American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 2272 (Union) and Department of Justice, U.S. Marshals Service, District of Columbia (Activity) 



[ v02 p909 ]
02:0909(113)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:


 2 FLRA No. 113
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
 AFL-CIO, LOCAL 2272
 (Union)
 
 and
 
 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, U.S. MARSHALS
 SERVICE, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
 (Activity)
 
                                          Case No. 0-NG-101
 
                     DECISION ON NEGOTIABILITY APPEAL
 
    THIS CASE COMES BEFORE THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY (THE
 AUTHORITY) PURSUANT TO SECTION 7105(A)(2)(E) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE
 LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (5 U.S.C. SEC. 7101 ET SEQ.).
 
    THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 2272
 (THE UNION) IS ONE OF THE LOCAL UNIONS COMPRISING THE INTERNATIONAL
 COUNCIL OF UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE LOCALS, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
 GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO (THE COUNCIL).  IN 1976, THE COUNCIL
 NEGOTIATED WITH THE U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE (THE AGENCY), OF WHICH THE
 ACTIVITY IS A COMPONENT, A MASTER AGREEMENT COVERING A UNIT OF ALL
 ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES OF THE U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE NATIONWIDE.  THE MASTER
 AGREEMENT, WHICH IS STILL IN EFFECT ON AN EXTENSION BASIS, PROVIDES FOR
 NEGOTIATING LOCAL SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENTS "SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
 (THE) NATIONAL AGREEMENT . . . "
 
    DURING THE COURSE OF NEGOTIATIONS FOR A LOCAL SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT
 BETWEEN THE UNION AND THE ACTIVITY, THE UNION SUBMITTED FIVE PROPOSALS
 TO THE ACTIVITY CONCERNING CERTAIN SUBJECTS CONTAINED IN THE MASTER
 AGREEMENT.  /1/ IN RESPONSE, THE ACTIVITY DECLARED SUCH PROPOSALS
 "NONNEGOTIABLE SINCE THEY ARE ALL COVERED IN THE NEGOTIATED MASTER
 AGREEMENT." THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO
 (AFGE), ON BEHALF OF THE UNION, THEN FILED THE INSTANT NEGOTIABILITY
 APPEAL WITH THE AUTHORITY.  IN ITS STATEMENT OF POSITION, THE DEPARTMENT
 OF JUSTICE, ON BEHALF OF THE ACTIVITY, CONTENDS ESSENTIALLY THAT SUCH
 PROPOSALS "WOULD ESTABLISH A POLICY OR PRACTICE WHICH WOULD BE
 INCONSISTENT WITH, AND THEREFORE NOT AUTHORIZED BY, THE TERMS OF THE
 CONTROLLING MASTER AGREEMENT . . . " IN RESPONSE, AFGE STATES, IN PART,
 THAT " . . . WE DO NOT BELIEVE OUR PROPOSALS ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE
 MASTER AGREEMENT, (AND) THEREFORE THEY ARE NEGOTIABLE AT THE LOCAL
 LEVEL." FOR THE REASONS SET FORTH BELOW, THE AUTHORITY CONCLUDES THAT
 THE INSTANT DISPUTE IS NOT PROPERLY BEFORE THE AUTHORITY FOR RESOLUTION.
 
    AS INDICATED ABOVE, THE PARTIES ARE ESSENTIALLY IN DISPUTE CONCERNING
 THE THRESHOLD QUESTION AS TO WHETHER THE MASTER AGREEMENT, NEGOTIATED AT
 THE NATIONAL LEVEL, AUTHORIZES BARGAINING AT THE LOCAL LEVEL ON CERTAIN
 MATTERS CONTAINED THEREIN.  IN AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
 EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 1661 AND DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, BUREAU OF
 PRISONS, FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, DA