ATTACHMENT

On or about May 13, 2003, and continuing, the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (PTO or Agency), by its agents and representatives, has committed an unfair labor practice under 5 U.S.C. 7116(a)(1) and (5) by its failing and refusing and continuing to fail and refuse to negotiate in good faith over all legally negotiable matters associated with the implementation of the Trademark Information System (TIS)/FAST (First Action System for Trademarks) Version 2.0.

On May 13, 2003, NTEU Chapter 245 requested to negotiate all legally negotiable matters associated with the Trademark Information System (TIS). In particular, the Chapter noted that the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office’s Revised Strategic Plan dated April 2003 stated that the Agency would develop and implement TIS in fiscal year 2004. The plan also noted that the project would be the “last phase in an effort to move to e-Government processes in Trademark Operations.” The plan further indicates that “[w]ith the implementation of TIS in 2004, examiners will be required to communicate electronically with applicants on all matters unless the applicant opts out of using electronic communications.” NTEU requested a clarification meeting. NTEU also asked that the Agency delay any implementation of the changes until negotiations and any related impasse procedures are complete. If any implementation occurred, NTEU requested that the Agency undo it until an agreement is reached. NTEU noted that by entering into negotiations, NTEU has not waived any rights to charge the Agency with premature implementation and other violations of the statute.

On May 20, 2003, Chief Negotiator David Dalke responded that the Agency had no duty to bargain over TIS because “the Agreement between the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office and the National Treasury Employees Union concerning the Trademark E-Commerce Law Office Program, dated October 23, 2002. covers the incorporation of technology into the electronic processing of applications pursuant to the E-government provisions of the strategic plan.” He concluded that since the matter was covered by an agreement, there is no duty to bargain and no need for a clarification meeting.

NTEU disagrees with the Agency’s position. On June 27, 2003, pursuant to the parties’ contract, NTEU filed its notice of intention to file an unfair labor practice charge over the Agency’s refusal to negotiate over TIS.

By letter dated July 30, 2003, Commissioner for Trademarks Anne Chasser announced that “in support of the 21st Century Strategic Plan, and to further our e-government initiatives, the Trademark Operation is preparing to introduce an enhanced version of the FAST file management system on November 2, 2003. FAST 2.0 will enable fully electronic file management and file review from pre-exam through registration, furthering our progress toward a “paperless” office.” Moreover, she noted that FAST 2.0 was known as TIS during the early design process.

On August 5, 2003, NTEU Chapter 245 requested to negotiate issues concerning FAST 2.0.

On August 20, 2003, Labor Relations Specialist Yolanda Owens responded, noting that FAST 2.0 and TIS are the same system. As such, she stated the Agency addressed this issue in its May 20, 2003 response to NTEU’s request to bargain over TIS and its position remains the same. She stated that the issue was covered by the E-Commerce agreement and that since it was covered by an existing agreement, there is no duty to bargain and no need to hold a clarification meeting.

NTEU disagrees with the Agency’s position. Therefore, on August 27, 2003, pursuant to the parties’ contract, NTEU gave notice of its intent to file an unfair labor practice charge over the Agency’s refusal to negotiate over FAST 2.0. The Agency’s failure to bargain and its continued failure to bargain over theses changes in working conditions is a failure to negotiate in good faith and an unfair labor practice under 5 U.S.C. 7116(a)(1) and (5).