Federal Uniformed Firefighters, Local F-169 (Labor Organization) and U.S. Army Armament Research and Development Command, Dover, New Jersey (Activity) 

 



[ v03 p317 ]
03:0317(49)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:


 3 FLRA No. 49
 
 FEDERAL UNIFORMED FIREFIGHTERS,
 LOCAL F-169
 (Labor Organization)
 
 and
 
 U.S. ARMY ARMAMENT RESEARCH
 & DEVELOPMENT COMMAND,
 DOVER, NEW JERSEY
 (Activity)
 
                                            Case No. 0-NG-73
 
                      DECISION ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE
 
    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 (THE STATUTE) (5 U.S.C. 7101 ET
 SEQ.).
 
                              UNION PROPOSAL
 
    REASONABLE OFFICIAL TIME WILL BE GRANTED TO UNION REPRESENTATIVES FOR
 PREPARATIONS FOR
 
    NEGOTIATIONS, AND IMPASSE RESOLUTIONS AND COUNTERPROPOSALS.
 
                    QUESTIONS HERE BEFORE THE AUTHORITY
 
    THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE UNION'S PROPOSAL IS INCONSISTENT WITH
 FEDERAL LAW (SECTION 7131(B) AND (D) OF THE STATUTE), AS ALLEGED BY THE
 AGENCY AND, THEREFORE, NOT WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN.  /1/
 
    CONCLUSION:  THE PROPOSAL DOES NOT CONFLICT WITH SECTION 7131 OF THE
 STATUTE.  ACCORDINGLY, PURSUANT TO SECTION 2424.10 OF THE AUTHORITY'S
 RULES AND REGULATIONS (45 FED.REG. 3513(1980)), THE AGENCY'S ALLEGATION
 THAT THE DISPUTED PROPOSAL IS NOT WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN IS SET
 ASIDE.  /2/
 
    REASONS:  IN AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO,
 LOCAL 1692 AND HEADQUARTERS, 323RD FLYING WING (ATC), MATHER AIR FORCE
 BASE, CALIFORNIA, CASE NO.  O-NG-183, 3 FLRA NO. 47, (1980) (HEREINAFTER
 MATHER), THE AUTHORITY HELD THAT THE FOLLOWING PROPOSAL, WHICH THE
 AGENCY ALLEGED TO BE OUTSIDE OF THE DUTY TO BARGAIN UNDER SECTION 7131
 OF THE STATUTE, WAS WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN:
 
    MANAGEMENT WILL ALLOW EQUAL OFFICIAL TIME TO THE UNION NEGOTIATION
 TEAM, AS ALLOTTED TO THE
 
    MANAGEMENT NEGOTIATION TEAM, FOR PREPARATION OF CONTRACT
 NEGOTIATIONS.
 
    IN THAT CASE, AFTER ANALYZING THE RELEVANT LEGISLATIVE HISTORY, THE
 AUTHORITY STATED AS FOLLOWS:
 
    THE DISPUTED PROPOSAL IN THE INSTANT CASE CLEARLY DOES NOT RELATE
 SOLELY TO THE STRUCTURE
 
    AND INSTITUTION OF THE LABOR ORGANIZATION.  RATHER, THE PROPOSAL
 SPECIFICALLY INVOLVES THE
 
    ALLOTMENT OF OFFICIAL TIME TO UNION NEGOTIATORS FOR THE PURPOSE OF
 PREPARING FOR CONTRACT
 
    NEGOTIATIONS WITH MANAGEMENT.  AS PREVIOUSLY NOTED, CONGRESS INTENDED
 THAT ACTIVITIES SUCH AS
 
    COLLECTIVE BARGAINING NEGOTIATIONS WHICH INVOLVE LABOR-MANAGEMENT
 CONTACTS, AS WELL AS
 
    PREPARATION FOR SUCH ACTIVITIES, ARE NOT "INTERNAL BUSINESS OF A
 LABOR ORGANIZATION" WITHIN
 
    THE MEANING OF SECTION 7131(B) OF THE STATUTE.  ACCORDINGLY, SECTION
 7131(B) WOULD NOT BAR
 
    NEGOTIATIONS UNDER SECTION 7131(D) (SEE