In the face of a proposed relocation from their longtime base in the nation’s capital, research employees at the USDA overwhelmingly voted to unionize.
Eligible workers at the National Institute of Food and Agriculture Tuesday voted, 137 to 2, to join the American Federation of Government Employees. Employees at the Economic Research Service voted 138 to 4 in favor of joining the same union on May 9. The unionization drive began after Secretary Sonny Perdue announced last August that both USDA agencies would be moved out of Washington.
“The Trump administration has been working overtime to undermine the invaluable work ERS and NIFA employees perform on our nation’s behalf. The proposal to relocate both agencies outside the nation’s capital would upend employees’ lives and could actually impede their work,” said AFGE president J. David Cox Sr. of the NIFA vote. “By organizing at the worksite, employees at NIFA and ERS are using their collective voice to demand a seat at the table when decisions are made that affect the important work they do on the public’s behalf. The workers have spoken with a resounding voice; now it’s time for the administration to listen.”
Perdue’s plan would move the two agencies to an as-yet-undetermined location far from Washington. Although sites in 35 states expressed interest in housing the USDA office, three finalists were announced in early May — the Kansas City region, several sites in Indiana, and the Research Triangle region of North Carolina. St. Louis, Missouri, and Madison, Wisconsin, remain in the running if the first three choices don’t pan out. The USDA has not yet announced its final pick.
The relocation would affect 253 of 329 ERS positions and 315 of 335 NIFA positions. Employees at NIFA report a “Hunger Games”-like environment as employees compete for the 20 positions that will remain in D.C.
Some critics of the relocation plan suggest it is politically motivated. A report in March featured ERS employees commenting anonymously that the relocation plan was retaliation for the agency’s research on the impacts of Trump administration policies on rural communities. Departures from the agency have more than doubled compared to a three-year average.
Perdue maintains that the decision to relocate ERS and NIFA is a financial one, intended to save taxpayer dollars and locate the agencies closer to the heartland.
Science and agriculture groups have spoken out against the relocation plan, arguing it would lead to an exodus of skilled staff, politicize the work of researchers, and needlessly uproot employees and their families. Several cheered the NIFA vote on Tuesday.
“USDA employees are rightly frustrated by the lack clarity and transparency throughout the relocation process,” said Rebecca Boehm, economist at the Union of Concerned Scientists of the NIFA vote. “Hopefully unionizing will give them a strong voice moving forward and allow them to get back to producing vital research for farmers and consumers.”
“We see this as another example that this whole relocation decision is just a bad one, given that the employees of NIFA felt the need to take this step,” said Nichelle Harriott, policy specialist at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition. “They are and we are concerned that not only their jobs are on the line but the integrity of all the scientific research that they do. We support their efforts on trying to at least get some type of redress moving forward.”
The relocation plan faces several obstacles before moving ahead. The USDA inspector general’s office is investigating whether Perdue has the authority to relocate the agencies. And in its draft appropriations bill for 2020, the House Agriculture Committee blocked the relocation from moving forward.