;(iv) the President of the American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO;(v) the President of the National Federation of Federal Employees;(vi) the President of the National Treasury Employees Union;(vii) the President of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, AFLCIO;(viii) the heads of three other labor unions that represent Federal employees and are not otherwise represented on the Council, who shall serve for terms of 2 years;(ix) the President of the Senior Executives Association; and(x) the President of the Federal Managers Association.

(b) Responsibilities and Functions. The Council shall advise the President on matters involving labor-management relations in the executive branch. Its activities shall include, to the extent permitted by law:

(i) supporting the creation of department- or agency-level labor-management forums and promoting partnership efforts between labor and management in the executive branch;(ii) developing suggested measurements and metrics for the evaluation of the effectiveness of the Council and department or agency labor management forums in order to promote consistent, appropriate, and administratively efficient measurement and evaluation processes across departments and agencies;(iii) collecting and disseminating information about, and providing guidance on, labor-management relations improvement efforts in the executive branch, including results achieved;

(iv) utilizing the expertise of individuals both within and outside the Federal Government to foster successful labor-management relations, including through training of department and agency personnel in methods of dispute resolution and cooperative methods of labor management relations;(v) developing recommendations for innovative ways to improve delivery of services and products to the public while cutting costs and advancing employee interests;(vi) serving as a venue for addressing systemic failures of department- or agency-level forums established pursuant to section 3 of this order; and(vii) providing recommendations to the President for the implementation of several pilot programs within the executive branch, described in section 4 of this order, for bargaining over subjects set forth in 5 U.S.C. 7106(b)(1).

(c) Administration.

(i) The Co-Chairs shall convene and preside at meetings of the Council, determine its agenda, and direct its work.(ii) The Council shall seek input from nonmember executive departments and agencies, particularly smaller agencies. It also may, from time to time, invite persons from the private and public sectors to submit information. The Council shall also seek input from Federal manager and professional associations, companies, nonprofit organizations, State and local governments, Federal employees, and customers of Federal services, as needed.(iii) To the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of appropriations, OPM shall provide such facilities, support, and administrative services to the Council as the Director of OPM deems appropriate.(iv) Members of the Council shall serve without compensation for their work on the Council, but may be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by law for persons serving intermittently in Government service (5 U.S.C. 5701-5707), consistent with the availability of funds.(v) The heads of executive departments and agencies shall, to the extent permitted by law, provide to the Council such assistance, information, and advice as the Council may require for purposes of carrying out its functions.(vi) Insofar as the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), may apply to the Council, any functions of the President under that Act, except that of reporting to the Congress, shall be performed by the Director of OPM in accordance with the guidelines that have been issued by the Administrator of General Services.

(d) Termination. The Council shall terminate 2 years after the date of this order unless extended by the President.

Sec. 3. Implementation of Labor-Management Forums Throughout the Executive Branch.

(a) The head of each executive department or agency that is subject to the provisions of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Act (5 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.), or any other authority permitting employees of such department or agency to select an exclusive representative shall, to the extent permitted by law:

(i) establish department- or agency-level labor management forums by creating labor-management committees or councils at the levels of recognition and other appropriate levels agreed to by labor and management, or adapting existing councils or committees if such groups exist, to help identify problems and propose solutions to better serve the public and agency missions;(ii) allow employees and their union representatives to have pre-decisional involvement in all workplace matters to the fullest extent practicable, without regard to whether those matters are negotiable subjects of bargaining under 5 U.S.C. 7106; provide adequate information on such matters expeditiously to union representatives where not prohibited by law; and make a good-faith attempt to resolve issues concerning proposed changes in conditions of employment, including those involving the subjects set forth in 5 U.S.C. 7106(b)(1), through discussions in its labor-management forums; and(iii) evaluate and document, in consultation with union representatives and consistent with the purposes of this order and any further guidance provided by the Council, changes in employee satisfaction, manager satisfaction, and organizational performance resulting from the labor-management forums.

(b) Each head of an executive department or agency in which there exists one or more exclusive representatives shall, in consultation with union representatives, prepare and submit for approval, within 90 days of the date of this order, a written implementation plan to the Council. The plan shall:

(i) describe how the department or agency will conduct a baseline assessment of the current state of labor relations within the department or agency;(ii) report the extent to which the department or agency has established labor-management forums, as set forth in subsection (a)(i) of this section, or may participate in the pilot projects described in section 4 of this order;(iii) address how the department or agency will work with the exclusive representatives of its employees through its labor-management forums to develop department-, agency-, or bargaining unit-specific metrics to monitor improvements

in areas such as labor-management satisfaction, productivity gains, cost savings, and other areas as identified by the relevant labor management forum's participants; and(iv) explain the department's or agency's plan for devoting sufficient resources to the implementation of the plan.

(c) The Council shall review each executive department or agency implementation plan within 30 days of receipt and provide a recommendation to the Co-Chairs as to whether to certify that the plan satisfies all requirements of this order. Plans that are determined by the Co-Chairs to be insufficient will be returned to the department or agency with guidance for improvement and resubmission within 30 days. Each department or agency covered by subsection (b) of this section must have a certified implementation plan in place no later than 150 days after the date of this order, unless the Co-Chairs of the Council authorize an extension of the deadline.

Sec. 4. Negotiation over Permissive Subjects of Bargaining.

(a) In order to evaluate the impact of bargaining over permissive subjects, several pilot projects of specified duration shall be established in which some executive departments or agencies elect to bargain over some or all of the subjects set forth in 5 U.S.C. 7106(b)(1) and waive any objection to participating in impasse procedures set forth in 5 U.S.C. 7119 that is based on the subjects being permissive. The Council shall develop recommendations for establishing the pilot projects, including (i) recommendations for evaluating such pilot projects on the basis, among other things, of their impacts on organizational performance, employee satisfaction, and labor relations of the affected departments or agencies; (ii) recommended methods for evaluating the effectiveness of dispute resolution procedures adopted and followed in the course of the pilot projects; and (iii) a recommended timeline for expeditious implementation of the pilot programs.

(b) The Council shall present its recommendations to the President within 150 days after the date of this order.

(c) No later than 18 months after implementation of the pilot projects, the Council shall submit a report to the President evaluating the results of the pilots and recommending appropriate next steps with respect to agency bargaining over the subjects set forth in 5 U.S.C. 7106(b)(1).

Sec. 5. General Provisions.

(a) Nothing in this order shall abrogate any collective bargaining agreements in effect on the date of this order.

(b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to limit, preclude, or prohibit any head of an executive department or agency from electing to negotiate over any or all of the subjects set forth in 5 U.S.C. 7106(b)(1) in any negotiation.

(c) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or(ii) functions of the Director of OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(d) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(e) This order is intended only to improve the internal management of the executive branch and is not intended to, and does not, create any right to administrative or judicial review, or any other right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,December 9, 2009.

Attachment B: MEMORANDUM FOR HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS/AGENCIES and LABOR-MANAGEMENT FORUMS

SUBJECT: Executive Order 13522 – Establishing Labor Management Forums and Pre-decisional Involvement

On December 9, 2009, the President signed Executive Order 13522, “Creating Labor-Management Forums to Improve Delivery of Government Services,” affirming his commitment to cooperation between labor and management in order to improve the productivity and effectiveness of the Federal Government. We are pleased with the progress to date, particularly the work that agencies and their union partners have done together to develop their plans for implementing the Executive Order. However, our work is far from complete. We have just started the process of working together to establish cooperative and productive labor-management relations throughout the executive branch. As a reminder, agencies should be moving forward in establishing labor-management forums at all appropriate levels. The Executive Order requires forums to be established at the level of recognition and other appropriate levels agreed to by labor and management. A level of recognition is where a union has been certified as a bargaining unit’s exclusive representative for collective bargaining and other purposes under Chapter 71 of Title 5, United States Code. Further, as the Executive Order expressly requires, agencies should also allow pre-decisional involvement with unions in all workplace matters to the fullest extent practicable, without regard to whether those matters are negotiable subjects of bargaining under 5 U.S.C. 7106. As stated in the Executive Order, “Management should discuss workplace challenges and problems with labor and endeavor to develop solutions jointly, rather than advise union representatives of predetermined solutions to problems and then engage in bargaining over the impact and implementation of the predetermined solutions.” Therefore, it is imperative that management immediately engage unions on an ongoing basis consistent with the spirit and intent of the Executive Order. Agencies should develop a shared understanding with employee representatives on how the pre-decisional process can best be utilized for their workplace. Generally, agencies should begin the pre-decisional process as soon as possible after they determine that some decision or action is needed to address a particular issue or problem. Pre-decisional discussions, by their nature, should be conducted confidentially among the parties to the discussions. This confidentiality is an essential ingredient in building the environment of mutual trust and respect necessary for the honest exchange of views and collaboration. Ultimately, the goal is to allow employees, through their elected labor representatives, to have meaningful input which results in better quality decision-making, more support for decisions, and timelier implementation. One example of an opportunity for pre-decisional involvement is the annual budget process. The Executive Order explicitly provides that nothing in the order affects the functions of the OMB Director related to budgetary proposals. Additionally, there are restrictions on the release of the nature, amounts, and underlying budget materials prior to the budget being submitted to Congress. However, recognizing that this memorandum should not be construed to override any OMB or agency-specific policies on the budget process, employee representatives can still play a role in this process, when practicable. During the budget development phase, before the President submits the Budget to Congress, management develops proposed funding levels and draft programmatic narratives to be included in the budget document. At this stage, management has the option to solicit input from employee representatives. If management chooses to solicit such input, it should be limited to high-level discussions of goals and strategies. Moreover, to the extent that anyone receives confidential pre-decisional, deliberative information during this budget-development period, such information remains subject to the long-standing OMB policies on preserving the confidentiality of the deliberations that lead to the President’s budget decisions. During the period when Congress is considering the President’s Budget proposal, pre-decisional involvement can take the form of employee representatives providing input to management on possible ways of implementing the President's proposals. Additionally, when the agency's appropriations have been enacted into law, employee representatives may provide input to management on the use of budgetary resources to carry out its mission. While pre-decisional input does not bind or obligate an agency to reach a specific decision or take a specific action, opportunities for pre-decisional involvement are valuable sources of input from employees through their

representatives. This supplement to the bargaining process can be beneficial to both parties as it may identify and address unexplored ideas, or expedite any bargaining that may be required as a result of budget execution initiatives. Members of the National Council on Federal Labor-Management Relations support activities that advance the goals and objectives of the Executive Order. This includes, with the concurrence of the parties involved, attending labor-management training sessions and forum meetings, as well as participating in discussions between the parties’ representatives and employees on organizational performance improvement, problem/issue resolution, and ways to effectively accomplish the agency’s mission. Requests for support may be made to LMRCouncil@opm.gov. Thank you for the work you have already done to improve labor-management relations at your agency. We know we can count on you to continue to work collaboratively with employee representatives of your organization to ensure we deliver the highest quality services to the American people.

Attachment C: DOE LMF Charter

19

20

Attachment D – OMB/OPM/White House Presidential Personnel Office memo of December 23, 2014

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

Attachment E: - Listing of positioned 2015 DOE LMF members and listing of designated representatives and Secretarial Staff

Chartering of three Sub-committees and populating all three with members1. Metrics and Forum Reports Sub-committee2. Administration and Public Affairs Sub-committee3. Joint Solutions Sub-committee.

Secretarial Designee

Bob Gibbs (OCHCO)

Kim Edens (Dept. LMER)

J. Carter (Dept. LMER)

FY 2016 Co Chairs

Heather Quedenfeld (NETL) – Management Co –Chair

Lilas Soukup (NETL-AFGE 1916)- Labor Co-Chair

Steering Committee (SC) Members

Don Gerrish (WAPA-Mgmnt)

Lilas Soukop (NETL-AFGE 1916)

Jason Anderson (Idaho-Mgmnt)

Randall Lillie (Idaho-Mgmnt)

Kim Parker (HQ-NTEU)

Judy Schoenberg (BPA-LIUNA 335)

Metrics

Jason Anderson-Idaho-Mgmnt (SC)

Kim Parker – (HQ-NTEU Labor) (SC)

Keith Collins (NETL-AFGE 1104)

Mark Lusk (NETL-AFGE 1995)

Steve Durbin (HQ-Mgmnt)

Admin & Public Affairs

Randall Lillie-Idaho-Mgmnt-(SC)

Lilas Soukop (NETL-AFGE 1916) (SC)

John Clark (NETL-AFGE 1104)

Doug Aoyama (Richland-Mgmnt)

Joint Solutions

Don Gerrish (WAPA-Mgmnt) (SC)

Judy Schoenberg (BPA-LIUNA 335) (SC)

Tom Pansky (BPA-LIUNA 335)

Paul Eiler (WAPA-GCC-1 Delegate)

Karen Griffin (HQ-NTEU)

Kent Kennedy (WAPA-AFGE 3827)

Brady Garner (WAPA-GCC-1 Delegate)

Element/Administration

Designated Management

Designated Union Representatives

Other Interested non-designated members

33

RepresentativesBPA

AFGE 928

LIUNA 335 (Prof)

CPTC

John Hairston jlhairston@bpa.gov

Jeff DiGenova jadigenova@bpa.gov

Robin Furrer rrfurrer@bpa.gov

Tony Kotgko@bpa.gov

Joe Masisakjhmasisak@bpa.gov

Joe Sullivan jxsullivan@bpa.gov

CPTCTravis Eri Travis@ibew125.com

Dave Rondeau Dave@ibew125.com

AFGE 928Ann Juarez ajuarez928@comcast.net

Connie Whitlow crwhitlow@bpa.gov

LIUNA 335 (prof)Tom Pansky tepansky@bpa.gov

Judy Schoenberg jlschoenberg@bpa.gov

Tom Teseniar (mgmnt) tateseniar@bpa.gov

HQ

NTEU

Rashida JacksonRashida.Jackson@Hq.Doe.Gov Steve Durbinstephen.durbin@eia.gov

NTEU:Jeff Eaganjeff.eagan@hq.doe.gov

Barry Clark barry.clark@em.doe.gov

Oris BrownOris.Brown@hq.doe.gov

Donna Williams-Dixon Donna.R.Williams@hq.doe.gov

Alston, Myron myron.alston@hq.doe.gov

Peggy Robinson Peggy.Robinson@hq.doe.gov

Cathlyne Smith Cathlyne.Smith@hq.doe.gov

Eryka Johnson Eryka.Johnson@hq.doe.gov

Rich Drury (mgmnt)rich.drury@science.doe.gov

34

Rick Reda (mgmnt)Rick.reda@hq.doe.gov

Christopher Sikes Christopher.Sikes@hq.doe.gov

Carl SwickCarl.Swick@hq.doe.gov

Karen Griffin (NTEU )karen.griffin@eia.gov

Kim Parker (NTEU)Kim.Parker@nuclear.energy.gov

Dave Schoeberlin (NTEU)Dave.Schoeberlein@hq.doe.gov

Idaho

IFTPE 94

Randall Lillie, IT supervisor- lillierd@id.doe.gov

Jason AndersonAnderson, Jason andersjl@id.doe.gov

IFPTE 94:Robert Gallegos, President, IFPTE Local 94gallegra@id.doe.gov

William C. Lattin, Executive Vice President, IFPTE Local 94lattinwc@id.doe.gov

NETL

AFGE ll04 (Prof & non-Prof)

AFGE 1916 (Prof & non-Prof)

AFGE 1995 (Prof & non-Prof)

Michael J. Monahan, NETL Senior Operations Advisormichael.monahan@netl.doe.gov

Heather Moody (LMER)heather.moody@netl.doe.gov

Daniel J Maloney (Supervisory Physical Scientist-Director Site Operations Division-NETL)daniel.maloney@netl.doe.go

AFGE 1104W. Keith Collins, President AFGE 1104keith.collins@netl.doe.gov

John A. Clark III, (Shop Stewardlabor-AFGE 1104)john.clark@netl.doe.gov

AFGE 1916

35

v

Heather Quedenfeld (Supervisory General Engineer)heather.quedenfeld@netl.doe.gov

Mark McKoy (Supervisory Physical Scientist)mmckoy@netl.doe.gov

TBD

Fran Wright (Pres 1916)frances.wright@netl.doe.gov

Lilas Soukup (VP 1916)lilas.soukup@netl.doe.gov

AFGE 1995Dan Doyle (Pres 1995) dan.doyle@netl.doe.gov

AFGE 1995 VP Mark Lusk mark.lusk@netl.doe.gov

Oak Ridge

OPEIU 2001 (Prof & non-Prof)

Pauline Douglas, Assistant Manager for Safeguards, Security, and Emergency Management, ORODouglasPL@oro.doe.gov

Adolphus Brown (mgmnt)BrownA@oro.doe.gov

OPEIU 2001Dori Johnson President johnsonde@oro.doe.gov;

James McDaniel VPmcdanielj@oro.doe.gov

Richland

AFGE 788 (non-Prof)

AFGE 788 (Prof)

Ken Wade Richland/RL ORP Mgmntkenneth_g_wade@orp.doe.gov Doug Aoyama/RL ORP Mgmntdouglas.aoyama@rl.doe.gov

Michael Collins (mgmnt)Michael.Collins1@rl.doe.gov

Connie Nottingham connie.nottingham@rl.doe.gov

AFGE 788 Prof and non Prof (2 individually recognized BU’s entitled to 4 reps)

Julie Reddick (Pres AFGE 788 –prof and non-prof unit)Julie.Reddick@rl.doe.gov TBD (VP AFGE 788 Prof Unit)

AFGE 788 Secretary Guy Bishop

36

Guy.Bishop@rl.doe.gov

AFGE 788 Treasurer Rob Chase Rob.Chase@rl.doe.gov

SWPA

IBEW 1002

Scott Carpenter/ GS-15, Director of Corporate Facilities(all BUE’s, maintenance, Engineering, IT and Security)scott.carpenter@swpa.gov

Kathy Monson(Mgmnt-LMER)Kathy.Monson@swpa.gov

IBEW 1002Jeff Bolin (Business Manager) IBEW 1002 businessagent@ibew1002.com

Brad Perkins (Asst Business Manager) IBEW 1002businessagent@ibew1002.com

Curtis Hunt (IBEW 1002)Curtis.hunt@swpa.gov

Keith Blackstone (HRD)keith.blackstone@swpa.gov

Jared Smith (Mgmnt-LMER)Jared.Smith@swpa.gov

WAPA

AFGE 3807

AFGE 3824

IBEW-GCC-1

Arun K. Sethi, Maintenance Manager asethi@wapa.gov

Dave Williams Supervisory Human Resource SpecialistDWilliams@wapa.gov

Anthony H. Montoya, Chief Operating Officertmontoya@wapa.gov

Teresa Garcia, HRD, garcia@wapa.gov

Donald Gerrish

TBD

AFGE 3807Kent Kennedy (3807)kkennedy@wapa.gov

Travis Everson, everson@wapa.gov , AFGE 3807 Vice President

AFGE 3824Ronnie Habacon (Pres 3824) Folsom, CA (Sacramento)Habacon@WAPA.GOV

James Hughes (VP 3824) Phoenix, AZAFGEDSWJHughes@WAPA.GOV JHughes@wapa.gov

GCC-1Paul Eiler (1959-

Carol L. Hammans (AFGE 3824-Treasurer)AFGEHammans@wapa.gov

Jamie Skehan (AFGE 3824) skehan@wapa.gov 916-353-2200

Tim Alme (GCC-1 labor)Alme@WAPA.GOV

Sam Glero (labor GCC-1)saga@ibew1245.com

Scott Jaacks(labor-GCC-1)ibewlineman@yahoo.com

Paul Lauderbach (labor-GCC-1)'plauderbach@wapa.gov'

Mike Rumbaugh(labor-GCC-1)mrumbaug@wapa.gov

37

Fargo, ND-GCC-1 Delegate)Peiler@WAPA.GOV

Jamie Freeze (lab or-GCC-1)freeze@wapa.gov

Brady GarnerGCC-1 delegategarner@wapa.gov

Secretarial Designee and Staff

OCHCO- Bob Gibbs

Kim Edens (Dept. LMER)

J. Carter (Dept. LMER)

Tonya Mackey (Acting Deputy CHCO) Ken Venuto (director Office of Human Capital Management )

Chelsea Smith (OCHCO Senior Advisor)

Loretta Robinson (Director, HC-10)

Tony Nguyen (Director, HC-50)

Kimberly Matthews- Williams (HC-50.1)

Thomasina Matthews (HC 50.1)

Karen Lerma (HC 50.1)

Lorrenda Buckner (HC-11)

38