Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Business

Trump faces federal employee unions in government efficiency battle

Published

5 minute read

From The Center Square

By 

President-elect Donald Trump has pledged to drastically cut government and clean out inefficiencies, but he faces an entrenched power in Washington, D.C. that may throw a wrench in his plans: federal government public employee unions.

“For president-elect Trump to succeed at making the federal bureaucracy more efficient and accountable to the American people, he’ll have to once again do battle with federal unions,” Max Nelsen, a labor policy expert at the Freedom Foundation, told The Center Square.

Trump has tapped top businessmen Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to lead the new Department of Government Efficiency effort. Musk has claimed he can cut $2 trillion in federal spending.

In a November joint editorial in the Wall Street Journal, Musk and Ramaswamy pledged “mass head-count reductions” in the federal government.

Firing federal workers is notoriously rare and difficult, but Ramaswamy has publicly said that mass, indiscriminate firings may allow for circumventing the usual bureaucratic holdups for firing a federal employee.

Trump himself recently pledged to cut “hundreds of billions” in federal spending.

“Government unions are hands down the single most significant defenders of the administrative state,” Nelsen said. “Their interests are always served by bigger, more expensive, less accountable government, and their partisan allegiance to the radical Left leads them to both overtly and covertly undermine conservative policy changes across the federal government…”

The first battle with unions in the DOGE war may be federal work from home policies, where unions have already threatened legal action to protect their pre-arranged deals with the Biden administration.

Trump threatened to fire federal employees who are not willing to report to the office, a clear shot at federal work-from-home policies, something Musk has also blasted in recent weeks.

“If people don’t come back to work, come back into the office, they’re going to be dismissed,” Trump told reporters during a news conference at Mar-a-Lago.

The largest federal employee union quickly shot back after Trump made the comments and threatened legal action.

Trump’s comments are likely at least in part reacting to a Biden administration official negotiating a deal with a union that extends until 2029, after Trump is scheduled to leave office.

As The Center Square previously reported, Social Security Administrator Martin O’Malley negotiated a deal with union leaders to codify work-from-home policies, keeping telework in place for his 42,000 employees until 2029.

Everett Kelley, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees, the largest federal employee union, pointed out that these contracts are legally binding.

“Collective bargaining agreements entered into by the federal government are binding and enforceable under the law,” Kelley said. “We trust the incoming administration will abide by their obligations to honor lawful union contracts. If they fail to do so, we will be prepared to enforce our rights.”

Trump’s backers may have an ace in the hole, though, in the form of new Supreme Court precedent.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled earlier this year in a landmark case to overturn Chevron deference, the longstanding legal practice of giving federal agencies broad power to interpret and practically change and expand federal laws as they deemed fit, citing their expertise.

Now, Musk and Ramaswamy will likely have more leeway in cutting rules from the books and workers from the payroll.

Nelsen said Trump should limit the amount of federal dollars that go toward unions, and that he should increase union transparency.

“Additionally, President Trump will need a cadre of energetic appointees at the Office of Personnel Management, the Federal Labor Relations Authority, and in labor relations departments government wide to aggressively implement his directives,” Nelsen said. “Finally, to truly have a long-term impact, President Trump will need a successor in four years committed to continuing the fight.”

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Trudeau government wants to give CBC more money

Published on

From the Canadian Taxpayers Association

By Kris Sims

The CBC used to air The Simpsons after school.

One of the best episodes was the Cape Fear homage where an FBI agent is trying to change Homer’s last name to Thompson.

After hours of explanation, the kids have fallen asleep, Marge has given up and the agent says, “When I step on your foot and say: ‘Hello Mr. Thompson,’ you nod your head! Got it?!”

Homer did not get it.

The Liberal members of Parliament on the heritage committee still don’t get it either.

The committee has sent a report to the House of Commons urging the government to give the CBC even more money.

“That the Government of Canada provide a substantial and lasting increase in the parliamentary appropriations for CBC/Radio-Canada, allowing it to eliminate its paid subscription services and gradually end its reliance on commercial advertising revenues,” reads the report.

Really? More money? The CBC already takes $1.4 billion year from taxpayers. And that’s not enough?

That amount of money could already cover the salaries of about 7,000 police officers and 7,000 paramedics.

If Trudeau’s MPs want to give the CBC more money so that it can get rid of its advertising and subscription funding, that means a huge cost for taxpayers.

According it’s latest annual report, the CBC collected about $493 million in revenue other than government funding in 2023-24, the bulk being subscription fees and advertising.

This means these Trudeau government MPs want taxpayers to fund the CBC to the tune of about $2 billion per year.

This is the opposite of what needs to happen.

The CBC should be defunded for three key reasons.

The CBC is a huge waste of money, nearly nobody is watching it and journalists should not be paid by the government.

The committee knows this.

And we know they know because the Canadian Taxpayers Federation told them to their faces in testimony before the committee.

CBC CEO Catherine Tait repeatedly testified at the committee and each time she inadvertently made a stronger case to defund the CBC, due to her entitlement and lack of accountability.

Tait refused to say if she will take a severance when she leaves the CBC next year, claiming it’s a personal matter.

It’s not personal if it’s taxpayers’ money.

Documents obtained by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation show Tait is paid between $460,000 and $551,000 this year, with a bonus of up to 28 per cent.

That’s a bonus of up to $154,448. That’s more than the average Canadian family earns in a year.

Just before Christmas last year, Tait cried broke to the committee and afterwards the CBC announced lay offs in its newsrooms.

Documents obtained by the CTF show the CBC handed out big bonuses that year anyway, costing taxpayers $18 million.

As the CBC fan group Friends of Canadian Media put it: “This decision is deeply out of touch and unbefitting of our national public broadcaster.”

It gets worse because the state broadcaster isn’t even doing a good job.

According to the CBC’s latest quarterly report, CBC News Network’s national audience share is 1.7 per cent.

Documents obtained by the CTF show the CBC’s supper hour newscast drawing microscopic audiences, with 0.7 per cent of Toronto watching the six o’clock news on CBC.

Journalists should not be paid by the government because it’s an obvious conflict of interest.

You can’t hold the powerful government to account if you’re counting on that government for your paycheque.

Such government funding of media has contributed to the rapid erosion of trust in the news media, with 61 per cent of Canadians saying they think journalists are “purposely trying to mislead people by saying things they know are false or gross exaggerations.”

CBC’s entertainment programming barely fares better. The Murdoch Mysteries, which is not produced by the CBC, pulls in its biggest audience with about 1.9 per cent of the population watching.

The politicians on the committee know all of this, and yet, like Homer Simpson, they are not getting the message.

If the CBC needs money, it should earn that money itself.

Taxpayers can’t afford the state broadcast’s bill now, let alone hundreds of millions more.

It’s time to defund the CBC.

Kris Sims is the Alberta Director for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation and a former member of the Parliamentary Press Gallery.

Continue Reading

Business

Why living in Canada has become impossible

Published on

From Hindsight

There is a housing crisis, cost-of-living crisis, and now even an immigration crisis. What’s happening to Canada?

Continue Reading

Trending

X