U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

85–504 PDF 2014

S. Hrg. 113–430 

NOMINATIONS OF HON. CAROL W. POPE, HON. 

ERNEST E. DUBESTER, AND PATRICK PIZZELLA 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

NOMINATIONS OF HON. CAROL W. POPE, HON. ERNEST W. DUBESTER, 

AND PATRICK PIZZELLA TO BE MEMBERS, FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY 

SEPTEMBER 25, 2013 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov/ 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

( 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware Chairman 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan 

MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

JON TESTER, Montana 

MARK BEGICH, Alaska 

TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

JEFF CHIESA, New Jersey 

RICHARD J. KESSLER, Staff Director 

JOHN P. KILVINGTON, Deputy Staff Director 

LAWRENCE B. NOVEY, Chief Counsel for Governmental Affairs 

KATHERINE C. SYBENGA, Senior Counsel 

DEIRDRE G. ARMSTRONG, Professional Staff Member 

KEITH B. ASHDOWN, Minority Staff Director 

CHRISTOPHER J. BARKLEY, Minority Deputy Staff Director 

ANDREW C. DOCKHAM, Minority Chief Counsel 

JAMES P. GELFAND, Minority Counsel 

LAURA W. KILBRIDE, Chief Clerk 

LAUREN M. CORCORAN, Hearing Clerk 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Opening statements: Page 

Senator Tester .................................................................................................. 1 

Senator Portman .............................................................................................. 3 

Senator Johnson ............................................................................................... 13 

Prepared statements: 

Senator Tester .................................................................................................. 23 

Senator Portman .............................................................................................. 25 

WITNESSES 

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2013 

Hon. Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Representative in Congress from the District 

of Columbia ........................................................................................................... 2 

Hon. Carol W. Pope to be Member, Federal Labor Relations Authority 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 4 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 26 

Biographical and financial information .......................................................... 28 

Letter from the Office of Government Ethics ................................................. 52 

Hon. Ernest W. DuBester to be Member, Federal Labor Relations Authority 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 6 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 54 

Biographical and financial information .......................................................... 56 

Letter from the Office of Government Ethics ................................................. 77 

Patrick Pizzella to be Member, Federal Labor Relations Authority 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 7 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 79 

Biographical and financial information .......................................................... 80 

Letter from the Office of Government Ethics ................................................. 104 

Letter of Support for Ms. Pope from the Congressional Black Caucus ............... 107 

(1) 

NOMINATIONS OF HON. CAROL W. POPE, 

HON. ERNEST W. DUBESTER, AND PATRICK 

PIZZELLA TO BE MEMBERS, FEDERAL LABOR 

RELATIONS AUTHORITY 

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2013 

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY

AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:35 p.m., in room 

SD–342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jon Tester, presiding. 

Present: Senators Tester, Portman, and Johnson. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR TESTER 

Senator TESTER. I will call to order this hearing of the Senate 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. There 

will be at least one other person showing up today but I just want 

to thank, first of all, thank the nominees for being here. 

We convened this afternoon’s hearing to consider the nominations of Carol Waller Pope, Ernest DuBester, and Patrick Pizzella 

to serve as Members of the Federal Labor Relations Authority 

(FLRA). 

Carol Waller Pope, Ernest DuBester, and Patrick Pizzella have 

all filed responses to a biographical and financial questionnaire, 

answered prehearing questions submitted by the Committee and 

have had their financial statements reviewed by the Office of Government Ethics (OGE). 

Without objection, this information will be a part of the hearing 

record with the exception of the financial data which are on file 

and available for public inspection in the Committee offices. 

Carol Waller Pope has over 30 years of experience at the FLRA 

and is the first and only FLRA career employee to serve as a member. Most recently, Ms. Pope served as the FLRA’s Chairman from 

2009 through January of this year. 

Under her leadership as Chairman, the FLRA eliminated its case 

backlog, reduced the average age of pending cases by 57 percent 

and vastly improved employee satisfaction and morale. 

Ernie DuBester has 35 years of experience in labor-management 

relations with nearly 20 years of experience in the Federal sector. 

He has worked as a public servant, advocate, mediator, arbitrator, 

and academic. Mr. DuBester currently serves as the Chairman of 

the FLRA and has been a member since 2009. 
2 

Patrick Pizzella has 21 years of experience in the Executive 

Branch and has held positions in management and administration 

at six different agencies including the Department of Labor (DOL), 

Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and the General Services 

Administration (GSA). Most recently, Mr. Pizzella served as the Assistant Secretary of Labor from 2001 to 2009. Additionally, Mr. 

Pizzella was an original member of the Chief Human Capital Officers (CHCO) Council. 

I want to thank Ms. Pope, Mr. DuBester, and Mr. Pizzella for 

joining us here today. 

When Senator Portman gets here, we will allow him to do his 

opening statement but I think I will just proceed with the oath. 

Our Committee rules require all witnesses at nomination hearings to give their testimony under oath. Will the three nominees 

please stand, raise their right hands. 

Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give to this 

Committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 

truth so help you, God? 

Ms. POPE. I do. 

Mr. DUBESTER. I do. 

Mr. PIZZELLA. I do. 

Senator TESTER. Let the record reflect that the witnesses answered in the affirmative. 

We are going to go with your testimony. Each of you have 5 minutes for your oral testimonies. Your complete written testimony 

will be made a part of the record. 

Ms. Pope, we will have you get started but first we have the 

honor to have Congresswoman Norton here today and so I will turn 

the floor over to you, Congresswoman. 

TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, 

A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE DISTRICT OF 

COLUMBIA 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you very much, Senator Tester. I want to 

say how much we appreciate this hearing. I am here to speak, of 

course, for Carol Waller Pope and my appreciation for the hearing 

comes from a fairly unusual circumstance. 

Although I think it has been clear to the Administration that Ms. 

Pope was to be appointed, this career employee, for technical reasons, actually retired after 34 years of service because her holdover 

period expired and has to come back to Federal service. 

We are particularly proud of Ms. Pope for what she has done in 

the agency and I am going to dispense with the usual credentials 

that one offers when you are presenting a nominee for the first 

time. I mean this is a nominee with a record, appointed by two 

Presidents for membership on the Authority, then as chair and now 

as chair. 

She has been reappointed as chair it seems to me for reasons 

that the President could not ignore. She has taken an agency that 

had real management difficulties and turned it around. You mentioned one of the indications. 

But here is an agency that Ms. Pope found in last place among 

small agencies in 2009 among best places to work in the Federal 
3 

Government. Then by 2010 she had already brought it up to 20th 

from 38th and an award for the most improved small agency. 

Now, it has risen to 7th best and it ranks in the top five small 

agencies in teamwork and effective leadership. 

Mr. Chairman, I think that summarizes why the President has 

nominated Ms. Pope; and if I may say so, Mr. Chairman, I think 

it is a good reason for this Committee to offer her to the Senate 

floor. 

Thank you very much. 

Senator TESTER. Well, thank you, Eleanor, for your very kind remarks and I would agree with your testimony. 

Before we get you, Carol, I would ask as we hear from Ranking 

Member Portman and Senator Johnson if he has any opening comments. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PORTMAN 

Senator PORTMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you 

holding the hearing; and to Congresswoman Holmes Norton, good 

to have you over here on our side of the Capitol; and that is meaningful that you would come all the way over here on behalf of Ms. 

Pope. 

I am looking forward to the nominees telling us a little more 

about their background and also what they would like to do at the 

FLRA. I have been on the other side of that table as a nominee a 

couple of times. I know it is always interesting in the confirmation 

process. 

But in this particular case, this comes at a very critical time obviously for the Federal Labor Relations Authority because it lacks 

a quorum and is unable to do its work which is to adjudicate disputes arising under the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA) and to decide cases concerning the negotiability of collective bargaining 

agreement or proposals, also to hear appeals concerning unfair 

labor practices and representation petitions and all important 

work. 

I am told that over the course of nearly 9 months the authority 

has lacked a quorum, it has developed a backlog of well over 100 

cases that have yet to be considered and decided. 

So, are you sure you want to do this? Because if you are confirmed, one of your most pressing priorities, obviously, is going to 

be to address that backlog and do it in an efficient and timely manner but also with high quality decisions. 

It also is going to be essential to attend to some of the other statutory responsibilities, to establish policies and guidance regarding 

labor-management relations of the nearly 1.6 million non-postal 

Federal employees. So, it is a big job. I am glad the Administration 

and Congress are now taking the necessary steps to provide the 

quorum and to get FLRA back to work. 

Even with a full complement of members, as Eleanor has just 

noted, there have been some challenges. We are all aware the authority came in dead last on the Partnership for Public Services 

best places to work in the Federal Government surveys in 2005, 

2007, and 2009. 

I am pleased to note that the FLRA has made significant strides 

in terms of its internal management. It now ranks, as I understand 
4 

1The prepared statement of Ms. Pope appears in the Appendix on page 26. 

it, 8 out of 29 small agencies for employee satisfaction. But I am 

sure we can all agree that there is a lot more to be done to be sure 

the agency works efficiently and it is a good place to work so you 

can attract the best and that we can be sure that we are helping 

foster lawful and productive relations between government managers and Federal employees. 

So, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to speak briefly. 

I look forward to the testimony from the nominees. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Portman, we appreciate 

your statement. 

Eleanor, thank you for coming over. We appreciate your glowing 

remarks of Ms. Pope also. 

And, you can proceed, Ms. Pope. 

TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE CAROL W. POPE1 TO BE A 

MEMBER, FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY 

Ms. POPE. Thank you. Good afternoon. I want to thank the Committee and in particular Senators Tester, Portman, and Johnson for 

conducting this hearing. I also want to thank the Committee staff 

for their work and meaningful assistance, and finally I want to 

thank Congresswoman Norton for being here today as she has been 

on two prior occasions that I appeared before this Committee. 

I admire her illustrious career in the law, civil rights, human 

rights, and public service as the first female Chairman of the Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) appointed by President Carter in 1977. 

While she found her place as an elected representative, I found 

mine as a member and Chairman of the Federal Labor Relations 

Authority. I am honored today and delighted to have been nominated by President Obama to serve for a third term as member and 

again serve as Chairman of the FLRA upon confirmation. 

As you have noted, I have worked for the last 33 of my 34 years 

of public service at the FLRA; and I would be remiss if I did not— 

because the FLRA has been a home for me for so long—acknowledge all of the FLRA staff here in attendance. It is a testament to 

their interest in the mission of the agency and the process that engages and confirms their leaders. 

In particular, I want to acknowledge General Counsel Julia 

Clark, who was appointed by President Obama and confirmed by 

the Senate in 2009; and I appreciate her being here today. 

I also want to acknowledge my family, my sister, Linda White, 

who is representing all of my family, from Philadelphia. I am a 

Pittsburgher but she is from Philadelphia. And, my fiance, Fred 

Grigsby, Jr., who is here from St. Maarten. 

As I said, the mission of the FLRA is an important one. We have 

been described as a small but mighty agency because of the breath 

of our jurisdiction, 1.9 million non-postal employees. 

We do a number of things primarily through our regional offices, 

training, investigations, prosecution of the statute, the Federal 

Service Labor-Management Relations Statute; and one of the mission matters that we take seriously is alternative dispute resolution to try to resolve disputes without costly litigation. 
5 

We do that through a lot of effort that is put into education and 

training. It is our belief that if the parties understand their statutory rights and obligations, needless litigation will not occur. And 

so, we do a lot of work regarding education and training of the statute. 

When I last appeared before this Committee on September 11, 

2008, the FLRA was plagued with poor mission performance, hundreds of unresolved cases, and a dispirited workforce noted primarily for low morale. It was not a fun place to be because we got 

notoriety for being the last in the Federal employee viewpoint surveys. 

Upon becoming Chairman in February 2009, I instituted an internal and external campaign known as the 3Rs—revitalization, reinvention, and re-engagement. This multi-pronged, multi-year initiative was geared toward revitalizing mission performance as the 

No. 1 goal and customer service, reinventing work processes and 

service delivery models and re-engaging our customers to better 

meet their needs for training and timely and quality dispute resolution. 

While the 3Rs initiative helped focus our actions and our resources, the FLRA’s success over the last 4 years would not have 

been realized without the hard work of all of its employees, including those that are mostly unseen and often underappreciated. 

Our case intake and publications, human resources, administration, and budget offices—all FLRA employees here in Washington 

and Atlanta and Boston and Chicago, and Dallas, Denver, and San 

Francisco—are the agency’s greatest assets. Together we were successful in eliminating the backlog of cases, revising regulations, 

and renewing a commitment to training, education, and alternative 

dispute resolution. 

I would like to share one other perspective with you. Given the 

fact at the end of my holdover period in January 2013, the FLRA 

was a relatively young agency, 34 years old, and the fact that I 

joined in the agency as a relatively young attorney—age omitted 

from this presentation—I had then served the agency in increasingly responsible positions during 97 percent of its history. 

So, my careers spans 97 percent of the history of the agency. 

Therefore, I own a unique perspective of both the good and the notso-good of our history and there has been dramatic improvement. 

The employees of the FLRA achieved these remarkable results 

but as Chairman I worked together with all of the Presidential appointees to provide the leadership and the resources for them to 

unleash their collective energy, skills, and talents. 

Going forward, if confirmed, no matter what the challenge is, internal or external, financial, technological, or perhaps skill-based, 

as Chairman I will again work with my Presidentially appointed 

colleagues and employees to implement a shared vision that 

prioritizes our resources in order to deliver even better customer 

service. 

I am honored to appear today with my fellow member nominees, 

Ernest DuBester and Patrick Pizzella. Chairman DuBester deserves praise for his management of the agency and the Authority 

for the last 8 months. Without a quorum of members issuance of 

decisions in pending cases before the Authority, approximately a 
6 

1The prepared statement of Mr. DuBester appears in the Appendix on page 54. 

third of which are now exceeding our internal time targets for 

issuance of a decision, have been stalled. 

Upon conformation, I am eager to join Member DuBester and to 

welcome nominee Pizzella to the FLRA family and get busy resolving this backlog of cases. 

The FLRA must also continue to recruit, train, and retain a diverse workforce. With the looming possibility of governmentwide 

reorganizations and larger budget reductions, the FLRA must continually revise and enhance its work processes to ensure that workplace disputes are resolved in a manner that promotes effective and 

efficient government. 

In closing, with respect to the FLRA’s statutory mission and the 

role and responsibilities of the position to which I have been nominated, I would like to quote President Teddy Roosevelt who once 

stated, ‘‘far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance 

to work hard at work worth doing.’’ 

I welcome any questions that you may have. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you for your statement, Ms. Pope. 

Mr. DuBester, it is your turn. 

TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE ERNEST W. DUBESTER1 TO 

BE A MEMBER, FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY 

Mr. DUBESTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Portman, 

Senator Johnson. I greatly appreciate the opportunity to come before this Committee again for its consideration of my nomination. 

I also would like to thank the Committee’s staff for their work and 

assistance in reviewing my nomination and scheduling this hearing. 

Before making a brief opening statement, I would also like to introduce my wife, Karen Kremer, who is here. This is the year of 

our 25th anniversary. When I first met Karen, she was working for 

Senator Howell Heflin on the Senate Judiciary Committee. So, this 

body will always have a special meaning for me in my personal life. 

It is also a great pleasure to appear alongside my friend and colleague, Carol Waller Pope and my new friend and hopefully soon 

to be colleague, Pat Pizzella. 

I also want to recognize the presence here this afternoon, in addition to our general counsel, Julie Clark, of quite a few people here 

from the FLRA. As Carol suggested, these dedicated public servants, as well as many FLRA staff who are not present, are the key 

to the FLRA’s many accomplishments of the last 4 years. 

It is an honor to appear before this Committee after being nominated again by President Obama. As you noted, I have served as 

a member of the FLRA for the last 4 years and have been privileged to serve as its Chairman since January. 

When I last appeared before this Committee, then-Senator 

Akaka noted that big changes were needed because for far too long 

the FLRA had failed to carry out its mission. 

With a serious backlog of cases existing then and low employee 

morale that has been referred to by Carol and Representative Norton, and I think by you, Mr. Chairman, I would say too that, indeed, big changes have occurred. 
7 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Pizzella appears in the Appendix on page 79. 

The last 4 years reflect many accomplishments at the FLRA 

based on an energetic period, as Carol put it, of the 3Rs—revitalization, reinvention, and re-engagement. 

At the end of the last calendar year, not only had we completely 

eliminated our case backlog but we had eliminated all over-age 

cases. In addition, exercising our statutory responsibility to provide 

leadership in labor-management relations, we delivered a variety of 

training sessions to thousands of labor and management representatives in the Federal sector community; and with the agency focused on human capital initiatives such as training and development, performance management, and work life balance, as has already been suggested, employee morale I believe has improved dramatically. 

And, for the last 2 years, we have ranked in the top 10 and we 

have received No. 3 rankings in the specific categories of teamwork 

and effective leadership. So, I know that is gratifying to many and 

certainly to Carol and myself. 

So, Mr. Chairman, in my nearly 40 years of experience in labormanagement relations, working as you noted in a variety of capacities with more than a majority of my professional life now in the 

Federal sector, I remain strongly committed to the FLRA’s mission 

and to the importance of stable, constructive labor-management relations in the Federal sector. 

If reconfirmed, I will continue to work tirelessly so the FLRA is 

recognized as one of the stellar agencies in the Federal Government. And again, I appreciate the opportunity to be with you today 

and I would also be pleased to answer any questions that you have. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Mr. DuBester. Mr. Pizzella. 

TESTIMONY OF PATRICK PIZZELLA1 TO BE A MEMBER, 

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY 

Mr. PIZZELLA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Before I begin I would like to recognize my wife, Mary Joy, who 

previously served at the Department of Energy (DOE), the State 

Department, and the General Services Administration. So there is 

no shortage of Federal service in our family. 

Chairman Tester, Senator Portman, and Senator Johnson, and 

other Members of the Committee, I want to thank you and your 

staff for all the courtesies you may have shown me as I prepared 

for this hearing. 

Given the seriousness of the issues that surround you on the eve 

of the new fiscal year, I am especially appreciative of the time that 

you are taking to ensure that the Federal Labor Relations Authority operates at full strength. 

This is the third time I have had the privilege of being nominated by a President for a position of public trust. I am honored 

the President nominated me to be a member of the Federal Labor 

Relations Authority; and if confirmed, I will dedicate myself to discharging of the responsibilities of the FLRA in accordance with 

laws, rules, and regulations. 
8 

I began my tenure in Federal service in the early 1980s, and I 

believe my 21 years of experience in the Executive Branch will be 

an asset to the FLRA. 

I will be happy to answer any questions you may have. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Mr. Pizzella. 

I appreciate all of your testimonies. We are going to start with 

standard questions that we ask all nominees. 

Is there anything you are aware of in your background that 

might present a conflict of interest with the duties of the office to 

which you have been nominated? 

Ms. POPE. No. 

Mr. DUBESTER. No. 

Mr. PIZZELLA. No. 

Senator TESTER. Do you know of anything personal or otherwise 

that would in any way prevent you from fully and honorably discharging the responsibilities of the office to which you have been 

nominated? 

Ms. POPE. No. 

Mr. DUBESTER. No. 

Mr. PIZZELLA. No. 

Senator TESTER. Do you agree with our reservation to respond to 

any reasonable summons to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of Congress if you are confirmed? 

Ms. POPE. Yes. 

Mr. DUBESTER. Yes. 

Mr. PIZZELLA. Yes, sir. 

Senator TESTER. I want to thank you. And, would the clerk to 

put 7 minutes on the clock, and we will have as many rounds as 

necessary. 

I am going to start with you, Ms. Pope. I am pleased we are able 

to hold this hearing today for all of you and I hope to get you all 

moving through the pipeline very quickly. As you all know too well, 

this lack of quorum on the authority has really prevented many 

cases from coming to an ultimate decision, and we owe Federal employees, we owe them to have a fully functioning FLRA. 

So with that as a background, Ms. Pope, what is the biggest 

issue facing the FLRA today? 

Ms. POPE. I would say for the authority side of the house it is 

our backlog of cases. 

Senator TESTER. Uh-huh. 

Ms. POPE. It was tremendous that we worked together pursuant 

to a corrective action plan that was approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to erase our backlog before; and I certainly want to make that our priority because it was demoralizing 

to our employees that we had a case backlog and that we were not 

performing our mission effectively and efficiently; and I know we 

can do it again because we have done it before. 

We certainly have fewer cases now than we did before. In addition to issuing case, decisions that are currently backlogged, one of 

the important issues for the FLRA is to continue to maintain a 

staff that is nimble and trained because we do know that, as there 

are issues in government with regard to organizations, furloughs, 

closures that we see an increase in cases; and those are the most 

important cases for us to be able to address in a timely manner. 
9 

So, to eradicate our backlog, positions us to be able to handle the 

inventory as it comes in a timely way. Our internal time targets 

are 180 days; and when we were successful in erasing our backlog, 

we had reduced our average age to 50 days and we can do it again. 

Senator TESTER. I would assume that the lack of quorum has 

contributed to that backlog and maybe contributed to the fact that 

the staff is not as nimble, I do not want to put words in anybody’s 

mouth, but does not have the flexibility that you want. A fair statement, if you agree that is fine. Are there other things that the lack 

of quorum has done to impact the FLRA’s ability? 

Ms. POPE. I know that some of the senior leadership positions, 

particularly those reporting to a Member, staff attorneys on a 

Member’s staff, out of respect for the Members opportunity to select their senior staff, in some regard those positions have been 

kept open. 

I also believe that from my experience as chairman, I benefited 

from having a full complement of Presidential appointees to collaborate with on administrative matters, on budget matters. And 

so, it is important to the overall administration of the agency that 

we have a quorum of all Presidential appointees, particularly Members. 

Senator TESTER. I would agree. 

Mr. DuBester, I will ask you a question here. After spending a 

career working in various capacities which you have referenced and 

so did I, including the National Labor Relations Board, the National Mediations Board, and the FLRA, what experiences have you 

found most helpful to your role as a member on the FLRA? 

Mr. DUBESTER. Well, there are so many of them; but if I had to 

single one out that I think has the broadest and deepest rippling 

effects, it would be serving for many years as a mediator and also 

acquiring, related to that, the special skills as a teacher and a 

trainer in the art of collaborative problem-solving. 

And, I think we have put an emphasis for the last 4 years and 

will continue to do so to complement what I would call our traditionally regarded mission, if you will, with working with the agency 

and union reps that we serve to get them to think of us in nontraditional ways and to consider using our collaborative alternative 

dispute resolution skills, because by doing so we accomplish a lot. 

We certainly help parties with their relationships but it is more 

than just about the personal human side of the relationship. We 

help them to solve a lot of their disagreements internally on their 

own without getting involved in protracted litigation proceedings, 

if you will, which are very costly. 

So, we help them to conserve some of their scarce resources at 

a time when everyone feels the need to do more with less. 

And so, we also have integrated the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) into our own culture internally. Virtually every office, 

and certainly every component, starting with our impasse panel, 

which by definition is an alternative dispute resolution operation, 

our office of General Counsel, and even within the authority side 

we have an Office of Alternative Dispute Resolution and we work 

with the parties even involving some of the cases that we have jurisdiction over. 
10 

For example, with negotiability decisions we will put our alternative dispute resolution office staff in contact with the parties before we engage in formal decisionmaking, and often we are able to 

help them in a negotiability dispute either to resolve the case completely, to narrow the disagreements over a number of proposals or 

at least to narrow their differences within proposals. 

And, I think that all, of this has a valuable effect not just for our 

mission performance but, if you will, throughout the Federal Government, because that is another piece about our mission that I 

think is sometimes overlooked. 

And, if I could just add to the answer to the question that you 

asked previously about the greatest problem facing the FLRA, it is 

making sure that we have the adequate resources to perform our 

mission; and again why I think that is so important is it is not just 

about what I would call the seeming self-interest of the FLRA per 

se but we have responsibilities throughout the Federal Government 

to help provide for stable, constructive labor-management relations. 

And if we are unable to do that, then there are consequences 

throughout the Federal Government. People at agencies with disputes are less able to perform their mission because they are either 

distracted by the costs of litigation or the time necessary to deal 

with those disputes. 

So, I think that is an important recognition about the importance 

of our work too. 

Senator TESTER. I appreciate your answer and I appreciate you 

delving into other areas too. 

Mr. Pizzella, I was going to get to you but my time is about out. 

We are going to have another round so the next time around we 

will do it. Senator Portman. 

Senator PORTMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

We talked earlier about this backlog and the Chairman just 

asked some questions about it. I was interested, Mr. DuBester, in 

your focus on adjudicating disputes, as you say in your testimony, 

fairly, impartially, and expeditiously; and you mentioned in your 

response to the question of collaborative dispute resolution. 

I know through your career you have emphasized the importance 

of ADR in addressing conflicts that might otherwise go to litigation. 

Can you talk just a little about what hurdles remain, what role can 

it play in reducing the backlog at FLRA and what hurdles there 

are to having that happen. What, might be done to expand its use, 

for instance, more training to labor and management representatives to try to reduce frivolous filings and facilitate avenues for 

those parties to resolve disagreements even on their own? Is that 

part of what you would recommend or not? 

And then if I might, Ms. Pope, you talked a little about what you 

did last time, which I think resulted in an 87 percent reduction in 

case inventory. You said it was an even larger inventory backlog. 

What did you learn and what is your view on ADR? And do you 

share the perspective Mr. DuBester talked about earlier? 

So, starting with you, Mr. DuBester. 

Mr. DUBESTER. Thank you, Senator. Well, first on the current 

backlog, again just to provide context, as we recognized, the first 

phase I would say is to go back to 2009. We were facing a backlog 

then of approximately 450 cases within the authority component; 
11 

and I think, as Carol mentioned in her opening statement, a critical action plan had been put into effect to deal with that; and as 

I mentioned in my statement, by the end of last calendar year not 

only had we eliminated that backlog but we had completely eliminated any over-age cases. 

So, the backlog that you are referring to now, of course, is the 

one created by the absence of a quorum this year. Any over-age 

case in my mind is a serious matter even if it is one. 

We have a number of cases now that have started to constitute 

a backlog. It is less than 100 in my opinion. I think you should 

know, though, we have been operating—but for the very serious 

matter of not being able to issue decisions absent a quorum—we 

have been operating in all other respects in a normal fashion; and 

within the authority component, that means within our three respective staffs, they have been considering cases, moving them 

along, moving them to me for consideration. 

And, every time I get a case on my desk, I vote on it, the point 

being that hopefully there is an efficiency in that so that with 

Carol and Pat, hopefully to be confirmed by the Senate, their work 

will be reduced or the authority’s work will be reduced because it 

will have progressed to the next stage. 

With respect to training, again two things about that. Training 

is very much an important part of what Carol and I have referred 

to as one of the 3Rs which is re-engagement although part of the 

training also involves our own people and our own staff. 

But with respect to training and what I would call the collaborative problem-solving kind of skills, we have done that in a variety 

of ways. We have done that just from our own ADR office based 

on contacts and communications we have directly with management reps and union reps in the Federal sector. 

We have also done that in concert with the National Council on 

Labor-Management Forums, which were created by the President’s 

Executive Order (EO) to create those and the idea of creating, as 

a complement to collective bargaining if you will, more effective 

and efficient government operations hopefully doing so in a way 

that provides for a more cooperative and collaborative relationship. 

So, a lot of training has been done as part of that initiative, and 

I think it is a very important part of our outreach, and we have 

done some of that on our own, as I said, and we have done some 

of that in concert with our sister agency the Federal Mediation and 

Conciliation Service. 

And, we have a lot of anecdotal but real stories within various 

agencies where their relationships have improved dramatically 

even in the last 4 years which creates for a more effective and efficient day-to-day operation of their missions. 

So, yes, that remains a very important part—— 

Senator PORTMAN. Let me just interject just for a second because 

I want to get to Ms. Pope and get to Mr. Pizzella. But do you have 

any hurdles right now to getting more ADR in place to doing the 

training, to try to avoid some of these frivolous lawsuits, to doing 

more administratively? What are the challenges you face? 

And then getting to Ms. Pope, are you supportive of this way to 

get more efficiency through ADR and administrative avenues rather than full adjudication where appropriate? 
12 

Mr. DUBESTER. Sure. Very quickly, two parts. I would say, as I 

mentioned, I think if there is a hurdle for us, it is making sure that 

we have adequate resources and that includes budgetary resources 

that we can continue to do, if you will, the outreach and external 

communications that we have done, and we are hopeful that we 

can continue to do that. 

The barriers we have are the barriers you have with any relationship. Again, we have participated with the National Council on 

Labor-Management Forums. Part of that Council has a problem 

resolution committee. Our General Counsel who has been introduced here, Julia Clark, has been kind of heading that along with 

a large group of management and union representatives. 

And, the barriers that you have, well, we have a lot of improvements in relationships and a lot of stories to show that. But we still 

have difficulties with issues of trust or communication which are 

key to any relationship, not just labor-management relations. 

But it takes time. It takes work making parties aware of the 

services that we have to provide training and working with them 

is a valued task but it takes work and we are prepared to continue 

that work. 

Senator PORTMAN. Thank you. Ms. Pope. 

Ms. POPE. I want to speak first to the backlog of cases and we 

have the experience of reducing and eliminating the backlog. Before, by way of contrast, there were 300 backlogged cases and we 

have a little over 100, 140 or so now. 

Part of the tools and processes that we implemented to address 

that will help serve us well with regard to the current backlog. So, 

we are ahead of the game, so to speak, with regard to revisions in 

our regulations that we implemented over the last 4 years that encourage, in the arbitration area, expedited decisions, also opportunities throughout for ADR. 

We have had the successful experience of using ADR in our negotiability cases and success in that area is not just resolving the entire case. In the negotiability area where the parties are bogged 

down in their contract negotiations, and sometimes it is a sad story 

to tell but in the Federal sector, negotiations for a collective bargaining agreement can go on for years. 

And, they come to us with a case where there are 30, 40 proposals where there are issues as to whether the parties have to negotiate at all, not whether they should agree but whether it is negotiable. And, we have been successful in implementing ADR and 

aggressive in going to the parties. 

I am wholeheartedly supportive of ADR. But one of the hurdles 

is it is voluntary, and we have been successful in employing a team 

of not just our ADR experts from our collaborative alternative dispute resolution office but teaming them with attorneys from each 

of the members’ staff who, dividing the proposals, the pending proposals in a case and each member office does research on a third 

of the pending proposals to work with the ADR official to provide 

the legal background and context to help the parties understand 

and agree during the ADR process where there is case precedent 

that their proposal has already been deemed negotiable or nonnegotiable. 
13 

That has really been a great team effort and that is the kind of 

work—— 

Senator PORTMAN. It helps expedite the process. 

Ms. POPE. Exactly. 

Senator PORTMAN. My time has expired. Mr. Pizzella, this means 

that Mr. Johnson is going to be really tough on you because you 

avoided both of us. 

But just to put emphasis on one point you made which was you 

changed the administrative rules regarding arbitration to have 

them work more flexibly, as I understand it, and speaking as one 

member and I think I probably speak for the other members, this 

is something we would want to be able to encourage you to do but 

also to assist you if there are any legislative hurdles or anything 

else we can do from our point of view. 

And, thank you Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. POPE. Thank you. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Portman. Senator Johnson. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHNSON 

Senator JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Pizzella, you can breathe a sigh of relief here. 

Mr. DuBester, I believe I heard Ms. Pope say that the backlog 

is a hundred, maybe 140. Is it as high as 114? What is the backlog 

right now? 

Mr. DUBESTER. I am not exactly sure. It depends on how you 

count but 140 might be just cases that are in our inventory. 

Senator JOHNSON. OK. 

Mr. DUBESTER. I would not consider all of those cases to be part 

of the backlog because they have not processed through in terms 

of our time lines, if you will, that make them even approaching 

over-age yet. 

So, I think the number is less than that but I think 140 is what 

is in our inventory but those cases still are not what I would call 

in the problem or danger zone. 

Senator JOHNSON. You mentioned as you have been the only 

member you still have been basically working the process of reviewing these cases and voting on them. How many are really in 

a state that is going to be ready when the authority is completed 

or you have a full membership can very quickly be adjudicated or 

settled? 

Mr. DUBESTER. Well, of course, part of that depends upon how 

quickly this body confirms my colleagues up here. 

Senator JOHNSON. I understand. 

Mr. DUBESTER. But right now I would say the number is approaching 50 and quite frankly I have a few cases on my desk to 

vote on so I am hoping it could be certainly in the 60–65 range. 

Senator JOHNSON. So, almost half could be really settled quite 

quickly, dispose of, and then you have a pretty reasonable backlog 

then. 

Mr. DUBESTER. I believe that is a fair characterization. Yes. 

Senator JOHNSON. I would kind of like to understand the process. 

I am new to really understanding what the FLRA is. So, can you 

talk about the priority of reviewing these cases? Is it just a first- 
14 

come-first-served basis? Are there particular issues that potentially 

rank a little higher in terms of your review, Ms. Pope. 

Ms. POPE. One of the things that we did when we had a backlog 

of 300 cases was to not just address it as first-in first-out, because 

as we attack the backlog, newer cases also became over-aged if we 

just work on over-aged cases. 

So, the process is such that when an appeal is filed with the Authority, it is assigned in rotation to one of the three members. Each 

of the three members has a legal staff that reviews the case, develops the legal issues, the research, and makes recommendations for 

their members vote and circulates that written information to all 

of the members for their votes. 

Sometimes cases are easily resolved; and when we were addressing a backlog, we tried to, in essence, look at the whole body of 

cases and not just wait until they came to a member but to assign 

a group of staff to look over all. 

Can we group cases with regard to legal issues? Can some, notwithstanding the fact that they are younger, go out so we can clear 

the decks for older cases? 

We really triaged cases and will continue to do so hopefully if I 

am confirmed, because it is important to look at the issues and not 

just the date it was filed. 

Senator JOHNSON. Obviously, working together as colleagues on 

the Authority, do you know each other pretty well? I would think, 

Ms. Pope, Mr. DuBester, each other pretty well. 

Ms. POPE. Over the course of the last 4 years we have gotten to 

know each other very well. 

Senator JOHNSON. What about Mr. Pizzella? 

Mr. PIZZELLA. I just met them in the last month. 

Senator JOHNSON. Brand-new. Could you just tell me what areas 

all three of you will basically agree on? Are there any areas where 

you may be in greater disagreement on? Let me start with Mr. 

Pizzella. 

Mr. PIZZELLA. Thank you, Senator. 

I certainly think the obvious thing which is to address the backlog. As long as there is a backlog, sort of an overhang on the 

Authority’s work, there will be continual questions from the customer community, from Members of Congress, as to why things are 

not being addressed. 

So, that would certainly be my immediate focus; and unlike my 

two potential colleagues here, they have had some years of experience at reviewing cases; and Ernie himself has had, I guess, 8 or 

9 months here where he has had the cases to himself. 

So, I am probably going to have to take a little time to get up 

to speed but I intend to make that the focus of my job there. 

Senator JOHNSON. Do you anticipate any philosophical differences? Are we going to see a lot of 2–1 decisions or is it going 

to be a lot of 3–0 decisions? 

Mr. PIZZELLA. If I can convince them to come with me, there will 

be a lot of 3–0 decisions. [Laughter.] 

But I do not really have a general answer to that. I will exercise 

my authorities and give my opinion, which is the charge I would 

have if being confirmed, and understanding that I can count and 
15 

sometimes it will be 2–1 one way and sometimes it will be 3–0 but 

I will have to live with whatever the decisions are. 

Mr. DUBESTER. But for context if I could just say this, in the 4- 

years or little less than 4 years that I served to the end of the last 

calendar year when we had a quorum, I think I participated in 

something like 700 decisions. And while I do not have the precise 

math, and while recognizing that we are all individuals and certainly that would apply to Pat, Pat is an individual, but I would 

say with the prior full complement of members that we had, we 

probably agreed on somewhere between 80 and 85 percent of the 

decisions that we issued. They were unanimous 3–0. 

I have talked to Pat enough to know that we root for the same 

sports teams. We have a lot of other things in common. I am confident that percentage is not going to change dramatically and I 

predict that is probably what it would be. So, the overwhelming 

majority would be unanimous decisions but there will be some 2– 

1 decisions. 

Senator JOHNSON. Is that because there is a fair amount of clarity in the law or is it because there is really a meeting of the minds 

in terms of the philosophy of the decisionmaking, Ms. Pope? 

Ms. POPE. I certainly have been guided by the 67 volumes of case 

law that have been developed by the Authority over the 34 years 

of implementing the statute; and if you start with the case law and 

applying the facts, then that is where there may or may not be a 

point of demarcation but there is a lot of clarity in the law after 

34 years. 

There are newer issues, legal issues that are unprecedented and 

that is where we look to private sector law and also develop newer 

case law for the Authority. 

So, it is not so much my philosophical bias, if you will, it is the 

case law that guides the decisionmaking. 

Senator JOHNSON. I am glad to hear that. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator. I very much appreciate the 

questions. 

Mr. Pizzella, you spent a number of years at the Department of 

Labor as Assistant Secretary. Can you relate how those experiences 

at Labor may help you as a member of this Committee of the 

FLRA? 

Mr. PIZZELLA. In a couple of fashions. So to speak, I was a customer of the FLRA from time to time because some of the disputes 

at the department if we could not resolve them at the department, 

they might work their way to the FLRA. 

The objective of an Assistant Secretary was always trying to 

solve any issues whether it is EEOC or labor-management ones in 

the department and address them early before they fester and then 

work their way up the food chain and then they need to leave the 

department to be decided by a body like the FLRA. 

In my time at the department, one of the things that I was engaged in was the three collective bargaining agreements that the 

department entered into with its employees; and I learned a great 

deal from that. I was administering those as an Assistant Secretary. I was not in all the negotiations but I was in constant con-
16 

tact with certainly the management team and I met with the labor 

team also. 

So, I had a little bit of a first hand experience from that side of 

the equation as to what really goes on in some of these disputes 

and negotiations; and I think that may help me have a little understanding of when an appeal comes to the FLRA as to what might 

have went on before it got there. 

Senator TESTER. I appreciate that. This is a question for all three 

of you. It deals with transparency. I want to know: Is it an essential part of leadership? If it is, how does transparency play within 

the FLRA? 

Ms. POPE. I think transparency is an essential part of leadership 

and we cannot be effective as the leaders of the agency without 

transparency. 

For us during the years that I was Chairman, we basically invited all of the career leadership in to collaborate on policy matters, 

pay and performance matters as well as representatives of the employees. 

We instituted new ways to communicate and we published our 

budget in a newly implemented weekly electronic newsletter that 

went out nationwide. We improved technology so that employees 

could also communicate with us. 

We set up an internal Web site for employees to ask questions 

anonymously. We also had a Web site where they could post questions. Transparency was also achieved through the first-ever town 

hall meeting where we met with employees and told them everything they wanted to know and we were responsive to questions 

that they posted on the message board anonymously. 

So, we have employed a number of tools. One of the things I 

learned is to be transparent you cannot communicate enough and 

also you have to listen. 

Senator TESTER. Mr. DuBester. 

Mr. DUBESTER. Well, I agree completely. Again as people who 

know me in any hat I am wearing, the key to successful labor-management relations whether you are a leader or not is communication; and a big part of communication is sharing information and 

that applies to the business internally within the agency of trying 

to share with managers as well as employees through whatever 

mechanism, what is going on, what the problems are, what your 

tough decisions are, and where you are going. 

But it is a two-way street. I mean, the other part of transparency 

is being open to receiving information from those groups as well. 

And, I think if they feel like you are transparent one-way, you are 

going to be receiving the input of your employees whether they are 

managers or employees. So that is important. 

For our stakeholders externally, it is very important and it is a 

big part of what the business is all about as a leader, as a mediator, to respect the rights of labor and management reps to choose 

and decide what information they want to share with the other 

side. I always encourage them to share information. To me that is 

the key to a successful relationship. 

That does not mean soliciting agreement, and people always get 

confused about the difference between what I would call an envi-
17 

ronment that fosters transparency and the sharing of information 

as opposed to sometimes you just cannot agree but that is OK. 

Senator TESTER. That is right. Mr. Pizzella. 

Mr. PIZZELLA. I am a strong believer in transparency; but in addition to our stakeholders, sometimes I know this from my experience in the Department of Labor and elsewhere, when agencies 

tend to talk about their stakeholders, sometimes they omit the biggest stakeholder of all which is the taxpayer. 

So, I would like to see us bring some transparency to there to 

make sure taxpayers are aware of what we are doing. It is very 

easy to be confined here inside the Beltway, especially with the Authority which jurisdiction is Federal employees and Federal agencies, but there is a taxpayer involvement. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you. 

Mr. Pizzella, you are an original member of the CHCO Council? 

Mr. PIZZELLA. Yes, sir. 

Senator TESTER. What did you learn about the similarities and 

differences facing Federal agencies in the realm of labor relations? 

Mr. PIZZELLA. I learned that some have absolutely no interest or 

problem or concern. They are usually the smaller agencies. 

Senator TESTER. Yes. 

Mr. PIZZELLA. And then, I learned that most of the agencies that 

I thought were complaining about the labor relations were ones 

who sort of avoided making, what I thought would be considered 

tough decisions. They did not want to spend a lot of time on labor 

relations. 

Their agencies had missions and directions from the Secretary or 

Administrator of an agency and sometimes labor relations would 

take a backseat, often it would take a backseat. 

The only time they would really get raised up the flagpole is 

when it impacts a decision that is trying to be implemented. So, 

outreach to agencies to make them understand the importance of 

resolving issues perhaps before they get too far down the pipeline 

I think would help agencies rather than have them frustrated. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you. Senator Portman. 

Senator PORTMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Pizzella, you got short shrift earlier but you got more air 

time recently. Just focusing on what you said a moment ago which 

is one of your stakeholders is the taxpayer and that leads me to 

question about your budget because, even though you are a small 

agency, in today’s budget environment, we looked everywhere, 

under every rock, for ways to find efficiencies and find ways to save 

money. 

I understand your direct obligations for fiscal year 2013 were al- most $25 million, $24.9 million and your request for next fiscal 

year is for $25.9 million. And, this is directed to all three of you 

because, Mr. DuBester, particularly you were very involved in that 

budget I am sure. 

So, first of all, I would like to get your insights on the personnel 

side. I assume that accounts for 80, 85 percent of your budget. A 

lot of agencies are going through some tough times right now freezing employee numbers, some reducing employees. You have asked 

for a 4-percent increase in personnel from 2013 to 2014 and you 

have talked about that today, the need for adequate resources. 
18 

This would be about a 15 percent growth in your staffing levels 

since 2009, as I look at it. So, my question for you, starting with 

you, Mr. Pizzella, since you talked about the taxpayer. Again, I understand you have not been through the budget process probably, 

at least you have not been in a position to have to go through it 

in the way your colleagues have. But do you think that increase is 

necessary given the budget climate that we are in? 

Mr. PIZZELLA. Senator, having served as Assistant Secretary 

while you were director of OMB I glad to see you have not changed 

a bit. 

Senator PORTMAN. Exactly. 

Mr. PIZZELLA. It really would be unfair of me to, I think, comment on the budget simply because having put together budgets 

before, I do not know what went into the formulation of the budget. 

Saying this, I am very proud of the time at the Department of 

Labor where, under Secretary Elaine Chao’s leadership we had, for 

8 years, we ended up with a smaller discretionary budget in our 

eighth year than the first year. 

And so, I am a bit of a skinflint and I will certainly try to conserve the taxpayer’s money as best I can. I would think that OMB 

probably has a mark as far as the rate of growth that they would 

allow agencies to pursue, if I remember the process well; and I 

would hope we live within that mark. I guess I would leave it at 

that. 

Senator PORTMAN. Yes. I was happy to see your background at 

Labor both because you were on the management side in some of 

these disputes that you are now going to be working on and so you 

have had some experience in disputes at least from the management side. But second, Secretary Chao was my favorite Secretary 

when I was at OMB. 

Mr. PIZZELLA. Mine too. 

Senator PORTMAN. Not just because she is a great lady but because the meetings were much more conducive to a negotiated settlement. You guys did a really good job of going through your individual departments and trying to figure out how you could find 

savings, particularly on the administrative side. 

So, you kept to your mission but you were able to find savings. 

Some other Secretaries who will remain unnamed because they are 

still very active in town and in politics, who were not quite as easy 

because they would come in at 10 or 20 percent above and we 

would have to spend a lot of time whittling it down. 

And frankly, you are in a better position to know where you can 

find those savings than OMB. So, my question I guess is at a time 

when we are looking at another year of flat domestic spending and 

you guys, and again, Mr. DuBester and Ms. Pope, are asking for 

an increase, is it absolutely necessary—is this something that you 

have spent time figuring out how you could avoid and just what are 

your thoughts on the budget? 

Mr. DUBESTER. Let me make three points, if I can. 

The first thing I want to say is the interest of the taxpayer, if 

you will, and not only because of the realities of the current environment we are in but at any moment in time I think our statutory 

directive to help produce more efficient, effective government oper-
19 

ations requires us to consider the interest of the taxpayer, if you 

would. 

I would say to you respectfully, and my guess is you probably 

could check it out, but I think not only hopefully up here on Capitol 

Hill but within the Office of Management and Budget, I think we 

have developed a reputation over the last few years of recognizing 

what it means to do more with less and doing a lot of creative 

things to accomplish our mission objectives while conserving money 

and I will just say that as just kind of a foundation question. 

The second point I would like to make, though, is just one of context because obviously the last couple of years have created a 

unique environment. But I think it is fair to say particularly because as you accurately suggested, Senator Portman, the human 

element, our staffing if you will, is not only the greatest expense 

but it is also the key to our mission performance. 

Only 10 years ago we had a third larger-sized workforce than we 

have today. I guess the point I am making just for context is that 

even before we hit the more severe budgetary environment of, say, 

the last couple of years, we had already downsized by about a third 

which I think is a meaningful context from recent years. And, that 

is a position where we lost some key people. 

And third, to make it more immediate, during this last year in 

particular where we have been facing, as everyone in the Federal 

Government has, the severe challenges of budgetary constraints, 

we left open a lot of critical positions. I want to say about 13 that 

we have just started to fill. 

And, you asked about barriers and my answer to the question 

about barriers going forward in terms of achieving what I hope you 

would agree are a lot of these successes externally with the labormanagement community in the Federal sector and my response 

was, having the adequate resources to continue to perform our mission related responsibilities. 

So, we had 13 vacancies in key areas and we only had, I want 

to say four, maybe even three, additional positions created for the 

fiscal year 2014 budget. And, I will tell you one of them is within 

our Office on Collaboration Alternative Dispute Resolution just because of the increased demands on that service. 

We are not sure, as I sit here with you today, that we are going 

to be able to fill that but that is part of the ask that we have that 

you are referring to which to me is very important and I think 

again has rippling, positive rippling effects throughout the Federal 

Government, not just for the FLRA internally. 

So, those are some of the tough issues and the choices that we 

are balancing. That is what I wanted to share. 

Senator PORTMAN. My time has expired but if the Chairman will 

indulge me just 1 second for Ms. Pope on the budget issue, any 

final comments. 

Ms. POPE. Just to add—— 

Senator PORTMAN. You can just say I agree or disagree. 

Ms. POPE. I agree with everything that has been said but I would 

like to add one or two additional points, and that is, during my tenure as Chairman, we started out in an effort to rebuild the agency 

and we had been decimated not only from a prior recission, but because we were not managed effectively to use our resources wisely. 
20 

But one of the things we did starting out was with the Presidential appointees in the room and representatives of the career 

employees to say we are not just going to go OMB to ask for the 

same amount of resources that we had before. 

We are going to look at what we can do differently with respect 

to our work processes and we developed a very good relationship 

with OMB to negotiate and get their understanding that we needed 

funds to rebuild, that our requests were not unreasonable because 

we had been decimated in our staffing. Performance was poor, and 

we needed additional monies. 

With the budget amount that we would receive every year, we 

would internally look to manage our resources in the most effective 

way. We have shared staff. We have detailed employees internally 

because we made a decision that our budget would not support filling all of the positions that were in our budget. 

We also look to use technology to better improve our customer 

delivery without the cost of travel, and we have also shared services other agencies whereas an agency budgeted at the 22, 23, 24 

million dollar level of the FLRA, we could not afford to keep up 

with technology in an environment where 80 percent of our budget 

is staff driven. 

We have partnered with the Veterans Administration, the Department of Defense to use their technology resources to build webbased manuals, webinars hosted by OPM on their dime to also save 

our resources so we would not impact adversely the delivery of our 

services. 

So, we continued to look for ways to use resources in an effective 

way and to not just come to the Senate and ask for more money. 

Senator PORTMAN. Thank you. I appreciate that response and I 

look forward to the FLRA having a full complement to be able to 

do its work and I thank the Chairman for giving me a little extra 

time here. I wish you all the best of luck. 

Mr. DUBESTER. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator TESTER. Thank you, Senator Portman. 

For the record, for Ms. Pope or Mr. DuBester, what was the peak 

number of employees that you guys employed? What was the highest member? 

Mr. DUBESTER. In history? 

Senator TESTER. FLRA, yes. And when was it? 

Ms. POPE. I would say almost in 2003 maybe was a peak year. 

We had about 200 employees if not more. 

Senator TESTER. And you have today how many? 

Ms. POPE. On board, 114. Well, we are funded at the 123 level. 

I think there are around 113 or 114. 

Senator TESTER. That 110, 113 level does not include the 10 or 

13 people that you are looking to fill positions right now. 

Mr. DUBESTER. Yes. I think our number is just a little bit higher 

than that but, no, I think at the end I think it is right. I think at 

our peak we actually were closer to, as Carol said, a little more 

than 200, probably about 220. 

What we are seeking authorization for in our fiscal year 2014 

budget is to get to 134. So, that would be still obviously almost a 

45 percent lower full-time equivalent authorization than we had. 
21 

Senator TESTER. I understand that. And you have a ton of really 

good employees obviously and some of them are here in the room 

today. I guess the question is when you drop that number of employees and assuming you would have had a quorum to work with 

and your numbers are in good shape, I mean, I think it says a lot 

about you and it says a lot about the employees that work in the 

agency. 

But the question is really how do you determine that sweet spot, 

because Senator Portman is right. We are looking under every rock 

for dollars. Anybody want to answer that? It is not an easy question to answer. How do you determine when enough is enough and 

you do not need anymore? 

Ms. POPE. The staffing levels certainly are part of the equation 

with regard to how we define timeliness of a case. 

Senator TESTER. OK. 

Ms. POPE. And what we set our time targets for. 

Senator TESTER. So, what are the parameters that you use to determine that. 

Ms. POPE. One hundred eighty days for cases before the Authority, certain cases by statute less, 120 days before the Office of the 

General Counsel, and various time targets in the other components 

and offices. 

Senator TESTER. In the days when you had a quorum, did you 

meet those standards? 

Ms. POPE. We did in the last 2 years. 

Senator TESTER. Good. That is good. That is a very good thing. 

First of all, I want to thank you guys for your testimony. I very 

much appreciate you taking the time out of your busy schedule to 

be here. I want to thank you for your willingness to serve. 

As I said in my opening statement, I hope that we can get you 

guys through the process as quickly as possible. I can tell you that 

I think all three of you will work together. I hope there are times 

when you disagree and I hope there are times you are going to 

agree and hopefully it is not a cantankerous environment and I do 

not think it will. I do not think your personalities indicate that at 

all. 

So, thank you for being here today and thank you for your testimony. 

Without objection, the hearing record will be kept open for 24 

hours for any additional comments and for any questions that 

might be submitted for the record. 

With that, this hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:41 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(23) 

A P P E N D I X 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 
79 
80 
81 
82 
83 
84 
85 
86 
87 
88 
89 
90 
91 
92 
93 
94 
95 
96 
97 
98 
99 
100 
101 
102 
103 
104 
105 
106 
107 
108 

Æ