WASHINGTON (AP) -- Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge, a former union member, finds himself in the position of defending a White House plan that labor leaders fear could strip federal employees of basic workers' rights.þþAs the Senate prepares to vote on creating a federal Department of Homeland Security, labor advocates are frustrated that Ridge is backing the White House plan that would give the agency powers to hire and fire its workers in the name of safeguarding the nation against terrorism.þþAt least a third of the agency's estimated 170,000 workers would transfer to the department from other agencies and lose their collective bargaining rights under the White House plan -- which has been flatly rejected by powerful labor unions and some legislators from both parties.þþThe Senate could vote to create a Cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security as early as this week.þþ``The reality is, to put this thing together and to put it (together) quick, which is what America expects us to do, we're going to run into unforeseen management challenges,'' said Mark Holman, Ridge's longtime chief of staff. ``But none of that -- none of that -- should threaten the workers.''þþBut union officials who have met with Ridge over the last few months to broker a compromise have left frustrated.þþ``The meetings with Ridge were a waste of time,'' said Bobby Harnage, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents 600,000 public workers nationwide. ``He's in lockstep with the president. And although he has a good record in the past of working with unions, he's made absolutely no effort to work with unions in this case.''þþRidge, a former member of the local carpenters union in his hometown of Erie, Pa., is a moderate Republican and Vietnam Bronze Star recipient who is often mentioned as a possible contender to be President Bush's 2004 running mate should Vice President Dick Cheney step down.þþDuring his 12 years in the House, from 1983 to 1995, Ridge sided with the AFL-CIO on legislation 53 percent of the time -- a grade national AFL-CIO legislative director Bill Samuel called ``pretty good, pretty high for a Republican.''þþRidge voted to extend unemployment benefits, boost the use of American-made auto parts in Japanese car plants and limit China's trade status, according to an informal Associated Press survey of his 1992 voting record. However, Ridge also sided with a White House veto of a bill to extend family and medical leave that year, and in 1994 he rejected a labor-friendly bill to create national education standards.þþIn Pennsylvania, statewide labor leaders still rave about their relationship with the twice-elected governor.þþRidge was endorsed in 1998 by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 13, the largest public employees union in Pennsylvania.þþ``He treated us with decency, and dignity, and respect, and was more than fair to state employees at the collective bargaining table,'' Council 13 executive director Ed Keller said. ``His administration hardly did anything on a unilateral basis, without sitting down with the union and labor management teams.''þþIt's precisely that sort of relationship that should allow Ridge the benefit of the doubt, said Edwin Meese III, a former U.S. Attorney General in the Reagan administration, now a domestic security policy adviser at the Washington-based Heritage Foundation, a conservative think-tank.þþ``I don't think it's inconsistent with his prior position,'' Meese said of Ridge's support of management flexibility. ``As a matter of fact, I think it's a reason why the unions should be more willing to go along -- that he has a good reputation for working with organized labor.''þþOthers point out that Ridge, who was hand-picked by Bush to monitor the country's safety in the days immediately after Sept. 11, may not have a choice.þþ``If the president takes Position A and he may feel Position B, he's going to be bound by the president,'' said Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa. ``He doesn't have the same independence he had as a congressman.''þþA Democrat-written Senate bill, which is co-sponsored by Specter, does not include the management flexibility Bush is seeking and imposes limits on the president's ability to waive union bargaining rights in matters of national security.þþThat disagreement over labor remains the chief sticking point holding up the entire plan.þþ``I want to hear exactly what the White House has to say about the flexibility issues, why they need it,'' said Specter, who helped write the bill with Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn.þþ
Source: NY Times
