Current Constitution And Bylaws

Legislative Update

The National Border Patrol Council continues to meet with representatives in Washington DC in order to explain and garner support for the Border Patrol Pay Reform Act.

With the assistance of our lobbyist McAllister and Quinn last month alone we had over 30 meetings with representatives and several meetings with Agency representatives. Some of them included staff members of the following legislators:

Senator Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota

Senator Ron Robinson of Wisconsin

Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin

Senator Mark Pryor of Arizona

Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky

Senator Jeff Chiesa of New Jersey

Representative Ruben Hinojosa of Texas

Senator John McCain of Arizona

Senator Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire

Senator Rob Portman of Ohio

Senator Mark Begich of Alaska

All of the meetings went very well. All members were very receptive to Border Patrol issues. Some of the highlights of what we discussed are below. If you are currently stationed in these representatives area or if you have family in these districts it would help our efforts if you could call their offices and tell them you want them to support Border Patrol Pay reform.

Border Patrol Pay Reform

The Border Patrol Council and the Administration have come to agreement on a pay reform package.  This package modernizes agent pay, greatly enhances border security, and saves the federal government money.    Key components include:

·         Agents will have three options on overtime.  They may work 100 hours per pay period and receive a 25% differential, work 90 hours and receive a 12.5% differential, or work no overtime at all. Agents make the election once a year.      

·         Overtime worked beyond 100 hours will be treated as compensatory time off. 

·         Agents who are a GS 12 and below will receive a one- time two step increase to offset the loss in FLSA overtime.

The Border Patrol estimates that this reform package will save the government $134 million per year.  This reform was introduced as an amendment by Senator Tester to the comprehensive immigration reform package, but was not considered as part of the floor debate due to objections to procedural rules. 

Hoeven-Corker Amendment to Immigration Reform

The Senate adopted an amendment by Senators Hoeven and Corker that increased the funding for border security to $46 billion.  This amendment included: 

·         $30 billion to double the number of border patrol agents to 40,000

·         $4.5 billion for border security technologies

·         $7.5 billion to double border fencing

The intent of the Hoeven-Corker amendment is to double the manpower at the border.  However, there is no need to double the workforce to achieve this objective.  Under the Tester amendment, over 90% of the agents could be scheduled to work a 10-hour day instead of an 8-hour day.  This additional two hours per day gives the Border Patrol an additional ¼ of an Agent and greatly increases manpower in the field when it needs it most.

By our estimates, if the Tester amendment were applied to both the existing number of Agents and potentially new Agents hired under Hoeven-Corker, we could double manpower in the field by hiring only 12,500 new Agents – not 20,000 new Agents.  The rough estimate is this would save the federal government approximately $12 billion in payroll and benefits alone.

The National Border Patrol Council believes whether they hire 1 or 20,000 new agents we need our archaic pay system reformed.

Terence L. Shigg

NBPC Legislative Committee member

 

Next Union Meeting August 13, 2013 @ 7pm.

Agenda:
Bylaws and Constitution changes will be voted on.
Legislative committee update
Media training report
K9 Kenneling issues
AUO issues
Arbitrations update
Union office update

 

"Sequestration Or Political Gain" by President James Harlan

The Agency, in their “infinite wisdom,” reduced man hours as ordered by DHS.  This has limited the number of units on patrol.  This action has not gone unnoticed by our adversary.  All of this to save money or for political gain? 

The agency must make cuts.  The Union understands this.  However, “Sequestration” has affected operations in a negative way.  How severely has this affected border security and operations? 

Here is a list of activity that has resulted negatively:

On July 25, 2013, two (2) vehicles rammed their way through the San Ysidro Port of Entry and drove into the United States from Mexico loaded with illegal aliens.  They drove northbound in the southbound lanes of Interstate 5 with no regard for life or property.  About twenty-six illegal aliens made that extremely dangerous and illegal desperate action crammed into these vehicles like animals.  This resulted in an accident where two innocent United States citizens were hurt and had to be taken to the local hospital with injuries.    

June 10, 2013, Smugglers coordinated their efforts from the north and south sides of the United States / Mexico International Boundary.  They cut the primary fence in the Imperial Beach Border Patrol Station's area of operations.  Two (2) vehicles loaded with their human cargo drove through the fence after it was cut with welding equipment and when the secondary fence gate was disabled from the north side.  

June 5, 2013, two (2) vehicles drove through the Campo area of operations in which in one of the drivers attempted to run over and murder Border Patrol Agents.  Agents felt their lives were in danger of grievous bodily harm or death and fired their agency issued weapons at the driver of the vehicle.  Both vehicles were filled with narcotics.  The occupants of one of the vehicles absconded back into Mexico.

May 10, 2013, a smuggling vehicle drove into the United States from Mexico in the same manner as the July 25^th incident by ramming through San Ysidro Port of Entry and absconded with an unknown cargo.  This “unknown cargo” possesses the greatest threat and danger to border security.

In the past there have been numerous deaths and human suffering associated with this wanton disregard for life.  Sometimes, the public forgets that the responsibility for this deadly behavior falls squarely on the drivers of these vehicles and their associates.  Border Patrol Agents are authorized to use whatever means necessary to protect the public and themselves against such callous behavior.  This brazen and aggressive behavior that is exhibited by the smuggling organizations is controlled and directed by the Cartels.  It affects national security, innocent lives, and the lives of the men and women who are sworn to protect our country.  

There are, of course, other incidents that occur, and these definitely appear to be on the rise.

Which leaves one to wonder, is this due to a combination of budget cuts and looming amnesty?  

Or, for the sake of political gain disguised as saving money?

James Harlan 

President 

Local 1613 

National Border Patrol Council

The Border Patrol Is Breaking up Families

 

Since my indoctrination into the Border Patrol I have heard the saying repeated over and over that “The Border Patrol is a Family.” My question is, if we are family then why is the Border Patrol keeping families apart and in some cases breaking up families?

 

I had an interesting meeting with Border Patrol Management in Washington DC. The meeting was to discuss the Compassionate/Spousal transfer and the hardship program. The meeting began very cordially with discussions of children and personal introductions. My intention was to get the answer to a simple question: “What needs to happen to allow the over 40 agents nationwide who have been approved by the aforementioned programs to be allowed to complete the transfers they have qualified for?” This was my only real reason for the meeting. I will not keep you in suspense. I never received a direct answer to this question. Instead I was told about manpower levels, needs of the service and what the agency could not do.

 

For example:

 

I was told due to the numbers even though these agents are in dire circumstances that qualify them to move they can’t be permanently relocated. Instead, in addition to the stress of their current situation they will have to wait until the location they desire to go to drops below an established staffing level set by headquarters. The number was a hard number that could not be change for any reason (unless they are told to change it). It should be noted that this “hard” number can change from year to year. Employees can also request temporary details every 30 days that are subject to denial at any given time for any reason whatsoever.

 

I was told that due to the budget agents who are enduring a hardship and qualify to move, will not be moved. Get this, the reason they would not do this is because these agents ‘deserve’ to be paid so until there is funding the service can’t move them. So, because the service cares so much about these agents they “can’t” move them. How about the fact that “IT’STHE LAW!” You have to pay them. Here is a novel idea. Allow them to move with the promise (legal contract) that you will pay them when funding becomes available. I know that’s just crazy talk.

 

I was told that agents should be more reasonable about where they request to go. In other words if one spouse is in San Diego and one is in Calexico (no offense to my brothers in CAX) they should consider going to the less desirable location because they would have a better chance of getting it approved. In my mind I am thinking, but you told me the numbers in these two areas did not allow anyone to move to either of these locations, so what difference does it make using your logic from earlier in the conversation you still will not move them. Part of this conversation went into the fact that managers out there are misinforming agents about the programs. Agents are being told the agency will ignore what they requested and make an offer that is opposite of what they requested and then drop them from the program if they turn down the offer. Or better yet agents are being told they can’t put in for the program because they are too junior. The response I got to these real case scenarios was well we can’t control what our managers say? What?  Pause for a head shake! This really happened. That conversation ended with the most ludicrous statement of all. I was told that maybe I should tell my members that they would have a better chance of relocating if they promoted!

 

All these excuses boiled down to the agency saying the equivalent of “I don’t have to so I will not do it!”

 

I’m sorry, excuse me but I thought this was a compassionate transfer program. I thought we were family. I thought the agency “cared” about its employees. In order to effectively run a compassionate program you first have to have compassion.

 

We will be getting with the attorneys and the media in order to continue this fight. If you are waiting for a compassionate/hardship or spousal transfer we highly recommend notifying your local representatives (Congress and Senate) and asking them for assistance also. We as a union will find a way to make these moves happen! These agents deserve better from the agency that says “we are family” and we as a union will not allow the incompetence and bureaucracy of the agency to further harm these agents who are already going through trying times.   

Happy 4th of July

Fourth of July 2013, finds us enjoying the great weather and beaches and other assorted activities which involve BBQ’s with friends and family.  These seem to be the usual sorts of activities on such a wonderful warm summer holiday.

We are celebrating the 4th of July as a National holiday, remembering freedom from tyranny of the British Empire.  Tyranny is described as the “arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority.  Synonyms: despotism, absolutism, dictatorship.  The government or rule of a tyrant or absolute ruler.  A state ruled by a tyrant or absolute ruler.  Oppressive or unjustly severe government on the part of any ruler, and undue severity or harshness.”  Sounds kinda like “some” (not all) of our managers?  Again, there are some very good managers who work very hard for the same goal as your Union; the welfare of the agent.  

We can and we have made mistakes, and we will make mistakes, while performing our duties as agents.  However, your treatment as an agent should not be met with tyranny when the Agency rules you negligent in professional matters of the position according to the Table of Offenses and Penalties.  The Union does not possess a “magic wand” and cannot make things “go away” whenever an agent finds himself in trouble.  The Union is in the position of mitigating the discipline and adverse action by the Agency.  

What does the celebrating on the 4th of July, tyranny, and negligence have to do with anything?

You, members of United States Border Patrol, San Diego Sector, are some of the finest members of our community, who work constantly keeping our borders secure and our streets safe.  The temptation will be to place yourself under the tyranny of the Agency and to be negligent by the choices you make while celebrating the 4th of July.  You may choose to drink and have fun with friends and family, but do not place yourself under the tyranny of the Agency by being arrested for driving under the influence.  The Agency’s stance is very clear when you hear an agent exclaim, “I am a good person, I don’t deserve to get fired.”     

And now choose not to place yourself under their tyranny.  Sector Management “DOES” treat bargaining members and non-bargaining (managers) differently.

The choice is yours.

Members

Meeting

June 25, 2013

5:00 P.M.

Location:  La Bellas Café Chula Vista

Please join the Local 1613 for it's second inter-monthly Meeting to be held at La Bellas Café in Chula Vista.  The address is 373 3rd Ave Chula Vista, CA 91910.  The meeting will start at 5:00 P.M.
This is meeting is set for members living near the "Big 3" but all members are invited and encouraged to attend.  The meeting will be a town hall style meeting.  See you all there.