close
close

Immigration judges seek renewed union recognition

Immigration judges seek renewed union recognition

A union representing the national group of immigration judges argued this week that it should regain its status as the judges’ bargaining representative after the Federal Labor Relations Authority controversially decertified the organization in 2020.

In November 2020, the FLRA rejected its regional director’s findings and ruled that immigration judges in the Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review are management officialsstripping the more than 700 federal workers of their collective bargaining rights.

In intervening years, the National Association of Immigration Judges has maintained a smaller “meet and confer” relationship with EOIR leadership, where they are able to ask questions and provide comments on agency initiatives. But earlier this year, management issued a much-criticized — and since canceled —gag order prohibiting immigration judges from speaking in public even in their personal capacity.

At this week’s hearing at FLRA headquarters, the union presented a two-fold argument: first, that the 2020 decision to decertify the union was wrong, and second, that a series of regulatory changes governing asylum systems and immigration are still determined by immigration judges. as frontline workers, not managers. Meanwhile, the Justice Department has tried to argue that there have been no substantial changes to the working conditions of immigration judges since 2020.

FLRA Deputy General Counsel Bill Kirsner presided over the hearing, frequently asking witnesses whether a variety of policy or workplace changes affecting immigration judges had occurred because of the judges’ input. Invariably, they said the changes were made without the judges’ involvement.

Mimi Tankov, the president of the union, said Government Executive Thursday that she felt optimistic that the agency would find in favor of recertifying the union. Both parties have 30 days to file written briefs in the case, after which the FLRA Regional Director will have 30 days to issue a decision. Either party would then have the opportunity to appeal the decision to the FLRA’s three-member governing board.

Tsankov said his organization’s current informal status is no substitute for the ability to negotiate workplace policies and implement them.

“One thing that was very well developed in the (case) file and is emblematic of the experience that we had is that we had opportunities to engage with management, providing some insight into our areas of concern, but an opportunity to providing information in the form of asking questions and seeking answers from management can in no way be sufficient and cannot replace a strong labor-management relationship where we are equals sitting at a table,” said Tsankov. “We need the strength of the union behind us and the formality of that union role so that the comments we make have a much greater impact.”