[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 133 (Tuesday, September 24, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11169-S11173]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. THURMOND (for himself, Mr. Faircloth, Mr. Lott, Mr. Helms, 
        and Mrs. Kassebaum):
  S. 2104. A bill to amend chapter 71 of title V, United States Code, 
to prohibit the use of Federal funds for certain Federal employee labor 
organization activities, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Governmental Affairs.


                      UNION ACTIVITIES LEGISLATION

  Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a very 
important piece of legislation that would affect every American 
taxpayer. This measure would prohibit Federal funds

[[Page S11170]]

from being used to pay Federal employees while working on union 
business.
  Mr. President, I was shocked by a recent Government Accounting Office 
[GAO] report to Congress concerning union activities at the Social 
Security Administration [SSA]. I understand that Federal employees have 
the right to be represented by a union. However, I completely disagree 
that the American taxpayer should foot the bill for this 
representation.
  The results of the GAO report are astounding and very disturbing. The 
GAO reported that over 413,000 hours were spent by Federal employees 
last year on union activities at the SSA. This cost the American 
taxpayers approximately $12.6 million in salaries and expenses. This 
does not even count the amount of time management spent answering union 
concerns. The cost involved for management to respond may be double the 
nearly $13 million we spent on the union representatives. The GAO 
identified 1,800 SSA employees who are authorized by the union to spend 
time on SSA union activities; I repeat, Mr. President, 1,800 Federal 
employees, paid by the U.S. Government to do union work. Currently, 146 
of those representatives are considered to be full-time. In other 
words, 146 Federal employees are spending 100 percent of their time at 
the Social Security Administration working on union activities, not 
serving Social Security beneficiaries and the taxpayer, but doing full-
time union work. These figures are for just one agency. In 1993, 
President Clinton issued Executive Order 12871, which requires agencies 
to involve labor organizations as full ``partners'' with management 
in identifying problems and creating solutions. In the time that this 
Executive order has been in effect, the cost to the American taxpayer 
for union activity at SSA alone has more than doubled. Further, Federal 
employees who are performing union work full-time has jumped from 80 to 
146. There are still some 1,654 additional SSA employees working part-
time on union activities. Mr. President, this is outrageous.

  As I stated, these figures are only for the SSA. I have, therefore, 
requested that the GAO prepare a similar report to the one conducted at 
SSA, which would address union activity within the entire Federal 
Government. It is my feeling that the aggregate numbers will be equally 
as staggering and shocking as those found at SSA.
  I am pleased to be a cosponsor of legislation, authored by my good 
friend, Senator Faircloth, which would prohibit using money from the 
Social Security and Medicare trust funds for union activities at SSA 
and the Department of Health and Human Services. However, I think we 
should go even further. No Federal money should be used to subsidize 
union work within any Government agency. Our Government workers should 
be attending to the business for which they were hired while on the 
American taxpayer's time. The union representatives at Federal agencies 
were not hired to do the work of the unions. They were hired to perform 
specific duties pertaining to the official business of the Federal 
agency that employs them.
  The legislation I am introducing would ensure that union activities 
at the Federal level are not financed by the already heavily burdened 
American taxpayer. Mr. President, let the unions pay the salaries and 
expenses of those who perform union work; and let our tax money be used 
to do the work of the American people.
  The able Majority Leader, Senator Lott, Senators Faircloth, Helms, 
and Kassebaum are original cosponsors. I invite my other colleagues to 
join us in support of this important measure to correct an absolute 
misuse of Federal funds.
  I further ask unanimous consent that the GAO report regarding union 
activities at the Social Security Administration be included in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

          Union Activity at the Social Security Administration

       Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: I am pleased 
     to be here today to discuss the time spent on union 
     activities at the Social Security Administration (SSA). Union 
     activities generally include representing employees in 
     complaints against management, bargaining over changes in 
     working conditions and the application of personnel policies, 
     and negotiating union contracts with management. The federal 
     government pays its employees' salaries and expenses for the 
     portion of time they are allowed to spend on union 
     activities; it also provides other support such as space, 
     supplies, equipment, and some travel expenses.\1\ Federal 
     union members generally cannot bargain over wages and cannot 
     strike, and federal employees are not required to join unions 
     and pay union dues in order to be represented by the union.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     \1\ Footnotes at end of article.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Given the budget constraints facing federal agencies, the 
     Subcommittee expressed concern about the amount of time and 
     expenses devoted to union activities and paid for by the 
     federal government. The Subcommittee expressed particular 
     concern about SSA unions regarding the amount of money paid 
     for union activities out of the Social Security trust funds.
       As requested, I will focus my remarks on the history of 
     union involvement in the federal government, the statutory 
     basis for the federal government to pay employee salaries and 
     expenses for union activities, and the amount of time spent 
     on and costs associated with union activities at SSA and how 
     the agency accounts for it. The Subcommittee also asked us to 
     comment on how the amount of time and money spent at SSA on 
     union activities compares with what is spent at other large 
     federal agencies, such as the Department of Veterans Affairs 
     (VA) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and how it 
     compares with the amount spent by the U.S. Postal Service, 
     which operates more like a private-sector company. As 
     requested, we have also provided information on union 
     activities in the private sector.
       In response to your request, we began our work at SSA in 
     August 1995. To develop this information, we interviewed 
     management and union officials in SSA headquarters and 4 of 
     SSA's 10 regional offices. We also reviewed union contracts, 
     payroll records, and time-reporting forms. To determine the 
     amount of time spent on union activities, we reviewed yearly 
     reports of time spent on union activities and verified the 
     time reported by reviewing source documents at one region and 
     selected headquarters components. We supplemented our field 
     work with telephone calls to three additional SSA regions to 
     verify that similar time reporting procedures were used.
       We also met with union and management officials at VA, IRS, 
     and the Postal Service to compare their union time and costs 
     with SSA's. VA does not operate a national union time-
     reporting system and therefore could not provide data on 
     union activities. Consequently, we are not providing any 
     information concerning VA. At IRS and the Postal Service, we 
     obtained available information on union activity from 
     headquarters and selected field facilities but did not verify 
     its accuracy. We also discussed the role and function of 
     unions in the federal government with the Office of Personnel 
     Management (OPM) and discussed the private-sector use of 
     official time for union activities with labor-relations 
     experts at various trade associations, colleges, and 
     universities. We also reviewed a 1992 Bureau of National 
     Affairs publication that summarized trends in labor/
     management contracts for private industry. Finally, to 
     determine the types of contract provisions that exist in 
     private industry with regard to the use of official time, we 
     reviewed ten contracts on file at the Bureau of Labor 
     Statistics.
       In summary, federal labor/management relations were 
     formalized by executive order in the early 1960s.\2\ In 1962, 
     an executive order permitted federal agencies to grant 
     official time for certain meetings between management and 
     union representatives, at the discretion of the agency. The 
     management control prevalent when the first executive order 
     was issued has evolved over time, and today unions operating 
     at federal government agencies have significant involvement 
     in operational and management decisions. The use of official 
     time, which is authorized paid time off from assigned duties 
     for union activities, has become a routine method of union 
     operation in the federal government. OPM officials told us 
     that currently no governmentwide requirement exists to 
     capture or report the amount of official time charged to 
     union activities. They further noted that managers and 
     employees would spend time interacting on personnel and 
     working condition matters even if there were no unions 
     operating at agencies.
       We determined that over the last 6 years, the time spent on 
     union activities at SSA has grown from 254,000 to at least 
     413,000 hours, at a cost to SSA's trust funds of $12.6 
     million in 1995 alone. That is, SSA currently pays the 
     equivalent of the salaries and expenses of about 200 SSA 
     employees to represent the interests of the approximately 
     52,000 employees represented by unions at SSA. This cost 
     represents a portion of the $5.5 billion SSA incurred in 
     administrative expenses for fiscal year 1995.
       In addition, SSA has reported to the Congress that the 
     number of full-time union representatives, those devoting 75 
     percent or more of their time to union activities, grew from 
     80 to 145 between 1993 and 1995. We found, however, that the 
     reporting system for collecting such data does not adequately 
     track the number of union representatives charging time to 
     union activities or the actual time spent. Consequently, we 
     conducted a limited verification of the hours spent on union 
     activities reported by SSA and found

[[Page S11171]]

     that time spent on union activities was underreported. While 
     SSA is currently developing a new system to more accurately 
     track the time spent on union activities, it plans to 
     implement this system to replace only the automated reporting 
     system for union representatives in the field offices and 
     teleservice centers. SSA is not planning to improve the less 
     accurate manual time-reporting system for its other 
     components.
       Under the terms of the current SSA union contract 
     negotiated in 1993, the selection of union representatives 
     and the amount of time they spend on union activities are 
     determined by the union without the consent of local 
     managers. We found that over 1,800 designated union 
     representatives in SSA are authorized to spend time on union 
     activities, although most of the time spent is by SSA's 146 
     full-time representatives. Some SSA field managers told us 
     that their having no involvement in decisions about how much 
     time is spent by individuals and who the individuals are 
     causes problems in managing the day-to-day activities of 
     their operations. Union representatives, on the other hand, 
     told us that the time they use is necessary to fully 
     represent the interests of their coworkers.
       SSA reported that it paid for 404,000 hours for union 
     activities in fiscal year 1995, as compared with 442,000 
     hours reported by IRS in fiscal year 1994, the most recent 
     information available. The Postal Service reported that 1.7 
     million hours spent on union activities in fiscal year 1995 
     related to grievances. This Postal Service estimate does not 
     include substantial additional time spent on other types of 
     union activities and paid for by either the unions or the 
     Postal Service.
       With regard to union activity in private industry, some 
     employers pay some or all of the salaries and expenses of 
     union representatives, as the federal government does, while 
     others do not.


                               background

       Labor unions are groups of employees organized to bargain 
     with employers over such issues as wages, hours, benefits, 
     and working conditions. The current federal labor/management 
     program differs from nonfederal programs in three important 
     ways: (1) federal unions bargain on a limited number of 
     issues--bargaining over pay and other economic benefits is 
     generally prohibited,\1\ (2) strikes and lockouts are 
     prohibited, and (3) federal employees cannot be compelled 
     to join, or pay dues to, the unions that represent them. 
     At SSA, employees are represented by three unions: the 
     American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), which 
     represents over 95 percent of SSA employees who are 
     represented by a union; the National Treasury Employees 
     Union (NTEU); and the National Federation of Federal 
     Employees (NFFE). Of SSA's 65,000 employees, about 52,000 
     nonsupervisory employees are represented by the unions, 
     and about 47 percent of those represented are dues-paying 
     union members. Union operations at SSA are governed by a 
     national AFGE contract and six other union contracts with 
     individual NTEU and NFFE components.
       At the other federal organizations we visited, five unions 
     had national collective bargaining agreements--four at the 
     Postal Service and one at IRS. There were 751,000 employees 
     represented by unions at the Postal Service and 97,000 at the 
     IRS. Although other unions without national collective 
     bargaining agreements represented Postal Service employees, 
     the number of employees represented by these unions is less 
     than one percent of all represented employees.
       There are two main categories of official time, or 
     government paid time spent on union activities, at SSA. The 
     category known as ``bank time'' in field offices, and 
     equivalent categories of official time in other components, 
     refers to time that is negotiated and limited by SSA 
     contracts with its unions. Bank time includes time spent on 
     union- or employee-initiated grievances (complaints regarding 
     any matter related to employment) as well as on union-
     initiated activities, such as training or representational 
     duties. The category known as ``nonbank time'' in field 
     offices, and equivalent categories in other components, 
     generally refers to time spent on management-initiated 
     activities; bargaining over changes to work assignments and 
     working conditions (such as disallowed leave, employee work 
     space, and equipment); management-initiated grievances; and 
     any other time not specifically designated as bank time.


          history of union activity in the federal government

       In 1912, the Lloyd-LaFollette Act established the right of 
     postal employees to join a union and set a precedent for 
     other federal employees to join unions. The government did 
     little to provide agencies with guidance on labor relations 
     until the early 1960s.
       In 1962, President Kennedy issued Executive Order 10988, 
     establishing in the executive branch a framework for federal 
     agencies to bargain with unions over working conditions and 
     personnel practices. The order established a decentralized 
     labor/management program under which each agency had 
     discretion in interpreting the order, deciding individual 
     agency policy, and settling its own contract disputes and 
     grievances.
       In 1969, President Nixon issued Executive Order 11491, 
     which established a process for resolving labor disputes in 
     the executive branch by forming the Federal Labor Relations 
     Council to prescribe regulations and arbitrate grievances. 
     This order clarified language to expressly permit bargaining 
     on operational issues for employees adversely affected by 
     organizational realignments or technological changes.
       In 1970, the Postal Reorganization Act brought postal labor 
     relations under a structure similar to that applicable to 
     companies in the private sector. Collective bargaining for 
     wages, hours, and working conditions was authorized subject 
     to regulation by the National Labor Relations Board. Like 
     other federal employees, postal employees could not be 
     compelled to join or pay dues to a union and could not 
     strike.
       The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 provided a statutory 
     basis for the current federal labor/management relations 
     program and set up an independent body, the Federal Labor 
     Relations Authority (FLRA), to administer the program. The 
     act expanded the scope of collective bargaining--the process 
     under which union representatives and management bargain over 
     working conditions--to allow routine negotiation of some 
     operational issues, such as the use of technology and the 
     means for conducting agency operations.
       In 1993, President Clinton issued Executive Order 12871, 
     which articulated a new vision of labor/management relations, 
     called ``Partnership.'' Partnership required agencies to 
     involve labor organizations as full partners with management 
     in identifying problems and crafting solutions to better 
     fulfill the agency mission. It also expanded the scope of 
     bargainable issues. This new arrangement was intended to end 
     the sometimes adversarial relationship between federal unions 
     and management and to help facilitate implementation of 
     National Performance Review initiatives, which were intended 
     to improve public service and reduce cost of government.


           basis for paying salaries of union representatives

       In 1962, Executive Order 10988 permitted federal agencies 
     to grant official time, which is authorized paid time off 
     from assigned government duties, for meetings between 
     management and union representatives for contract 
     negotiation, at the discretion of the agency. In 1971, 
     Executive Order 11491 was amended to prohibit the use of 
     official time for contract negotiation unless the agency 
     and union agreed to certain arrangements. Specifically, 
     the agency could authorize either (1) up to 40 hours of 
     official time for negotiation during regular working hours 
     or (2) up to one-half the time actually spent in 
     negotiations. Over the next 4 years, a series of Federal 
     Labor Relations Council decisions and regulations 
     continued to liberalize the use of official time by 
     allowing negotiations for the use of official time for 
     other purposes.
       The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 authorized official 
     time for federal agency union representatives in negotiating 
     a collective bargaining agreement. \4\ The act also permitted 
     agencies and unions to negotiate whether union 
     representatives would be granted official time in connection 
     with other labor/management activities, as long as the 
     official time was deemed reasonable, necessary, and in the 
     public interest. The act continued to permit agencies to 
     provide unions with routine services and facilities at agency 
     expense. The act prohibited the use of official time for 
     internal union business, such as solicitation of members.


           TIME SPENT ON AND COST OF UNION ACTIVITIES AT SSA

       SSA has a national system for reporting time spent on union 
     activities by union representatives. This system is separate 
     from the agency's time and attendance and workload reporting 
     systems. Under this system, union representatives generally 
     fill out and submit forms to their supervisors to account for 
     union time. The hours reported on these forms are then 
     periodically aggregated and submitted to SSA headquarters for 
     totaling. This time-reporting system consists of two 
     component systems that cover roughly an equal number of 
     employees. The first is an automated system that captures 
     time reported by union representatives working in field 
     offices, which are the primary point of public contact with 
     SSA, and at teleservice centers, where calls to SSA's 
     national 800 number are answered. The second component is a 
     manual system used to capture time spent by union 
     representatives at SSA headquarters, as well as at Program 
     Service Centers, the Office of Hearings and Appeals, and 
     other components. Neither system is designed to capture 
     either time spent by management on union-related matters or 
     the number or names of individuals charging union time.
       We conducted a limited verification of time captured in 
     SSA's national reporting system at one SSA region and several 
     headquarters components. By tracing source documents for 
     union representatives' time to reported totals in the system, 
     we discovered additional time not captured by the two 
     systems. These gaps occurred primarily in the manual system 
     and resulted from inaccurate reporting from the source 
     documents, overlooked reports for some union representatives, 
     and uncounted reports for some organizational units during 
     certain reporting periods. We also verified that similar 
     procedures were being used at three other regions, which 
     could result in similar underreporting at these locations.
       The overall time spent on union activities has grown 
     steadily from 254,000 hours in 1990 to over 413,000 in 1995. 
     This is the equivalent

[[Page S11172]]

     of paying the salaries and other expenses of about 200 SSA 
     employees to represent the 52,000 employees in the bargaining 
     unit in 1995. SSA reported 254,000 hours of official time 
     devoted to union activities in 1990, 269,000 in 1991, 272,000 
     in 1992, 314,000 in 1993, 297,000 in 1994, and 404,000 in 
     1995.
       Because of limitations in SSA's reporting system, it is not 
     possible to estimate actual time spent agencywide for any 
     reporting period. Although it is likely that the actual time 
     spent agencywide exceeds our estimates, our verification 
     sample was not large enough to be statistically valid, so it 
     cannot be extrapolated to all of SSA.
       To determine what contributed to the increase in time spent 
     on union activities, we developed information on the 
     categories of time used.
       SSA is currently developing a new system to better track 
     and account for time spent on union activities in its field 
     offices and teleservice centers. SSA says the purpose of this 
     system is to provide management and the union with a more 
     accurate and up-to-date accounting of time spent and the 
     number of employees working on union activities and to ensure 
     that time expended on certain activities does not exceed time 
     allotted to the unions by the contracts. SSA, however, has no 
     current plans to apply this new system to headquarters, the 
     Program Service Centers, the Office of Hearings and Appeals, 
     or other components using the manual system and did not 
     explain why the agency made this decision.
       SSA has no system for routinely calculating and reporting 
     the cost of union activity, although it does provide annual 
     estimates of the expenses for union activities to the 
     Congress.
       In order to determine the accuracy of these estimates, we 
     tried to construct our own estimate of union-related costs. 
     Because the salaries of union representatives make up most of 
     the cost, we asked SSA for a list of current representatives 
     and the time they spend on union activities. SSA estimated 
     that there were about 1,600 union representatives, but the 
     lists they maintained were outdated and incomplete. We 
     identified about 1,800 union representatives who are 
     currently authorized by the union to spend time on SSA union 
     activities. SSA has also reported to the Congress that the 
     number of full-time representatives--those spending 75 
     percent or more of their time on union activities--grew from 
     80 to 145 between fiscal years 1993 and 1995. We identified 
     145 current full-time representatives. The average annual 
     salary in 1995 for the 146 full-time representatives was 
     $41,970. In 1996, their salaries ranged from $23,092 to 
     $81,217.
       We estimate that the total cost to SSA for union activities 
     of all representatives was about $12.6 million in 1995. We 
     calculated the 1995 personnel cost to be $11.4 million by 
     multiplying the average hourly salary of union 
     representatives (about $27.64, including benefits) by the 
     413,000 hours we estimated the representatives spent on union 
     activities.
       The remaining $1.2 million in total SSA costs for union 
     activities includes related travel expenses; SSA's share of 
     arbitration costs; and support costs, such as supplies, 
     office space, and telephone use. More specifically, in 
     accordance with the union contracts, SSA pays for travel 
     related to contract negotiations and grievance cases. In 
     addition, it pays the travel and per-diem costs of all union 
     representatives, whenever meetings are held at management's 
     initiative. Union representation at major SSA initiatives, 
     such as the reengineering of its disability programs, the 
     National Partnership Council, and Partnership training, has 
     added to travel and per-diem costs. In 1995, SSA estimated 
     that it spent about $600,000 on travel-related expenses for 
     union representatives. Union representatives told us that the 
     union pays travel costs for union-sponsored training, 
     internal union activities, and some local travel.
       Under the national contract agreements, arbitration fees 
     and related expenses are shared equally between the union and 
     SSA. SSA reported that its share of arbitration costs was 
     $54,000 for the 38 cases heard in 1995.
       SSA also incurs other costs for telephones, computers, fax 
     machines, furniture, space and supplies used by union 
     representatives. In 1995, SSA estimated this cost at 
     $500,000.
       Regarding the amount of dues collected from union members, 
     we determined that about $4.8 million was collected in 1995, 
     mainly through payroll deduction. The unions use these funds 
     for their internal expenses, which include the cost of 
     lodging and transportation for union-provided training; the 
     union's share of grievance costs; miscellaneous furniture, 
     supplies, and equipment for some union offices; the salaries 
     of the AFGE local president and his staff, who represent SSA 
     headquarters employees; and a share of national union 
     expenses.
       The recent advent of Partnership activities in SSA will 
     likely increase the time spent on union activities. The 
     executive order on Partnership directs agencies to involve 
     unions as the representatives of employees to work as full 
     partners with management to design and implement changes 
     necessary to reform government. Partnership activities at SSA 
     are just starting, and we found that these limited activities 
     are not routinely designated by SSA in its union time-
     reporting system. It is possible that time spent on 
     Partnership activities is currently being reported in other 
     activity categories. Consequently, as Partnership activities 
     increase, we would expect the time devoted to them to also 
     increase. However, this will be evident only if agency time-
     reporting systems adequately designate this time. It should 
     be noted that many public and private organizations without 
     unions are involving employees in quality management 
     initiatives similar to Partnership activities.


              ssa management and union views on union time

       SSA managers and union officials and representatives have 
     offered their views about the use of official time for union 
     activities. SSA managers, both individually and through their 
     managers' associations, have expressed concern to us and to 
     the Congress about limitations in their ability to 
     effectively manage their operations and control the use of 
     time spent by their employees under the current union/
     management arrangement. By contract, the assignment of union 
     representatives and the amount of time they spend on union 
     activities are determined by the union without the consent of 
     local management.
       Of the 31 field managers we interviewed, 21 said that it is 
     more difficult to manage day-to-day office functions because 
     they have little or no control over when and how union 
     activities are conducted. They said that they have trouble 
     maintaining adequate staffing levels in the office to serve 
     walk-in traffic, answer the telephones, and handle routine 
     office workloads. Additionally, 18 expressed concern about 
     the amount of time they spend responding to union requests 
     for information regarding bargaining and grievances. We did 
     not verify the accuracy of any of the field managers' 
     statements. We tried to quantify the time spent by managers 
     on union related activities, but SSA had no time reporting 
     system to track it. However, managers would be spending some 
     of their time interacting with employees about similar issues 
     even if there were no unions.
       Nine out of the 15 union officials and representatives we 
     talked to felt that it was counterproductive in the 
     Partnership era to track time spent on union activities. They 
     believe that union representation is an important function 
     that is authorized by a negotiated agreement with SSA that 
     authorizes them to represent the interests of their 
     coworkers. They consider the amount of time currently 
     allocated for their activities as appropriate and believe 
     that more attention should be paid to the value of their 
     efforts than to the time it takes to conduct them.


comparison of time spent and cost of union activity at irs, the postal 
                            service and ssa

       The Postal Service and IRS provided data to us on time 
     spent on union activities in their agencies. Postal Service 
     records show that during fiscal year 1995, union 
     representatives at the Postal Service reported spending 1.7 
     million hours of official time on grievance processing and 
     handling in the early stages. This number does not include 
     substantial amounts of official time spent on employee 
     involvement programs similar to SSA's Partnership activities, 
     which are paid for by the Postal Service. Neither does this 
     number include official time spent on activities such as 
     employee involvement training and ULP charges.
       IRS records showed that their union representatives 
     reported spending 442,000 hours on union activities in fiscal 
     year 1994, the most recent year for which data are available. 
     We did not attempt to verify these estimates. In fiscal year 
     1995, the Postal Service reported spending $29 million in 
     basic pay on grievance processing and handling for the 1.7 
     million hours. IRS did not develop cost data for union 
     operations.


               who pays union costs in private industry?

       Union operations in private industry vary widely. In 
     addition to bargaining over working conditions as SSA unions 
     do, unions in private industry bargain over wages, hours, and 
     benefits. In discussions with National Labor Relations Board 
     officials, we were told that some private-sector firms do not 
     pay their employees' salaries for the time they spend 
     performing union activities, and other firms pay for some or 
     all of the time. For example, during our review of 10 
     contracts, we found that 7 provided for company employees, 
     acting as union representatives, to perform certain union 
     functions in addition to their company duties, at the expense 
     of the employer. In a 1992 publication that summarized basic 
     patterns in private industry union contracts, the Bureau of 
     National Affairs (BNA) reported that over 50 percent of the 
     400 labor contracts it analyzed guaranteed pay to employees 
     engaged in union activity on company time. It also reported 
     that 22 percent of the contracts specifically prohibit 
     conducting union activities on company time.
       Private-sector employers negotiate company time with pay 
     for union representatives to handle grievances more 
     frequently than they do for contract negotiations. Of the 
     contracts reviewed by BNA, 53 percent guaranteed pay for 
     union representatives to present, investigate, or handle 
     grievances. This practice was reported occurring twice as 
     often in manufacturing as in nonmanufacturing businesses. BNA 
     reported that only 10 percent of the contracts guaranteed pay 
     for employees to negotiate contracts.
       Forty-one percent of the private-sector contracts 
     guaranteeing employees pay when they conduct union activities 
     on company time place restrictions on representatives. BNA 
     reported that in 19 percent of the cases with such pay 
     guarantees, management limited the amount of hours that it 
     would pay

[[Page S11173]]

     for. Our review of 10 private-sector contracts submitted to 
     the Bureau of Labor Statistics found one negotiated contract 
     under which employees were limited to 6 hours a day of 
     company time for union representation and another under which 
     they were limited to 8 hours per week of company time for 
     processing grievances.


                              Conclusions

       SSA, like other federal agencies and some private firms, 
     pays for approved time spent by their employees on union 
     activities. SSA has a special fiduciary responsibility to 
     effectively manage and maintain the integrity of the Social 
     Security trust funds from which most of these expenses are 
     paid. In a time of shrinking budgets and personnel resources, 
     it is especially important for SSA, as well as other 
     agencies, to evaluate how resources are being spent and to 
     have reliable monitoring systems that facilitate this 
     evaluation.
       To ensure accurate tracking of time spent on union 
     activities and the staff conducting these activities, SSA has 
     developed and is testing a new time-reporting system for its 
     field offices and teleservice centers. We agree that these 
     are valuable goals for a time-reporting system and believe 
     that it should be implemented agencywide, including at 
     headquarters, Program Service Centers, the Office of Hearings 
     and Appeals, and other components currently using the less 
     reliable manual reporting system. With an improved agencywide 
     system, SSA management should have better information on 
     where its resources are being spent.
       Mr. Chairman, this concludes my formal remarks. I would be 
     happy to answer any question from you or other members of the 
     Subcommittee. Thank you.


                               footnotes

     \1\ The U.S. Postal Service generally does not pay the 
     salaries and expenses of full-time union representatives. 
     Instead, salaries and expenses are covered by union dues. The 
     Postal Services does, however, pay for the time spent on 
     union activities by some parttime union representatives and 
     for union-occupied space in postal facilities.
     \2\ Postal labor/management relations are governed by the 
     Postal Reorganization Act of 1970, which incorporates many 
     provisions of the National Labor Relations Act.
     \3\ Postal unions, however, can bargain over wages and other 
     economic benefits.
     \4\ The Postal Service is not governed by this act. The basis 
     for paying certain union representatives for specified union 
     activities at the Postal Service is contained in union 
     contracts. Contract negotiations are carried out at union 
     expense.
                                 ______