AR 190-56
March 4, 2007
By James L. Coker
Steward
Local 54
Columbus, GA
Dear Union Brother and Sisters,
I need to know if any Department of the Army Locals have had any success with negotiating any part of this new regulation. We have filed an ULP against the agency for refusing to negotiate. Also, has amy Local negotiated in the past to have their BEUs grandfathered from taking a PAT. Thanks!
Post a response to this Blog
Hide Comments
|
Reader Comments
|
|
|
Author: Pete Kovac, of Local 2302, on
Feb 21, 2008 6:41 PM
There is a revision to the AR 190-56; the PAT (as they are now calling it) replaces the run with an obstacle course. The course is similar to as I call it a motorcycle safety course. Run in and out and around some cones. DEFCON is currently organizing a AR 190-56 steering group to look at the AR and come up with a plan of attack, I would urge everyone to not get caught up in the PAT portion of the Reg, but look at how this (Reg) will affect all aspects of the job. Yes I will agree that the PAT is a major concern and rightfully so but it is not the only issue that needs to be addressed.
Post a response to this comment
|
|
Author: Mark Gibson, of Local 1882, on
Mar 6, 2007 7:38 AM
Please contact me at gibsom@afge.org for information concerning AR 190-56. AFGE's Field Services Department has prepared guidance concerning these changes that will adversely affect many Army employees who are GS-083's and GS-085's.
Post a response to this comment
|
|
Author: Bruce R Storace, of Local 1658, on
Mar 14, 2007 5:59 PM
At Detroit Arsenal Warren, MI we are working on the latter.
Contact me at 586-306-7466
Bruce Storace
Steward L-1658
Post a response to this comment
|
Author: Richard Chappell on
May 11, 2007 5:01 PM
Our agency is doing physicals and going ahead with the implementation of the PAT. It will be a good thing to ensure everyone is fit to remain on the street.
Post a response to this comment
|
Author: James L Coker, of Local 54, on
Jun 7, 2007 1:11 AM
In the old reg., we had an annual medical exam to ensure that we were fit to work the street. For the last three years I performed my duties as a DA guard without the need of a PAT. So what has changed? Why does a DA Guard, who only works access control, need to be able to run 1.5 miles when he isn't allowed to leave his post to run after someone?
Post a response to this comment
|
Author: Aureliano Sifuentes on
Feb 13, 2008 1:54 AM
I am all for organized PAT/training. Our command does not provide company time for PAT training. We do it on our own time, and at our own expense. As a guard, I patrol the inside & outside of a building and its parking lots. Cameras are posted throughout the area. If I see a violation, I call the guard at the camera monitor room, who then zooms in on the site. The camera is faster than a 300 meter dash in 81 seconds or a 1.5 mile run in 17:30. Furthermore, many fellow guards are retired veterans with service connected disabilities. Some have been doing the job for ten or more years. They have been doing it with a tactical radio, pepper spray, and a well-maintained pistol. The running aspect discriminates against guards who are veterans with disabilities...it discriminates against aged veterans who can do the job without dashing or long distance running.
Post a response to this comment
|
|
Author: Glenn A Berkhimer on
Dec 3, 2007 7:30 AM
I'm s/t of NFFE/IAM local FL 2058 in Aberdeen Proving Grounds Maryland. We start negotiations in Jan. 08. We are looking for the same information as everyone else is. It apperas there is something else/new coming from the DA about adjustments to AR 190-56. If any local would like to compair notes please contact me at pappap3359@att.net.
Post a response to this comment
|
|
Author: melissa boggess on
Jan 14, 2008 8:35 PM
Please let me know if anything is happening with 190-56. My husband has been here as an 0083 for 15 years. Was hurt on the job and can no longer do the sit ups. His test is Friday and will immediately be taken out of his position and detailed out. He then will have 3 months to retake the test. If he fails that he will be fired. We started out all those years ago making very little money but wanted the security of the federal govt. He has made police officer of the year twice since the injury and promoted twice. They have already detailed out several men and know there is atleast 20 more that can't pass.
Post a response to this comment
|
|
Author: James W Starleper on
Jan 29, 2008 12:50 AM
I am with Aberdeen Proving Ground, Dept. of the Army 0083 series. We are currently negotiating the 190-56 with the 0085 series guards. I am V.P. FOP 116F. I am absolutely confused as to the rediculous content of the regulation. What is the rest of our country doing in reference to this reg? We need unity. At APG they are attempting to implement some of the regulation and skip others. It appears the 190-56 is not valid yet. Any information would be helpful.
James W. Starleper
V.P. FOP Lodge 116F
Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland
james.w.starleper@us.army.mil
Post a response to this comment
|
Author: Lance Pierce on
Mar 4, 2008 12:23 PM
AR-190-56
I was a Supervisory Police Officer GS-09 at Red River Army Depot since 2005. The new regulation 190-56, effected me also. even though i was management and ineligible for union reresentation I am against the new regulation. I began my police career as a military policeman,retired from a department in Ga. and have been in police work for about 30 years. I am also a disabled vet. I had to leave my position as the police supervisor because I could not do the run. There is no provision for a waiver in the regulation and I think there should me. Someone with that much experience should not be lost from the Dept of the Army because of a running event. Keep me posted on what happens
Thanks
Lance Pierce
Post a response to this comment
|
Author: Jeffrey L Matthews on
Nov 6, 2008 11:34 AM
well as was stated in the very begining of these threads, The army is now starting to impliment an expo's facto regulation of Ar 190 56 stating that all Police Officers who work for the Department of the Army if they had a break in service of more than two years prior to being hired by the Department will have to attend the DA Police Academy. They Our administration through imcom is demanding that single parents leave thier children for three months to attend the Military Police Force in Ft. Lenordwood Missouri.
1) 1st issue- An "Expo's Facto" regulation is by defenition a law and therefor unconstitutional.
2) 2nd issue- Since when did the DA police Academy superseed all State certifications. To be hired we had to show experience as to having a law enforcement background. Most of our Officers are certified through Pennsylvania and Maryland and even FLETC. But this isn't good enough.
3) CAN ANYONE SAY FOP or union has failed us
Post a response to this comment
|
Author: navy cop on
Sep 25, 2009 1:19 AM
very true....the only reason I have had any job offers it because of my LE background and certs and why is it no one knows who can qualify for a waiver....why in AR 150-96 it say they "WILL BE a list of approved academies" yet it can't be found.....why do those with the same training put it for the waiver and some get it while others don't?
Post a response to this comment
|
|
Hide Comments
|
Official Blogs
Public Blogs
|
