State of Nevada National Guard (Agency/Respondent) and National Association of Government Employees, Locals R12-130 and R12-145 (Unions/Charging Parties)

 



[ v07 p245 ]
07:0245(37)CA
The decision of the Authority follows:


 7 FLRA No. 37
 
 
 ***********************************************************
 
 FULL TEXT OF DECISION NOT AVAILABLE.     [ NOTAVAILABLE$ ]
 
 
 **** The following denial for a request for reconsideration
 **** was found:
 
 
 ***********************************************************
 
 7 FLRA No. 37
 
 STATE OF NEVADA NATIONAL GUARD
 Agency/Respondent
 
 and
 
 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT
 EMPLOYEES, LOCALS R12-130 AND
 R12-145
 Unions/Charging Parties
 
                                            Case No. 9-CA-49
 
         DENIAL OF MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND MOTION FOR STAY
 
    THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE AUTHORITY ON A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
 AND MOTION FOR STAY OF THE AUTHORITY'S DECISION IN STATE OF NEVADA
 NATIONAL GUARD, 7 FLRA NO. 37 (1981), FILED BY THE RESPONDENT.
 
    ON NOVEMBER 19, 1981, THE AUTHORITY ISSUED ITS DECISION AND ORDER IN
 THE ABOVE CASE, BASED UPON ITS FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS DERIVED FROM THE
 RECORD BEFORE THE AUTHORITY, INCLUDING THE PARTIES' STIPULATION OF
 FACTS.  THE AUTHORITY FOUND THAT THE RESPONDENT HAD VIOLATED SECTION
 7116(A)(1) AND (6) OF THE STATUTE BY ITS ACTIONS IN FAILING AND REFUSING
 TO COOPERATE IN AND COMPLY WITH A FEDERAL SERVICE IMPASSES PANEL
 DECISION AND ORDER, DATED APRIL 2, 1979.  THE RESPONDENT HAS FILED A
 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE AUTHORITY'S DECISION CONTENDING, IN
 GENERAL, THAT THE AUTHORITY HAS MISCONSTRUED THE NATURE OF EMPLOYMENT OF
 THE NATIONAL GUARD TECHNICIANS AND HAS FAILED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE
 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TECHNICIANS AND OTHER NON-TECHNICIAN FEDERAL
 EMPLOYEES.  THE RESPONDENT ALSO HAS FILED A MOTION FOR STAY OF THE
 DECISION AND ORDER PENDING A DETERMINATION ON THE MOTION FOR
 RECONSIDERATION.  THE GENERAL COUNSEL FILED AN OPPOSITION TO SUCH
 MOTIONS, AND BOTH PARTIES FILED REPLIES.
 
    NOTING PARTICULARLY THAT THE MATTERS RAISED IN THE MOTION FOR
 RECONSIDERATION ARE NOT SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT FROM THOSE PREVIOUSLY
 CONSIDERED BY THE AUTHORITY IN REACHING ITS DECISION, THE AUTHORITY
 FINDS THAT THE RESPONDENT HAS FAILED TO ESTABLISH ANY EXTRAORDINARY
 CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH WOULD WARRANT RECONSIDERATION OF THE DECISION AND
 ORDER.  /1/ IT FOLLOWS THAT THE RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR STAY MUST ALSO
 BE DENIED.
 
    ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE RESPONDENT'S MOTIONS FOR
 RECONSIDERATION AND STAY IN THIS MATTER BE, AND THEY HEREBY ARE, DENIED.
  ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., JULY 21, 1982
 
                       RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN
                       HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER
                       LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER
                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------- FOOTNOTES: ---------------
 
 
    /1/ SECTION 2429.17 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS (5 CFR
 2429.17) PROVIDES:
 
    SEC. 2429.17 RECONSIDERATION.
 
    AFTER A FINAL DECISION OR ORDER OF THE AUTHORITY HAS BEEN