The judge delays efforts to put an end to the union agreement for TSA workers

Seattle (AP) – A federal judge granted a preliminary injunction on Monday to arrest Interior Security Secretary Kristi Noem to kill a collective agreement for Transport security administration workers.

The American district judge Marsha Pechman of Seattle said in his order that an injunction was necessary to preserve the rights and advantages American Federation of Government employees.

In their trial, said Pechman, the union has shown that Noem’s directive to end the agreement “constitutes inadmissible reprisals against him for his reluctance to acquiesce the assault of the Trump administration against federal workers”. He also violated the regular procedure and AFGE should succeed in showing that Noem’s decision was “arbitrary and capricious,” she added.

“Today’s court’s decision is a crucial victory for federal workers and the rule of law,” said AFGE National President Everett Kelley in a statement. “The preliminary injunction underlines the unconstitutional nature of the DHS attack against the rights of the first amendment of the TSA officers. We remain determined to ensure that the rights and dignity of our members are protected, and we will not decrease from the defense of the rights of our members against the rupture of an illegal union. ”

US deputy prosecutor Brian Kipnis refused to comment on the judge’s decision, according to Emily Langlie, spokesperson for the American prosecutor’s office.

AFGE had concluded a new seven -year -old collective agreement with the agency last May, but Noem published a memo on February 27, canceling this agreement. A week later, the TSA informed the union of the Noem directive, saying that the contract had been terminated and that all the outstanding grievances would be deleted.

AFGE has filed a complaint against Noem, saying that this decision was reprisals against the union for postponing attacks by the Trump administration against federal workers. AFGE had brought a separate legal action on February 19 against the staff management office to stop the Probation workers shooting. A judge rendered a temporary ban order on February 27, arresting layoffs – on the same day, Noem published his memo.

Abigail Carter, representing AFGE during the oral arguments before Pechman on May 27, said that Noem’s decision was reprisals and a violation of the law of the first amendment of the union to protected speech and his right to the fifth amendment to regular procedure.

“The administration has clearly indicated that if you are not in political disagreement, you and your members can keep your rights, but if you do not agree, you lose them,” said Carter. It also argued that the collective agreement was necessary because the TSA workers are not covered by the Federal Labor Management Code. The agreement protects them against dangerous working conditions and unreasonable hours.

Kipnis denied the complaint of reprisals and said that it was simply a difference in management styles.

Pechman asked for this assertion. Not all unions are prohibited by the administration, said Pechman, only those who oppose the administration.

“Isn’t that a model you see?” Pechman asked Kipnis. “Lawyers who take opposition positions are prohibited. Those who do not have these restrictions. Isn’t that the model that the White House set up? ”

Kipnis said that tensions between unions and management are common and that this conflict does not point out a violation of the rights of workers in the first amendment, but rather reflects a relationship of confrontation.

But Pechman was not convinced.

Previous TSA directors found that the unions were beneficial and have renewed their contracts for years, she said. They found that they had made a happier workforce and “they wanted their employees to feel that they were well treated,” she said. What has changed is the attitude of this administration, she said.

To this, Kipnis replied: “Or you could characterize it as a different management style. The former administration apparently saw this as a better way to do business. … but this administration sees a different way of doing business. And the same law offers them the same discretion amount. ”

Pechman said that she understood that the administration had the right to exercise this discretion, “but abruptly cancel does not seem well reasoned, so I have problems with that.” She also noted: “But why the United States is recovering contracts, it’s more difficult to accept.”

In the ordinance on Monday, Pechman said that TSA workers would undergo “irreparable damage” without the injunction, noting that if they lost their collective conduct, they will lose the advantages it would bring.

“Although the loss of money alone does not show irreparable damage, total damage here is more than monetary,” said Pechman. “They include the loss of substantial employment on employment, the avenues of grievance and arbitration, and the right to have a workforce that may unite to require services that may not be obtained through individual negotiations.”