American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 1928 (Union) and Department of the Navy, Naval Air Development Center, Warminster, Pennsylvania (Activity)
[ v02 p451 ]
02:0451(62)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
2 FLRA No. 62
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 1928
(Union)
and
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL AIR DEVELOPMENT CENTER
WARMINSTER, PENNSYLVANIA
(Activity)
Case No. 0-NG-13
DECISION ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE
UNION PROPOSAL
(C)IVILIAN AND OFFICER PERSONNEL WHO ARE ENGAGED IN FOOT HAZARDOUS
OPERATIONS AND WHO ARE REQUIRED TO WEAR FOOT PROTECTION (SHALL) BE
PROVIDED WITH SAFETY SHOES WITHOUT CHARGE.
QUESTION HERE BEFORE THE AUTHORITY
THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE UNION'S PROPOSAL FALLS WITHIN THE DUTY TO
BARGAIN UNDER THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE
(THE STATUTE), OR WHETHER, AS ALLEGED BY THE AGENCY, THE DUTY TO BARGAIN
DOES NOT EXTEND TO THE PROPOSAL IN VIEW OF PUBLISHED AGENCY REGULATIONS,
PURSUANT TO SECTION 7117(A)(2) OF THE STATUTE. /1/
OPINION
CONCLUSION: THE AGENCY HAS FAILED TO SUPPORT ITS ALLEGATION THAT THE
UNION'S PROPOSAL FALLS OUTSIDE THE DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER SECTION
7117(A)(2) OF THE STATUTE. ACCORDINGLY, PURSUANT TO SECTION 2424.8 OF
THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS(44 FED. REG. 44740 ET
SEQ.(1979)), THE AGENCY'S ALLEGATION IS SET ASIDE. /2/
REASONS: THE PROPOSAL AT ISSUE ESSENTIALLY WOULD REQUIRE THE
ACTIVITY TO PROVIDE, WITHOUT CHARGE, SAFETY SHOES FOR EMPLOYEES REQUIRED
TO WEAR FOOT PROTECTION IN THE COURSE OF THEIR WORK. THE DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE (THE AGENCY) ALLEGES THAT NEGOTIATION OF THIS PROPOSAL IS
BARRED, UNDER SECTION 7117(A)(2) OF THE STATUTE, BY AN AGENCY REGULATION
(DOD INSTRUCTION 6055.2) /3/ WHICH, ACCORDING TO THE AGENCY, "REQUIRES
THAT COMPONENTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROVIDE ANY REQUIRED
PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE . . . (INCLUDING)
SAFETY SHOES FOR EMPLOYEES REQUIRED TO WEAR FOOT PROTECTION." THIS
PARTICULAR REGULATION WAS RAISED FOR THE FIRST TIME BY THE AGENCY IN ITS
STATEMENT OF POSITION TO THE AUTHORITY, IN RESPONSE TO THE UNION'S
PETITION FOR REVIEW. /4/ THE AGENCY'S SOLE ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT OF ITS
ALLEGATION IS AS FOLLOWS:
NO DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE AUTHORITY THAT NO COMPELLING
NEED EXISTS FOR DOD
INSTRUCTION 6055.2; NO UNION HAS RAISED A QUESTION AS TO THE
COMPELLING NEED FOR THAT
REGULATION; AND THEREFORE THE DUTY TO BARGAIN, PURSUANT TO 5 U.S.C.
7117(A)(2), DOES NOT
EXTEND TO THE MATTER AT ISSUE HERE.
IN THIS CONNECTION, THE AGENCY DOES NOT EXPLAIN WHY THE UNION SHOULD
HAVE BEEN EXPECTED TO ANTICIPATE A QUESTION REGARDING THE COMPELLING
NEED FOR THIS AGENCY REGULATION WHICH, AS INDICATED, HAD NOT PREVIOUSLY
BEEN RELIED UPON BY THE AGENCY. FURTHER THE AGENCY DOES NOT ADVERT TO
ANY CONFLICT BETWEEN THE PROPOSAL AND THE REGULATION. MOREOVER, THE
AGENCY DOES NOT MAKE ANY SHOWING WHATSOEVER TO SUPPORT A FINDING BY THE
AUTHORITY THAT A COMPELLING NEED DOES EXIST FOR THE REGULATION IN
QUESTION TO BAR NEGOTIATIONS ON THE UNION'S PROPOSAL.
THE DUTY TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH UNDER SECTION 7117 OF THE STATUTE
EXTENDS IN GENERAL TO MATTERS WHICH ARE THE SUBJECT OF AGENCY RULES AND
REGULATIONS WHICH ARE NOT GOVERNMENT-WIDE RULES AND REGULATIONS, TO THE
EXTENT THEY ARE NOT INCONSISTENT WITH FEDERAL LAW. /5/ WHEN THERE IS A
"COMPELLING NEED," HOWEVER, FOR PARTICULAR INTERNAL AGENCY RULES AND
REGULATIONS TO PREVAIL VIS A VIS PARTICULAR CONFLICTING UNION BARGAINING
PROPOSALS, SUCH RULES AND REGULATIONS WILL STAND AS BARS TO NEGOTIATION
ON SUCH PROPOSALS. THEREFORE, INTERNAL AGENCY RULES AND REGULATIONS,
SUCH AS THE DOD INSTRUCTION INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT CASE, MAY BAR
NEGOTIATIONS ON CONFLICTING COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PROPOSALS WHEN, UNDER
THE STATUTE, A COMPELLING NEED FOR SUCH A RESULT IS DETERMINED TO EXIST
BY THE AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO SUBPART B OF ITS RULES. /6/
HENCE, IN A PROCEEDING BEFORE THE AUTHORITY SUCH AS THE INSTANT CASE
INVOLVING AN ALLEGATION BY AN AGENCY THAT A UNION PROPOSAL IS NOT WITHIN
THE DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER SECTION 7117(A)(2) OF THE STATUTE BECAUSE OF
AN INTERNAL AGENCY REGULATION RAISED SPECIFICALLY FOR THE FIRST TIME IN
THE AGENCY'S STATEMENT OF POSITION, THE AGENCY BEARS THE BURDEN OF
COMING FORWARD WITH AFFIRMATIVE SUPPORT FOR ITS ASSERTION THAT THE
REGULATION IN QUESTION BARS NEGOTIATIONS BECAUSE, IMPLICITLY, A
COMPELLING NEED EXISTS FOR THE REGULATION. THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE
REQUIREMENT IN THE AUTHORITY'S RULES CONCERNING THE REVIEW OF
NEGOTIABILITY ISSUES THAT AN AGENCY'S STAT