Sure, here’s a rewritten version in the third person:
—
By late March, Anthony Lee, president of the NTEU Chapter 282, which represents nearly 9,000 employees at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), expected advance notice about impending mass layoffs. Instead, Lee discovered the situation through early morning panicked calls. Employees learned of their termination while swiping badges at work; a green light allowed entry, while a red light indicated termination, preventing building access.
As per the union’s collective bargaining agreement, the government must provide advance notice of any workforce reductions. However, the Trump administration did not provide such notice or consult with Lee when it ended the union’s telework agreement. Lee expressed that the administration had largely ignored the union.
President Trump’s well-documented opposition to federal sector unions has intensified, with Lee noting that current attacks are significantly worse compared to Trump’s first term. Trump’s workforce reduction efforts may severely impact union bargaining units by eliminating many positions. He has also curtailed union representation rights for many federal employees.
In late March, Trump issued an executive order ending collective bargaining rights for most federal workers, citing national security concerns. While agencies like the CIA, FBI, and NSA already lacked these rights, Trump’s order extended exclusions to agencies such as the EPA, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and the FDA. Several lawsuits challenge this order, and a federal judge issued an injunction in late April, temporarily blocking it, though the administration is appealing.
Trump has argued that negotiating with unions over workplace matters hinders his ability to manage the government effectively. Conversely, Nicholas Handler, an associate law professor at Texas A&M School of Law, asserts that collective bargaining acts as a check on presidential power, shaping how the federal bureaucracy is managed.
Historically, federal employees did not possess significant bargaining rights. However, in the early 1960s, a recruitment crisis led President John F. Kennedy to sign an executive order allowing federal workers to unionize. This development aimed to attract skilled professionals without offering high salaries, focusing instead on stability and job protections. Congress later reinforced these protections through the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, emphasizing the role of collective bargaining in efficient public business conduct.
Handler emphasizes that collective bargaining provides a mechanism to counteract potential agency weakening by the government, preserving employees’ ability to fulfill their mission as intended by Congress. However, Trump argues that these rights render federal workers unaccountable, particularly in national security agencies.
Lee, an FDA veteran and union president, expresses concern that removing these protections would erode job stability and subject scientists to political pressure. Under union contracts, employees can address safety concerns without fear of retribution.
The Trump administration criticizes unions for complicating the removal of underperforming employees. However, others argue that unions contribute to governmental efficiency. Armando Rosario-Lebron, a vice president of the National Association of Agriculture Employees, states that collective bargaining agreements enhance government efficiency by managing overtime and serving as a mediator between management and employees.
Rosario-Lebron highlights that unions often resolve disputes informally and discourage pursuing baseless grievances. He cautions the administration against eliminating unions, suggesting that management would then bear the full responsibility of these tasks.
—
This version maintains a neutral tone while delivering the original information in a professional, third-person manner.
