Which basically said to workers “you don’t have to join a union if you don’t want to”, to be replaced by “you have the right to organize”. The new EO makes it mandatory (which it already was, by other FAR clauses) to post NLRA language in the workplace.

My instructions are: “Federal Contracting Offices will not implement this Executive Order until the Secretary of Labor completes its rulemaking process (allowed 120 days by the Executive Order) and the Federal Acquisition Regulation Council implements an Interim or Final Rule. This is a normal part of the rule making process, Executive Order first, then FAR Rule.

The Order requires federal agencies to include provisions in their contracts obligating contractors to post notices in conspicuous places in their plants, offices and work sites advising employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C 151 et seq.). Further, this posting obligation flows down so that contractors must include this provision in subcontracts and purchase orders.

In addition, the subject Order revokes Executive Order 13201, Notification of Employee Rights Concerning Payment of Union Dues or Fees, issued by President Bush on 17 February 2001 (see CIR Information Letter 01-8). It is therefore anticipated that the FAR Council will initiate action to rescind all regulations implementing Executive Order 13201. However, until such time as the FAR Council rescinds regulations implementing Executive Order 13201 continue to use existing clauses.”

On another front, the FAR clause implementing E-verify has been delayed. As of 30 Jan 09, FAR Clause 52.222-54 Employment Eligibility Verification is delayed an additional 90 days. The new clause’s applicability date was initially delayed until 20 Feb 09, in order to comply with the Congressional Review Act (5 USC 801(a)(3)(A)). The applicability date was extended to 21 May 09, in order to permit the new Administration an adequate opportunity to review the Employment Eligibility Verification rule.

Although it does repeal EO 13202, it does not take us all the way to requirement of union labor on gov’t projects:

Sec. 5. This order does not require an executive agency to use a project labor agreement on any construction project, nor does it preclude the use of a project labor agreement in circumstances not covered by this order, including leasehold arrangements and projects receiving Federal financial assistance. This order also does not require contractors or subcontractors to enter into a project labor agreement with any particular labor organization.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/EXECUTIVEORDERUSEOFPROJECTLABORAGREEMENTSFORFEDERALCONSTRUCTIONPROJECTS/

since many of our esteemed contributors are lawyers. Conservative lawyers are necessary to protect us from the depredations of Modern Liberal lawyers.

The evil that lawyers do is evidenced by the verbage contained in much of our laws and regulations. The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), which I deal with daily, is an example of keeping protected classes’ oxen from being gored. It requires a careful reading to discern the intent and to manuever through the contradictions. Some of it makes no sense to the casuall reader. I cited an example the other day of some odd dollar thresholds which trigger the Buy American Act vs Free Trade Agreement Act. Their are many examples in legislation coming out of Washington where the language has been crafted to benefit a particular constituent – only dedicated detective work can bring it to light.

When weasel words are called for, nobody is slicker than a Democrat lawyer. Especially if said lawyer is a Capitol Hill careerist.

Kenny, I assure you, when I was a kid I didn’t tell folks I wanted to grow up and be a Contract Specialist. It just turned out to be my second career, totally unrelated to the first one.