American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1331, AFL-CIO (Union) and Department of Agriculture, Science and Education Administration, Eastern Regional Research Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Activity)

 



[ v04 p8 ]
04:0008(2)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:


 04 FLRA No. 2
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
 EMPLOYEES, AFL-CI0, LOCAL 1331
 (Union)
 
 and
 
 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
 SCIENCE AND EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION,
 EASTERN REGIONAL RESEARCH CENTER,
 PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA
 (Activity)
 
                                            Case No. 0-NG-175
 
                      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
 
                           RESEARCH MANUSCRIPTS
 
    THIS IS A MULTIPART AND DETAILED PROPOSAL WHICH ESTABLISHES HOW THE
 ACTIVITY'S RESEARCH MANUSCRIPTS ARE TO BE PRODUCED.  (THE PROPOSAL IS
 SET FORTH IN ITS ENTIRETY IN APPENDIX A.)
 
                    QUESTION HERE BEFORE THE AUTHORITY
 
    THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE UNION'S PROPOSAL VIOLATES THE AGENCY'S
 RIGHT TO ASSIGN WORK UNDER SECTION 7106(A)(2)(B) OF THE STATUTE, AS
 ALLEGED BY THE AGENCY.  /1/
 
                                  OPINION
 
    CONCLUSION:  THE UNION'S PROPOSAL VIOLATES THE AGENCY'S RIGHT TO
 ASSIGN WORK UNDER SECTION 7106(A)(2)(B) OF THE STATUTE.  ACCORDINGLY,
 PURSUANT TO SECTION 2424.10 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS (5
 CFR 2424.10), THE AGENCY'S ALLEGATION THAT THE PROPOSAL IS NOT WITHIN
 THE DUTY TO BARGAIN IS SUSTAINED.  IN REACHING ITS DECISION, THE
 AUTHORITY, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2424.8 OF THE AUTHORITY'S
 REGULATIONS, DID NOT CONSIDER THE ADDITIONAL STATEMENT OF POSITION FILED
 BY THE AGENCY, WITHOUT APPROVAL, SUBSEQUENT TO THE UNION'S RESPONSE TO
 THE ORIGINAL AGENCY STATEMENT.
 
    REASONS:  ACCORDING TO THE RECORD IN THE CASE, THE ACTIVITY IS
 RESPONSIBLE FOR DEVELOPING NEW AND IMPROVED USES AND TECHNIQUES FOR THE
 PROCESSING AND HANDLING OF FOOD AND FIBRE PRODUCTS.  IN THIS REGARD, THE
 PREPARATION AND PUBLICATION OF RESEARCH MANUSCRIPTS IS THE PRIMARY MEANS
 OF CARRYING OUT SUCH RESPONSIBILITY.
 
    THE UNION'S PROPOSAL SEEKS TO PRESCRIBE, IN ELABORATE DETAIL, THE
 SPECIFIC DUTIES THAT PARTICULAR AGENCY PERSONNEL WILL PERFORM IN THE
 PREPARATION OF THE MANUSCRIPTS.  FOR EXAMPLE, THE PROPOSAL PROVIDES THE
 AUTHOR OF A MANUSCRIPT WILL COMPLETE THE FIRST DRAFT ACCORDING TO THE
 FORMAT AND STYLE HE OR SHE SELECTS, THEN CHOOSE INDIVIDUAL(S) WHO WILL
 REVIEW THE MANUSCRIPT AND FINALLY DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT TO REVISE THE
 MANUSCRIPT ACCORDING TO THE REVIEWER'S COMMENTS.  FURTHER, THE AUTHOR
 MUST REQUEST THE LABORATORY CHIEF TO ORDER THE LINEN TRACINGS AND GLOSSY
 PRINTS THAT WILL ACCOMPANY THE MANUSCRIPT, WITHIN TWO DAYS OF ITS
 SUBMISSION TO THE LABORATORY SECRETARY, AND THE LABORATORY CHIEF IS
 REQUIRED TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THE DRAFT OF THE MANUSCRIPT WITHIN TEN
 DAYS OF RECEIPT.  THE PROPOSAL ALSO SEEKS TO PRESCRIBE THE DUTIES WITH
 RESPECT TO MANUSCRIPTS OF THE LABORATORY SECRETARY, THE PEER REVIEWERS,
 THE RESEARCH LEADER, THE TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS EDITOR, AND THE CENTER
 DIRECTOR.  MOREOVER, SOME OF THESE POSITIONS ARE OUTSIDE THE BARGAINING
 UNIT.
 
    UNDER THE LANGUAGE OF SECTION 7106(A)(2)(B) OF THE STATUTE, IT IS
 CLEAR THAT MANAGEMENT HAS THE RIGHT TO ASSIGN WORK.  /2/ FURTHER, THE
 RIGHT TO ASSIGN WORK INCLUDES THE DISCRETION AS TO THE PARTICULAR
 EMPLOYEE TO WHOM THE WORK WILL BE ASSIGNED.  /3/ THE UNION'S PROPOSAL,
 HOWEVER, WOULD PRESCRIBE THE ASSIGNMENT OF SPECIFIC DUTIES TO PARTICULAR
 EMPLOYEES AND WOULD PRECLUDE MANAGEMENT FROM ASSIGNING THOSE DUTIES TO
 OTHER EMPLOYEES.  /4/ THUS, SINCE THE PROPOSAL WOULD ELIMINATE THE
 DISCRETION INHERENT IN MANAGEMENT'S RIGHT TO ASSIGN WORK, IT CONFLICTS
 WITH SECTION 7106(A)(2)(B) OF THE STATUTE.  ACCORDINGLY, THE AGENCY'S
 ALLEGATION THAT THE UNION'S PROPOSAL IS NOT WITHIN THE DUTY TO BARGAIN
 IS SUSTAINED.  IN VIEW OF THE AUTHORITY'S DECISION HEREIN, IT IS
 UNNECESSARY TO REACH THE AGENCY'S ADDITIONAL ALLEGATIONS CONCERNING THE
 NEGOTIABILITY OF THE UNION'S PROPOSAL.
 
    ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., AUGUST 12, 1980
 
                       RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN
 
                       HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER
 
                        LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER
 
                     FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
                                APPENDIX A
 
                              ARTICLE . . .
 
                           RESEARCH MANUSCRIPTS
 
    SECTION 1.
 
    THE CENTER AND THE UNION RECOGNIZE THAT THE CAREER DEVELOPMENT OF
 RESEARCH PERSONNEL DEPENDS ON THE NUMBER OF THEIR PUBLICATIONS WHICH ARE
 ACCEPTED BY SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL JOURNALS.  SUCH PUBLICATIONS ARE
 IMPORTANT BOTH TO THE EMPLOYEE'S REPUTATION AS A RESEARCH SCIENTIST AND
 TO THE EMPLOYEE'S CAREER AS A FEDERAL EMPLOYEE.  THE CENTER WILL
 ENCOURAGE ALL PERSONNEL TO WORK TOWARD INCREASING AND IMPROVING THE
 SCIENTIFIC OUTPUT OF THE CENTER.  THE CENTER AGREES THAT RESEARCH
 MANUSCRIPTS PRODUCED AT THE CENTER WILL BE PROCESSED ACCORDING TO THE
 PROCEDURES STATED IN SECTION (3) OR (5) OF THIS ARTICLE.
 
    SECTION 3.  RESEARCH MANUSCRIPTS PREPARED AT ERRC WHICH BEAR THE NAME
 OF A MEMBER OF THE BARGAINING UNIT WILL BE HANDLED EITHER ACCORDING TO
 THE PROCEDURE STATED IN THIS SECTION OR ACCORDING TO THAT IN SECTION 5
 OF THIS ARTICLE.  AUTHOR(S) MAY USE EITHER PROCEDURE BUT NOT BOTH EXCEPT
 AS STATED IN SUBSECTION C OF SECTION 5 OF THIS ARTICLE.  THROUGHOUT THIS
 SECTION AUTHOR MEANS SENIOR AUTHOR INDIVIDUALLY OR ALL THE AUTHORS OF A
 MANUSCRIPTS OR ANY ONE AUTHOR ACTING IN PLACE OF THE SENIOR AUTHOR
 WHICHEVER IS APPROPRIATE.
 
    A.  AUTHOR, USUALLY SENIOR AUTHOR, COMPLETES THE FIRST DRAFT OF A
 MANUSCRIPT ACCORDING TO THE FORMAT AND STYLE OF THE JOURNAL CHOSEN BY
 THE AUTHOR.
 
    B.  AUTHOR MAY CHOOSE WHETHER OR NOT TO PROVIDE AN INTERPRETIVE
 SUMMARY AND AN ABSTRACT FOR LIST OF PUBLICATIONS.  ALTERNATIVELY, AUTHOR
 MAY ELECT TO USE THE JOURNAL ABSTRACT AS THE ABSTRACT FOR LIST OF
 PUBLICATION.
 
    C.  AUTHOR SENDS THE MANUSCRIPT TO THE APPROPRIATE LABORATORY
 SECRETARY AND REQUESTS THAT THE LABORATORY CHIEF ORDER FROM THE CENTER
 PHOTOGRAPHIC LABORATORY WITHIN 2 WORK DAYS LINEN TRACINGS AND GLOSSY
 PRINTS FOR THE APPROPRIATE FIGURES.
 
    D.  LABORATORY SECRETARY TYPES THE MANUSCRIPTS OR FORWARDS THE
 MANUSCRIPT WITHIN 1-1/2 WORK DAYS TO THE STENOGRAPHIC AND TYPING POOL
 FOR TYPING ACCORDING TO THE PROCEDURES STATED IN SECTION 4.
 
    THE TYPED MANUSCRIPT WILL BE RETURNED TO THE AUTHOR ON OR BEFORE THE
 12TH WORK DAY AFTER RECEIPT BY THE LABORATORY SECRETARY OR THE TYPING
 POOL WHICHEVER IS LATER.
 
    E.  THE AUTHOR CHOOSES TWO PEER REVIEWERS WHO MAY OR MAY NOT BE
 EMPLOYEES OF THE AGENCY.  AUTHOR SENDS TO EACH REVIEWER ONE COPY OF THE
 MANUSCRIPT.  EACH REVIEWER SHOULD INITIAL AND DATE THE COPY RECEIVED.
 IN CASE OF DISPUTE, THE DATE OF RECEIPT SHALL BE 5 DAYS FROM DATE OF
 SENDING BY AUTHOR.
 
    F.  PEER REVIEWERS' COMMENTS MUST BE DATED AND SIGNED AND APPEAR ON
 ARS FORM 533.  THE COMPLETED FORM MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE AUTHOR ON OR
 BEFORE THE 15TH WORK DAY AFTER DATE OF RECEIPT OF MANUSCRIPT BY
 REVIEWER.  IF FOR ANY REASON A REVIEWER IS UNABLE TO REVIEW A
 MANUSCRIPT, THE REVIEWER WILL RETURN THE MANUSCRIPT TO THE AUTHOR WITHIN
 3 WORK DAYS.  OTHERWISE, THE AUTHOR MAY PROCEED WITH THE MANUSCRIPT
 PROCEDURE WHILE ANOTHER REVIEWER IS SOUGHT.
 
    G.  AUTHOR MAY REVISE HER/HIS MANUSCRIPT ACCORDING TO REVIEWERS'
 COMMENTS.  AUTHOR'S RESPONSE TO REVIEWERS' COMMENTS MUST BE SIGNED AND
 DATED AND APPEAR ON OR BE ATTACHED TO THE APPROPRIATE FORMS 533.
 
    H.  IF REVISED, THE MANUSCRIPT WILL BE SENT TO THE LABORATORY
 SECRETARY WHO WILL FORWARD THE MANUSCRIPT IMMEDIATELY AS IN SUBSECTION D
 OF THIS SECTION.  OTHERWISE, THE AUTHOR MAY PROCEED TO SUBSECTION I OF
 THIS SECTION.
 
    I.  AUTHOR SENDS TO THE APPROPRIATE RESEARCH LEADER ONE COPY OF EACH
 OF THE FOLLOWING:
 
    THE MANUSCRIPT READY TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE JOURNAL SELECTED
 
    ARS FORMS 533-- ONE COPY FROM EACH OF TWO PEER REVIEWERS
 
    INTERPRETIVE SUMMARY (OPTIONAL)
 
    ABSTRACT FOR LIST OF PUBLICATIONS (OPTIONAL)
 
    CARCINOGENIC FORM
 
    ARS FORM 115
 
    PATENT ADVISOR'S FORM
 
    IF THE RESEARCH LEADER IS UNAVAILABLE FOR 4 DAYS OR MORE, AUTHOR MAY
 SEND THE ENTIRE PACKAGE, LISTED IN THIS SUBSECTION, TO THE APPROPRIATE
 LABORATORY CHIEF.
 
    J.  RESEARCH LEADER (OR LABORATORY CHIEF) WILL CONSIDER THE
 MANUSCRIPT FOR PUBLICATION IN THE JOURNAL SELECTED AND WILL APPROVE OR
 REJECT WITHIN 10 WORK DAYS.  R.L.  (OR L.C.) WILL DATE AND INITIAL THE
 MANUSCRIPT UPON RECEIPT, OTHERWISE THE DATE OF RECEIPT BY R.L. (OR L.C.)
 WILL BE TAKEN TO BE 7 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF LAST TYPING BY THE TYPING
 POOL.  IF MANUSCRIPT IS APPROVED, THE R.L. WILL SIGN ITEM 9 OF FORM 115
 AND WILL RETURN ALL FORMS TO THE AUTHOR.
 
    K.  IF THE MANUSCRIPT IS REJECTED, THE RESEARCH LEADER (OR L.C.) WILL
 RETURN ALL FORMS TO THE AUTHOR TOGETHER WITH A DETAILED, EXPLICIT
 WRITTEN STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR REJECTION WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT STATED
 IN SUBSECTION J OF THIS SECTION.  AT THE DISCRETION OF THE AUTHOR, THIS
 REQUIREMENT MAY BE WAIVED.  AUTHOR MAY ELECT TO ACCEPT THE REJECTION AND
 ABANDON THE MANUSCRIPT OR MAY ATTEMPT TO REBUT THE REASONS FOR
 REJECTION.  AUTHOR MAY ELECT TO RESOLVE A DISPUTE THROUGH THE NEGOTIATED
 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE.  IN THAT CASE, THE GRIEVANCE WILL BE FILED DIRECTLY
 AT THE SECOND STEP.  MEANWHILE, THE AUTHOR MAY CONTINUE PROCESSING THE
 MANUSCRIPT IN DISPUTE ACCORDING TO THE PROCEDURE IN THIS SECTION.
 
    L.  AUTHOR SENDS THE MANUSCRIPT AND APPROPRIATE FORMS TO THE
 LABORATORY SECRETARY WHO WILL FORWARD THE ENTIRE PACKAGE IMMEDIATELY TO
 THE TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS EDITOR.  THE EDITOR WILL RETURN THE
 MANUSCRIPT WITH COMMENTS, IF NECESSARY, AND THE FORMS TO THE LABORATORY
 SECRETARY ON OR BEFORE THE 20TH WORK DAY AFTER RECEIVING THE MANUSCRIPT.
  LABORATORY SECRETARY WILL NOTIFY THE AUTHOR WHEN THE MANUSCRIPT IS
 RETURNED BY THE EDITOR.
 
    M.  AUTHOR MAY REVISE MANUSCRIPT ACCORDING TO EDITOR'S COMMENTS.  IF
 REVISED, THE MANUSCRIPT WILL BE SENT TO THE LABORATORY SECRETARY WHO
 WILL FORWARD THE MANUSCRIPT TO THE TYPING POOL AS IN SUBSECTION D OF
 THIS SECTION.
 
    N.  AUTHOR WILL PROOFREAD THE FINAL DRAFT OF THE MANUSCRIPT.
 
    O.  AUTHOR WILL SUBMIT FINAL DRAFT OF THE MANUSCRIPT TO THE
 APPROPRIATE LABORATORY CHIEF.  IF THE MANUSCRIPT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY
 THE RESEARCH LEADER AND THE TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS EDITOR, THE
 LABORATORY CHIEF WILL SIGN FORM 115 AND ENTER THE DATE IN ITEM 4.  IF
 THE MANUSCRIPT IS IN DISPUTE, THE LABORATORY CHIEF MAY RULE IN FAVOR OF
 THE AUTHOR OR MAY WAIT UNTIL THE DISPUTE IS RESOLVED THROUGH THE
 NEGOTIATED GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE OR MAY FORWARD THE MANUSCRIPT AS IN
 SUBSECTION P OF THIS SECTION.  THE LABORATORY CHIEF WILL SIGN AND DATE
 FORM 115 PROMPTLY UPON THE RESOLUTION OF ANY DISPUTE IN FAVOR OF THE
 AUTHOR.
 
    P. THE LABORATORY CHIEF WILL FORWARD THE MANUSCRIPT AND FORMS
 PROMPTLY TO THE CENTER DIRECTOR.
 
    Q.  THE CENTER DIRECTOR OR A DESIGNEE WILL SIGN AND DATE FORM 115 AND
 RETURN THE FORM TO THE LABORATORY SECRETARY WITHIN 3 WORK DAYS.  IF THE
 MANUSCRIPT IS IN DISPUTE, THE CENTER DIRECTOR MAY RULE IN FAVOR OF THE
 AUTHOR OR MAY WAIT UNTIL THE DISPUTE IS RESOLVED THROUGH THE NEGOTIATED
 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE.  THE CENTER DIRECTOR WILL SIGN AND RETURN FORM 115
 PROMPTLY UPON THE RESOLUTION OF ANY DISPUTE IN FAVOR OF THE AUTHOR.
 
    R.  THE LABORATORY CHIEF WILL SEND THE MANUSCRIPT TOGETHER WITH A
 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO THE JOURNAL SELECTED.
 
    S.  AUTHOR WILL RECEIVE COMMENTS FROM THE JOURNAL REVIEWERS.  AUTHOR
 MAY REVISE THE MANUSCRIPT ACCORDING TO THESE COMMENTS AND WILL PREPARE A
 RESPONSE TO THESE COMMENTS.  IF NECESSARY, AUTHOR WILL ASK THE
 LABORATORY SECRETARY TO FORWARD THE MS TO THE TYPING POOL AS IN
 SUBSECTION D OF THIS SECTION.
 
    T.  THE LABORATORY SECRETARY WILL NOTIFY THE AUTHOR UPON THE RETURN
 OF THE MANUSCRIPT FROM THE TYPING POOL.  AUTHOR WILL PROOFREAD AND
 RETURN THE MANUSCRIPT TO THE JOURNAL.
 
    U.  IF FOR ANY REASON THE AUTHOR DECIDES TO SELECT A DIFFERENT
 JOURNAL FOR THE SAME MANUSCRIPT, THEN THOSE STEPS IN THIS PROCEDURE
 WHICH ARE ALREADY COMPLETED WILL NOT BE REPEATED FOR THAT MANUSCRIPT.
 
    V.  CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL OF MANUSCRIPTS BY SUPERVISORY RESEARCH
 SCIENTISTS OR OTHER MANAGEMENT OFFICIALS SHALL INCLUDE REASONABLE
 CONSIDERATIONS OTHER THAN THE CHOICE BY THE AUTHOR(S) OF SECTION 3 OR 5
 OF THIS ARTICLE OR THE STYLE OF WRITING USED BY THE AUTHOR.
 
    W.  ALL TIME LIMITS IN THIS SECTION MAY BE EXTENDED BY MUTUAL
 AGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES CONCERNED.
 
    SECTION 5.  RESEARCH MANUSCRIPTS PREPARED AT ERRC WHICH BEAR THE NAME
 OF A MEMBER OF THE BARGAINING UNIT WILL BE HANDLED EITHER ACCORDING TO
 THE PROCEDURE IN THIS SECTION OR ACCORDING TO THAT IN SECTION 3 OF THIS
 ARTICLE.  AUTHOR(S) MAY USE EITHER PROCEDURE BUT NOT BOTH EXCEPT AS
 STATED IN SUBSECTION C OF THIS SECTION.  SUBSECTIONS E, F, G AND H OF
 SECTION 3 OF THIS ARTICLE ARE EXCLUDED IN THIS SECTION.  ALL OTHER
 SUBSECTIONS OF SECTION 3 OF THIS ARTICLE ARE INCLUDED WITH THE FOLLOWING
 VARIATIONS.
 
    A.  AT SUBSECTION I OF SECTION 3 AUTHOR MUST CLEARLY INDICATE THAT
 THE PROCEDURE OF ARTICLE . . . , SECTION 5 IS TO BE USED AND SHOULD
 INCLUDE TWO BLANK COPIES OF ARS FORM 533.
 
    B.  SUBSECTION Q OF SECTION 3 IS MODIFIED.  THE CENTER DIRECTOR OR A
 DESIGNEE WILL INDICATE TENTATIVE APPROVAL OF THE MANUSCRIPT.  THE CENTER
 DIRECTOR WILL DATE AND INITIAL FORM 115 AND RETURN THE