On Thursday night the VA issued a new notice stating that it had again terminated AFGE’s CBA and claimed that action made the court proceedings related to its original termination last August moot.

On Thursday night the VA issued a new notice stating that it had again terminated AFGE’s CBA and claimed that action made the court proceedings related to its original termination last August moot. CRobertson/Getty Images

‘Blatant disrespect’: Judge contemplates contempt proceedings after VA re-terminated union contract

A federal judge in Rhode Island denied a request from the Trump administration to “moot out” a preliminary injunction preserving the American Federation of Government Employees’ contract with the Veterans Affairs Department.

A federal judge in Rhode Island on Friday moved to enforce her court order earlier this month requiring the Veterans Affairs Department to restore its contract with the American Federation of Government Employees and warned of possible contempt proceedings, after the department tried to terminate the agreement a second time Thursday.

Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Melissa DuBose issued a preliminary injunction mandating the VA to reinstate its CBA with AFGE, having found that the department’s August termination of the contract violated the First Amendment and the Administrative Procedures Act. But last week, the union reported that while the department had technically reinstated their collective bargaining agreement, management still refused to honor any of the contract’s provisions.

On Thursday night, on the eve of a hearing on the union’s request that the judge enforce her decision, the VA issued a new notice stating that it had again terminated AFGE’s CBA and claimed that action made the court proceedings related to its original termination last August moot.

“I think, because of the VA’s retermination of the CBA last night, this plaintiff’s motion to enforce here is moot,” said Tyler Becker, an attorney at the Justice Department. “[Nothing] at this point suggests that [AFGE is] challenging the retermination or anything that would allow this court to enjoin the retermination. Given the changed factual circumstances, in addition to the clarification order Monday, this motion to enforce is moot.”

Travis Silva, an attorney representing the union, argued that the move was an intentional end-run around the judge’s order. He noted that the department’s attorneys described at length both what compliance with an injunction would entail, including the collection of dues and participation in grievance proceedings, and virtually none of those steps had been taken by management.

“The fact that there is defiance I don’t think is reasonably in dispute,” he said. “We’ve laid out the many ways in which the Department of Veterans Affairs is not complying with the master [collective bargaining] agreement. They talked over and over in their briefings and in oral argumetns what substantive compliance looks like—it was their irreparable harm argument, it was in their balance of the equities argument—it was there for the court. They understand what compliance looks like and they simply aren’t doing it.”

DuBose agreed. In addition to issuing a new order to enforce compliance of the injunction, with a requirement that the department prove it has done so to the court by April 1, she ordered the agency to submit arguments by Tuesday spelling out why the department should not be held in contempt of court for a “blatant violation” of the initial injunction.

“There is a process that the defendants certainly could follow to seek redress from either a higher court to stay my preliminary order or seek a rehearing because of changed circumstances—none of that happened here,” she said. “There was a late-night refiling of a retermination, which throws everything this court attempted to do and clarify into chaos. For yout o suggest that all the work done prior to this retermination is mooted out and we kind of disregard it is really a blatant disrespect for not just this court’s order but for the rule of law.”

In a statement Friday, Mary Jean Burke, president of AFGE’s National VA Council, applauded the ruling.

"VA workers did not choose this fight—the Trump administration brought it to them," she said. "VA employees come to work every day focused on one thing: serving veterans. They deserve a voice in their workplace. The judge’s consideration of contempt for the VA’s attempt to avoid compliance and disregard the court’s order further demonstrates how little this administration cares for the frontline workers serving and protecting our veterans. The NVAC will not rest until every VA facility in this country is honoring our union contract."  

Share your experience with us: Erich Wagner: ewagner@govexec.com; Signal: ewagner.47

NEXT STORY: Federal labor board asserts political control over union elections