Army and Air Force Exchange Service Base Exchange, Fort Carson, Colorado (Activity-Petitioner) and American Federation of Government Employees, Local No. 1345, AFL-CIO (Labor Organization) 



[ v03 p596 ]
03:0596(95)CU
The decision of the Authority follows:


 3 FLRA No. 95
 
 ARMY AND AIR FORCE EXCHANGE SERVICE
 BASE EXCHANGE, FORT CARSON
 FORT CARSON, COLORADO
 Activity-Petitioner
 
 and
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
 EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL NO. 1345
 Labor Organization
 
                                            Case No. 7-CU-10
 
                    DECISION AND ORDER CLARIFYING UNIT
 
    UPON A PETITION DULY FILED WITH THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 UNDER SECTION 7111(B)(2) OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT
 RELATIONS STATUTE, 5 U.S.C.  7101-7135, A HEARING WAS HELD BEFORE A
 HEARING OFFICER OF THE AUTHORITY.  THE AUTHORITY HAS REVIEWED THE
 HEARING OFFICER'S RULINGS MADE AT THE HEARING AND FINDS THAT THEY ARE
 FREE FROM PREJUDICIAL ERROR.  THE RULINGS ARE HEREBY AFFIRMED.
 
    UPON THE ENTIRE RECORD IN THIS CASE, INCLUDING A BRIEF FILED BY THE
 LABOR ORGANIZATION, THE AUTHORITY FINDS:
 
    THE ACTIVITY, ARMY AND AIR FORCE EXCHANGE SERVICE, BASE EXCHANGE,
 FORT CARSON, COLORADO, FILED A PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION OF UNIT (CU)
 SEEKING TO EXCLUDE 33 EMPLOYEES IN 12 POSITIONS AS SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES
 FROM THE UNIT OF EXCLUSIVE RECOGNITION REPRESENTED BY THE AMERICAN
 FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL NO. 1345, AFL-CIO (AFGE).  /1/
 AT THE HEARING IN THIS MATTER, THE PARTIES STIPULATED THAT 13 OF THE
 INCUMBENTS WERE SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES AND THAT 10 OTHERS WERE
 NONSUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES.  THE ACTIVITY AMENDED ITS PETITION TO DELETE
 THOSE POSITIONS AND INCUMBENTS FROM CONSIDERATION BEFORE THE AUTHORITY.
 ACCORDINGLY, THE ONLY DISPUTE IS WHETHER THE 10 REMAINING INCUMBENTS
 SHOULD BE EXCLUDED FROM THE EXCLUSIVE UNIT AS SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES
 UNDER SECTION 7103(A)(10) OF THE STATUTE, WHICH STATES:
 
    "SUPERVISOR" MEANS AN INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYED BY AN AGENCY HAVING
 AUTHORITY IN THE INTEREST OF
 
    THE AGENCY TO HIRE, DIRECT, ASSIGN, PROMOTE, REWARD, TRANSFER,
 FURLOUGH, LAYOFF, RECALL,
 
    SUSPEND, DISCIPLINE, OR REMOVE EMPLOYEES, TO ADJUST THEIR GRIEVANCES,
 OR TO EFFECTIVELY
 
    RECOMMEND SUCH ACTION, IF THE EXERCISE OF THE AUTHORITY IS NOT MERELY
 ROUTINE OR CLERICAL IN
 
    NATURE BUT REQUIRES THE CONSISTENT EXERCISE OF INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT,
 EXCEPT THAT, WITH RESPECT
 
    TO ANY UNIT WHICH INCLUDES FIREFIGHTERS OR NURSES, THE TERM
 "SUPERVISOR" INCLUDES ONLY THOSE
 
    INDIVIDUALS WHO DEVOTE A PREPONDERANCE OF THEIR EMPLOYMENT TIME TO
 EXERCISING SUCH AUTHORITY.
 
    ALTHOUGH CERTAIN OF THE REMAINING INCUMBENTS HAVE THE SAME JOB
 CLASSIFICATION AS THOSE STIPULATED BY THE PARTIES TO BE SUPERVISORS,
 THEIR DUTIES VARY BECAUSE OF THEIR LOCATION IN THE EXCHANGE AND THE
 AMOUNT OF INDEPENDENT AUTHORITY THEIR IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR ALLOWS THEM.
 AS UNIT STATUS DEPENDS ON ACTUAL DUTIES PERFORMED, EACH OF THE
 INCUMBENTS IS CONSIDERED SEPARATELY.
 
    JOYCE BERGEY, BRANCH 1210.  RETAIL SUPERVISOR (SHIFT) 5186P05-01
 
    THE RECORD INDICATES THAT BERGEY HAS WORKED IN THE POSITION AT ISSUE
 HEREIN SINCE SEPTEMBER, 1978.  HOWEVER, SINCE JUNE, 1979, HER POSITION
 HAS BEEN DESIGNATED "IN EXCESS" AND SHE CURRENTLY WORKS AS A REGULAR
 EMPLOYEE AND DOES NOT EXERCISE ANY SUPERVISORY AUTHORITY.
 
    BASED ON THE FACT THAT BERGEY DOES NOT PRESENTLY EXERCISE ANY OF THE
 INDICIA OF SUPERVISORY AUTHORITY UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION
 7103(A)(10) OF THE STATUTE, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT BERGEY SHOULD BE
 INCLUDED IN THE EXCLUSIVELY RECOGNIZED UNIT.
 
    DOROTHY HARTON, BRANCH 1104.  RETAIL SUPERVISOR (SHIFT) 5186P05-01
 
    HARTON HAS BEEN IN HER PRESENT POSITION JULY, 1979.  IN ADDITION TO
 HARTON THERE ARE THREE LOWER GRADED PART-TIME EMPLOYEES IN THE BRANCH.
 IN TERMS OF EXERCISING ANY SUPERVISORY AUTHORITY, THE RECORD INDICATES
 THAT HARTON HAS NOT FILLED OUT EMPLOYEES' EVALUATION REPORTS OR LEAVE
 SLIPS NOR HAS SHE RECOMMENDED THAT AN EMPLOYEE BE DISCIPLINED OR RECEIVE
 AN AWARD.  THE RECORD SHOWS THAT HARTON'S SUPERVISOR, MS. LEINTZ, A
 GRADE 7, DOES ALL THE INTERVIEWING AND HIRING OF NEW EMPLOYEES.  THE
 RECORD INDICATES FURTHER THAT THE ONLY RESPONSIBILITIES THAT HARTON
 EXERCISES IN REGARD TO OTHER EMPLOYEES ARE DIRECTING THEM IN THEIR DAILY
 ROUTINE DUTIES AND OCCASIONALLY COUNSELLING THEM BY REVIEWING THEIR JOB
 DESCRIPTIONS WITH THEM.
 
    THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT HARTON IS NOT A SUPERVISOR WITHIN THE
 MEANING OF SECTION 7103(A)(10) OF THE STATUTE, AS HER DIRECTING OF
 EMPLOYEES IS MERELY ROUTINE IN NATURE AND STANDING ALONE IS INSUFFICIENT
 TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CONSISTENT EXERCISE OF INDEPENDENT
 JUDGMENT IN CARRYING OUT SUCH AUTHORITY.  THUS, THE AUTHORITY CONCLUDES
 THAT HARTON SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE EXCLUSIVELY RECOGNIZED UNIT.
 
    CLARA BENSON, BRANCH 1108.  RETAIN SUPERVISOR (ANNEX) 5183P06-01
 
    THE RECORD ESTABLISHES THAT BENSON IS THE HIGHEST GRADED EMPLOYEE IN
 HER BRANCH, AND THAT HER SUPERVISOR, MRS. MCELHANNON, HAS NOT BEEN
 PHYSICALLY STATIONED AT BENSON'S WORKSITE SINCE JULY 1978.  IN DECEMBER,
 1978, BENSON WAS PROMOTED TO HER PRESENT GRADE 6 WITHOUT A CHANGE IN JOB
 TITLE.  THERE ARE TWO PART-TIME GRADE 2 SALES CLERKS AND A GRADE 2
 PART-TIME LABORER AT THE BRANCH.
 
    THE EVIDENCE INDICATES THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SEVEN OR EIGHT PEOPLE IN
 THE LABORER'S POSITION IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS.  BENSON TESTIFIED THAT
 SHE REMEMBERED THE DETAILS OF HER INVOLVEMENT IN ONLY THE LAST TWO
 HIRES.  THE EVIDENCE REGARDING THOSE TWO HIRES IS INSUFFICIENT TO SHOW
 THAT HER RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SELECTION WERE EFFECTIVE AND INVOLVED THE
 EXERCISE OF INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT, BECAUSE IN BOTH CASES SHE HAD ONLY ONE
 PERSON ON THE LIST TO RECOMMEND.  THERE HAS NOT BEEN A VACANCY INVOLVING
 THE SALES CLERKS POSITIONS ALTHOUGH ONE OF THE SALES CLERKS WAS
 TRANSFERRED TO THE BRANCH BY MCELHANNON.
 
    THE RECORD DISCLOSES FURTHER THAT A RECOMMENDATION BY BENSON TO
 MCELHANNON THAT THE SALES CLERKS POSITIONS BE UPGRADED WAS NOT FOLLOWED.
  ALTHOUGH PRIOR TO THE HEARING BENSON WAS GIVEN THE AUTHORITY TO
 SCHEDULE EMPLOYEES' WORK TIMES ON THE RARE OCCASIONS WHEN CHANGES ARE
 MADE, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO INDICATE THAT BENSON HAS EXERCISED THIS
 AUTHORITY.  BENSON HAS NOT HANDLED EMPLOYEES' GRIEVANCES NOR RECOMMENDED
 THAT EMPLOYEES BE DISCIPLINED, SUSPENDED, FIRED OR TRANSFERRED.
 
    BASED ON THE RECORD, THE AUTHORITY FINDS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO
 ESTABLISH THAT BENSON EXERCISES ANY OF THE INDICIA OF SUPERVISORY
 AUTHORITY WITH THE REQUIRED CONSISTENT EXERCISE OF INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT.
  THUS, THE RECORD DOES NOT ESTABLISH THAT BENSON IS A SUPERVISOR WITHIN
 THE MEANING OF SECTION 7103(A)(10) OF THE STATUTE.  THEREFORE, THE
 AUTHORITY CONCLUDES THAT BENSON SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE EXCLUSIVELY
 RECOGNIZED UNIT.
 
    GENEVA BJORVEDT, BRANCH 2107.  FOOD ACTIVITY FOREMAN 5682H04-92
 
    BJORVEDT HAS WORKED IN THIS POSITION AT THE IVY SNACK BAR OF THE
 ACTIVITY FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.  HER SUPERVISOR, EVA BLACKWELL, ALTHOUGH
 PHYSICALLY LOCATED AT THE FACILITY, IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ANOTHER BRANCH
 AND SPENDS SOME OF HER TIME OVERSEEING ITS OPERATION.  FURTHER, THE
 EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT BJORVEDT IS THE "SUPERVISOR" FOR THE EVENING SHIFT
 WHILE PHYLLIS GAVIN, A RECENT HIRE AND BJORVEDT'S COUNTERPART, IS
 RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DAY SHIFT.  THERE IS AN OVERLAP OF THE TWO SHIFTS.
 
    EXCEPT FOR ONE RECENT HIRING PRIOR TO THE HEARING IN THIS MATTER,
 BJORVEDT, GAVIN'S PREDECESSOR, AND BLACKWELL, JOINTLY INTERVIEWED AND
 CONFERRED ON THE HIRING OF NEW EMPLOYEES.  THE RECORD ESTABLISHES THAT
 BLACKWELL HAS DISAGREED WITH BJORVEDT'S RECOMMENDATION ON HIRING FOR THE
 DAY SHIFT, BUT HAS USUALLY GONE ALONG WITH HER RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE
 EVENING SHIFT.  FURTHER, THE RECORD ESTABLISHES THAT THEY JOINTLY MAKE
 UP THE EMPLOYEES' WORK SCHEDULES.  BJORVEDT HAS ORALLY REPRIMANDED AN
 EMPLOYEE AFTER BEING TOLD TO DO SO BY BLACKWELL.  SHE HAS RECOMMENDED
 THE FIRING OF AN EMPLOYEE, BUT IT WAS NOT EFFECTIVE.  FINALLY, THE
 RECORD INDICATES THAT ABOUT A WEEK BEFORE THE HEARING BJORVEDT
 RECOMMENDED AN EMPLOYEE FOR A PROFICIENCY AWARD AFTER CONFERRING WITH
 BLACKWELL.  THERE IS NO EVIDENCE WHETHER THIS RECOMMENDATION WAS
 EFFECTIVE.  IT APPEARS FROM THE EVIDENCE THAT, EXCEPT FOR THE ONE RECENT
 HIRING, EVEN WHERE BJORVEDT'S RECOMMENDATIONS WERE EFFECTIVE THEY DID
 NOT INVOLVE THE USE OF INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT, NOR WAS INDEPENDENT
 JUDGMENT INVOLVED WHEN SHE EXERCISED ANY OF THE OTHER INDICIA OF
 SUPERVISORY AUTHORITY UNDER SECTION 7103(A)(10) OF THE STATUTE.
 
    AS NOTED, THE STATUTE DEFINES A "SUPERVISOR" AS AN EMPLOYEE WITH
 CERTAIN AUTHORITY, THE EXERCISE OF WHICH "REQUIRES THE CONSISTENT
 EXERCISE OF INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT . .  . ." THUS, WHEN ASSESSING AN
 INDIVIDUAL'S PERFORMANCE IN REGARD TO TASKS INDICATING SUPERVISORY
 AUTHORITY, THE EVIDENCE MUST ESTABLISH THE EXERCISE BY THE EMPLOYEE OF
 INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT, AND IT MUST ESTABLISH THAT INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT
 IS A CONSISTENT FEATURE OF THE EMPLOYEE'S PERFORMANCE OF SUCH TASKS.
 UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES HEREIN, IT IS CONCLUDED THAT BJORVEDT'S SINGLE
 EXERCISE OF THE AUTHORITY TO HIRE, WITH INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT, IS
 INSUFFICIENT TO ESTABLISH A CONSISTENT EXERCISE OF INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT
 WITH RESPECT TO THE PERFORMANCE OF SUPERVISORY DUTIES.  ACCORDINGLY, THE
 AUTHORITY FINDS THAT BJORVEDT SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE EXCLUSIVELY
 RECOGNIZED UNIT.
 
    MARIA PILUSO, BRANCH 2106.  FOOD ACTIVITY FOREMAN 5682H04-91
 
    PILUSO HAS WORKED IN HER PRESENT POSITION AT THE EXCHANGE SINCE
 NOVEMBER, 1977.  HER SUPERVISOR, MR. SOUSA, WORKS AT THE BRANCH IN THE
 MORNING AND PILUSO WORKS THE AFTERNOON SHIFT WHILE SOUSA GOES TO THE
 OTHER BRANCHES THAT ARE UNDER HIS JURISDICTION.  PILUSO HAS TWO
 EMPLOYEES, A JANITOR AND A COOK, WORKING UNDER HER IN THE AFTERNOON.
 THE EVIDENCE INDICATES THAT THREE WEEKS BEFORE THE HEARING, PILUSO
 INTERVIEWED APPLICANTS FOR THE COOK'S POSITION AND, AFTER A DISCUSSION
 WITH SOUSA, RECOMMENDED THE HIRING OF THE COOK.  THE RECORD ESTABLISHES
 THAT PILUSO HAS NEVER HANDLED A GRIEVANCE NOR RECOMMENDED EMPLOYEES BE
 DISCIPLINED, FIRED, TRANSFERRED OR PROMOTED.  SHE SCHEDULES EMPLOYEE'S
 LEAVE, BUT SHE CAN ONLY CHANGE AN EMPLOYEES' VACATION LEAVE WITH SOUSA'S
 APPROVAL.
 
    THE AUTHORITY FINDS, ALTHOUGH PILUSO RECOMMENDED THE HIRE FOR THE
 COOK'S POSITION THE EVIDENCE DOES NOT ESTABLISH THAT SHE DID SO USING
 INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT BUT INSTEAD THAT HER RECOMMENDATION WAS MERELY
 ROUTINE IN NATURE.  THUS, AS THE EVIDENCE IS INSUFFICIENT TO ESTABLISH
 THE CONSISTENT EXERCISE OF INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT BY PILUSO WHILE
 PERFORMING THE ABOVE FUNCTIONS, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT PILUSO SHOULD
 BE INCLUDED IN THE EXCLUSIVELY RECOGNIZED UNIT.
 
    GRACETTA KAMOHALII, BRANCH 2112.  FOOD ACTIVITY FOREMAN 5682H04-92
 
    KAMOHALII HAS WORKED IN HER PRESENT POSITION AT THE MOUNTAINEER SNACK
 BAR OF THE ACTIVITY FOR FIVE YEARS.  SHE DIRECTS THE EVERYDAY DUTIES OF
 ONE FULL-TIME AND TWO PART-TIME EMPLOYEES AT THE BRANCH AND DETERMINES
 THE HOURS OF THE PART-TIMERS.  SHE HAS ALSO ORALLY REPRIMANDED AN
 EMPLOYEE FOR NOT DOING HIS JOB.  ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS SHE HAS
 INTERVIEWED APPLICANTS FOR POSITIONS AND EFFECTIVELY RECOMMENDED
 SELECTION, ALTHOUGH ON SOME OCCASIONS HER SUPERVISOR, SOUSA, HAS BEEN
 INVOLVED IN THE SELECTION PROCESS AT HER INVITATION.  KAMOHALII HAS NOT
 EXERCISED AUTHORITY TO RECOMMEND SUSPENDING, FIRING, TRANSFERRING OR
 PROMOTING AN EMPLOYEE.
 
    THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT KAMOHALII IS A SUPERVISOR WITHIN THE MEANING
 OF SECTION 7103(A)(10) OF THE STATUTE BASED ON THE FACT THAT KAMOHALII
 HAS EFFECTIVELY RECOMMENDED THE SELECTION OF APPLICANTS ON SEVERAL
 OCCASIONS AND CONSISTENTLY DETERMINES THE HOURS OF THE PART-TIMERS.
 THUS, THE AUTHORITY SHALL ORDER THAT KAMOHALII BE EXCLUDED FROM THE
 EXCLUSIVELY RECOGNIZED UNIT.
 
    BEATRICE HUBER, BRANCH 2102.  FOOD ACTIVITY FOREMAN 5682H04-92
 
    HUBER WAS PROMOTED TO A GRADE 4 FROM A GRADE 3 A FEW WEEKS BEFORE THE
 HEARING, APPARENTLY WITHOUT A CHANGE IN POSITION.  HER SUPERVISOR, MRS.
 MCGHEE, THE MANAGER OF THE BRANCH, RUNS THE DAY-TO-DAY OPERATION OF THE
 BRANCH AND ARRIVES FIRST AT 5:30 A.M. AND LEAVES AT 2:00 P.M.  HUBER
 COMES IN AT 9:30 A.M. AND WORKS UNTIL 6:00 P.M.  HUBER HAS THREE
 EMPLOYEES WORKING UNDER HER IN THE AFTERNOON.  THE EVIDENCE ESTABLISHES
 THAT THE SUPERVISOR, MCGHEE, GETS REPLACEMENTS TO FILL IN AND TO REPLACE
 ABSENT EMPLOYEES.  FURTHER, MCGHEE OFTEN INTERVIEWS AND HIRES NEW
 EMPLOYEES.  THREE WEEKS BEFORE THE HEARING HUBER INTERVIEWED APPLICANTS
 FOR A POSITION AND TURNED IN THE REFERRAL SLIPS DIRECTLY TO PERSONNEL.
 IN 1978, HUBER INTERVIEWED AND EFFECTIVELY RECOMMENDED A HIRE.  FURTHER,
 ALTHOUGH HUBER HAS NOT RECOMMENDED THAT AN EMPLOYEE BE PROMOTED OR
 NOMINATED FOR AN AWARD, SHE HAS EFFECTIVELY RECOMMENDED THAT AN EMPLOYEE
 BE FIRED DURING HIS PROBATIONARY PERIOD AFTER CONFERRING WITH MCGHEE.
 
    THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THE HIRING, AND THE EFFECTIVE RECOMMENDATION
 FOR DISCHARGE AFTER CONFERRING WITH HER SUPERVISOR, DEMONSTRATES A
 CONSISTENT EXERCISE OF INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THE
 SUPERVISORY INDICIA CONTAINED IN SECTION 7103 OF THE STATUTE.  THUS, THE
 AUTHORITY CONCLUDES THAT HUBER IS A SUPERVISOR AND SHOULD BE EXCLUDED
 FROM THE EXCLUSIVELY RECOGNIZED UNIT.
 
    MARY TOTH, BRANCH 1001.  CASHIER CHECKER SUPERVISOR 5081P04-91
 
    TOTH FOR TEN MONTHS PRIOR TO THE HEARING HAS SUPERVISED 15 REGULAR
 AND 5 INTERMITTENT EMPLOYEES IN THE MAIN EXCHANGE'S FRONT CHECK-OUT
 DEPARTMENT AS A GRADE 4.  ALL THE EMPLOYEES UNDER HER ARE GRADE 2'S
 EXCEPT FOR A GRADE 3 LEADER.  THE RECORD INDICATES THAT TOTH'S
 DEPARTMENT EXPERIENCES A HIGH TURN-OVER IN PERSONNEL AND THAT TOTH DOES
 ALL THE INTERVIEWING OF APPLICANTS FOR THESE VACANCIES, DOES THE PAPER
 WORK INVOLVED, AND FORWARDS THE PAPERS DIRECTLY TO THE PERSONNEL OFFICE
 FOR PROCESSING.  TOTH'S SUPERVISOR, OLIVE, SIGNS OFF ON THE HIRING
 REFERRAL SLIPS.  NONE OF TOTH'S SELECTIONS HAS BEEN REJECTED.
 
    WITH THE CONCURRENCE OF HER SUPERVISOR, TOTH HAS TERMINATED ONE
 PROBATIONARY EMPLOYEE.  THE EVIDENCE ALSO INDICATES THAT SHE HAS
 CRITICIZED EMPLOYEES ON THEIR COUNSELLING CARDS CONCERNING THEIR WORK
 PERFORMANCE.  FURTHER, ALTHOUGH REGULAR WEEKLY SCHEDULES DO NOT CHANGE,
 TOTH ASSIGNS EMPLOYEES TO GIVEN WORK STATIONS.  TOTH HAS NOT RECOMMENDED
 AN EMPLOYEE FOR PROMOTION OR FOR AN AWARD.
 
    THE AUTHORITY FINDS, BASED ON THE RECORD HEREIN, THAT TOTH IS A
 SUPERVISOR WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 7103(A)(10) OF THE STATUTE, AS
 SHE EFFECTIVELY RECOMMENDS HIRE AND ASSIGNMENT OF WORK, EACH WITH THE
 CONSISTENT EXERCISE OF INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT.  THUS, THE AUTHORITY SHALL
 ORDER THAT TOTH BE EXCLUDED FROM THE EXCLUSIVELY RECOGNIZED UNIT.
 
    BEVERLY CONNERS, BRANCH 1001.  OPERATIONS CLERK (RETAIL) SUPERVISOR
 5132106-91
 
    CONNERS IS ASSIGNED TO THE OFFICE THAT KEEPS THE ACCOUNTING AND
 BOOKKEEPING RECORDS FOR THE ACTIVITY.  FOUR GRADE 4 OPERATION CLERKS AND
 GRADE 3 GENERAL CLERKS WORK UNDER HER.  CONNERS REPORTS DIRECTLY TO THE
 EXCHANGE'S OPERATIONS MANAGER, DIXON.  CONNERS HAS, ON OCCASION,
 EFFECTIVELY RECOMMENDED THAT A CLERK CHANGE DESKS (ACCOUNTS) WHEN A
 VACANCY HAS OCCURRED.  THE EVIDENCE ALSO SHOWS THAT CONNERS SPENDS ABOUT
 50% OF HER TIME DIRECTING OTHER EMPLOYEES AND INSPECTING THEIR WORK.
 THE RECORD INDICATES THAT WHEN A VACANCY OCCURS IN THE OFFICE, CONNERS
 INTERVIEWS THE APPLICANTS AND RECOMMENDS TO HER SUPERVISOR A PERSON FOR
 SELECTION.  WHILE AN ISSUE WAS RAISED AS TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF HER
 RECOMMENDATIONS THE RECORD REFLECTS THAT OF THE FIVE APPLICANTS SHE
 RECOMMENDED FOR SELECTION, THREE WERE HIRED.  CONNERS CAN APPROVE LEAVE
 ON A ONE-DAY BASIS ALTHOUGH SHE MUST GET DIXON'S APPROVAL FOR ANY OTHER
 TYPE OF LEAVE.
 
    THE AUTHORITY FINDS, BASED ON THE RECORD HEREIN, THAT CONNERS IS A
 SUPERVISOR WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 7103(A)(10) OF THE STATUTE BY
 REASON OF THE CONSISTENT EXERCISE OF INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT IN DIRECTING
 AND INSPECTING THE WORK OF THE OTHER EMPLOYEES AT THE BRANCH.  THUS, THE
 AUTHORITY SHALL ORDER THAT CONNERS BE EXCLUDED FROM THE EXCLUSIVELY
 RECOGNIZED UNIT.
 
    IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE UNIT SOUGHT TO BE CLARIFIED HEREIN, FOR
 WHICH THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL NO. 1345,
 AFL-CIO, WAS CERTIFIED ON AUGUST 13, 1971, BE AND HEREBY IS, CLARIFIED
 BY EXCLUDING FROM SAID UNIT GRACETTA KAMAHALII, BRANCH 2112, FOOD
 ACTIVITY FOREMAN 5682H04-92;  BEATRICE HUBER, BRANCH 2102, FOOD ACTIVITY
 FOREMAN 5682H04-92;  MARY TOTH, BRANCH 1001, CASHIER CHECKER SUPERVISOR
 5081P04-91;  AND BEVERLY CONNERS, BRANCH 1001, OPERATIONS CLERK (RETAIL)
 SUPERVISOR, 5132A06-91.
 
    DATED, WASHINGTON, D.C., JULY 10, 1980
 
                       RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN
 
                       HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER
 
                        LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER
 
                     FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
    /1/ THE AFGE WAS CERTIFIED AS THE EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE IN THE
 FOLLOWING UNIT ON AUGUST 13, 1971:
 
    INCLUDED:  ALL REGULAR FULL-TIME AND REGULAR PART-TIME HOURLY PAY
 PLAN (HPP) AND COMMISSION
 
    PAY PLAN (CPP) NONSUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES EMPLOYED BY THE FORT CARSON
 POST EXCHANGE, COLORADO,
 
    AND THE PUEBLO ARMY DEPOT, PUEBLO, COLORADO.
 
    EXCLUDED:  TEMPORARY FULL-TIME, TEMPORARY PART-TIME AND CASUAL
 EMPLOYEES, MANAGERIAL
 
    EXECUTIVE AND SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES, MANAGERIAL TRAINEES, EMPLOYEES
 ENGAGED IN PERSONNEL WORK
 
    IN OTHER THAN A PURELY CLERICAL CAPACITY, PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES,
 GUARDS, WATCHMEN AND
 
    EMPLOYEES OF THE COLORADO EXCHANGE REGION.
 
                          CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
 
    COPIES OF THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS
 AUTHORITY IN THE SUBJECT PROCEEDING HAVE THIS DAY BEEN MAILED