---

 8 FLRA No. 93
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
 EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 2612
 Union
 
 and
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE,
 GRIFFISS AIR FORCE BASE, NEW YORK
 Agency
 
                                            Case No. O-NG-492
 
                 DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE
 
    THE PETITION FOR REVIEW IN 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),
 AND PRESENTS ISSUES RELATING TO THE NEGOTIABILITY OF THE FOLLOWING UNION
 PROPOSAL ;  /1/
 
                           TRANSFER OF FUNCTION
 
    SECTION 1.  THE EMPLOYER AGREES TO FREEZE THE FILLING OF ALL
 BARGAINING UNIT
 
    VACANCIES.  THE FREEZE SHALL REMAIN IN EFFECT UNTIL THE FOLLOWING
 PROCEDURES HAVE BEEN
 
    FOLLOWED.
 
    (A) EMPLOYEES SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO REQUEST ASSIGNMENT AT THEIR
 SAME OR LOWER
 
    GRADE.  THIS REQUEST MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE EMPLOYER AS SOON AS
 POSSIBLE BUT NOT MORE THAN 20
 
    CALENDAR DAYS AFTER THE EMPLOYEE RECEIVES THE SPECIFIC WRITTEN NOTICE
 OF TRANSFER OF
 
    FUNCTION.  THE EMPLOYER SHALL RESPOND IN WRITING WITHIN 20 CALENDAR
 DAYS TO THE EMPLOYEE'S
 
    REQUEST.  IF THE REQUEST IS DENIED, THE EMPLOYEE SHOULD ADVISE THE
 EMPLOYER WITHIN 10 CALENDAR
 
    DAYS OF RECEIVING THE EMPLOYER'S REPLY WHETHER HE/SHE WILL ACCEPT OR
 DECLINE TO TRANSFER WITH
 
    THE FUNCTION.  HOWEVER, IN ALL INSTANCES THE EMPLOYEE WILL HAVE UP TO
 25 CALENDAR DAYS FROM
 
    THE DATE THE SPECIFIC NOTICE IS RECEIVED BY THE EMPLOYEE TO ACCEPT OR
 DECLINE TO TRANSFER WITH
 
    THE FUNCTION.
 
    UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE ENTIRE RECORD INCLUDING THE
 PARTIES' CONTENTIONS, THE AUTHORITY MAKES THE FOLLOWING DETERMINATION.
 IN AGREEMENT WITH THE AGENCY, THE AUTHORITY FINDS THAT THIS PROPOSAL
 CONSTRUED AS A WHOLE CONCERNS MATTERS WHICH, UNDER SECTION 7106(B)(1) OF
 THE STATUTE, /2/ ARE NEGOTIABLE ONLY AT THE ELECTION OF THE AGENCY.  /3/
 THAT IS, THE PROPOSAL CONCERNS MATTERS DIRECTLY AND INTEGRALLY RELATED
 TO THE NUMBERS AND TYPES OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED IN THE
 ORGANIZATIONAL SUBDIVISION.
 
    THE PROPOSAL WOULD REQUIRE THE IMPOSITION OF A FREEZE ON THE FILLING
 OF VACANCIES UNTIL BARGAINING UNIT EMPLOYEES INVOLVED IN A TRANSFER OF
 FUNCTIONS HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST REASSIGNMENT TO UNIT
 VACANCIES, HAVE RECEIVED A RESPONSE TO SUCH REQUEST, AND HAVE INDICATED
 THEIR WILLINGNESS TO TRANSFER WITH THEIR FUNCTION.  IN THIS RESPECT, THE
 PROPOSAL IS NOT MATERIALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE ONE BEFORE THE AUTHORITY
 IN NATIONAL FEDERATION EMPLOYEES (NFFE), LOCAL 1332 AND HEADQUARTERS,
 U.S. ARMY MATERIEL DEVELOPMENT AND READINESS COMMAND, ALEXANDRIA,
 VIRGINIA, 3 FLRA 611 (1980), REQUIRING NEGOTIATION ON THE IMPOSITION OF
 A FREEZE ON THE FILLING OF BARGAINING UNIT VACANCIES DURING A
 "REALIGNMENT OF THE WORKFORCE," WHICH EXPLICITLY ENCOMPASSED TRANSFERS
 OF FUNCTION, UNTIL EITHER ALL UNIT EMPLOYEES WERE SATISFACTORILY PLACED
 OR AN EXCEPTION TO THE FREEZE WAS GRANTED BY A JOINT UNION-AGENCY BOARD
 ESTABLISHED FOR THAT PURPOSE.  THE AUTHORITY HELD THE PROPOSAL IN THE
 CITED CASE TO BE NEGOTIABLE ONLY AT THE AGENCY'S ELECTION UNDER SECTION
 7106(B)(1), NOTING PARTICULARLY THAT "THE AGENCY WOULD BE PRECLUDED FROM
 HIRING NEW EMPLOYEES OF THE REQUISITE TYPES, AT THE REQUISITE GRADES,
 AND IN THE NECESSARY NUMBERS TO MEET CHANGES IN MISSION REQUIREMENTS"
 UNLESS OR UNTIL CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY THE PROPOSAL WERE SATISFIED.
 
    CONSEQUENTLY, FOR THE REASONS STATED IN THE CITED U.S. ARMY MATERIEL
 DEVELOPMENT AND READINESS COMMAND DECISION, THE DISPUTED PROPOSAL
 HEREIN, LIKEWISE, IS NEGOTIABLE ONLY AT THE ELECTION OF THE AGENCY.
 ACCORDINGLY, SINCE THE AGENCY HAS DECLINED TO NEGOTIATE ON THE PROPOSAL,
 PURSUANT TO SECTION 2424.10 OF THE AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS (5
 CFR 2424.10 (1981)), IT IS ORDERED THAT THE UNION'S PETITION FOR REVIEW
 BE, AND IT HEREBY IS, DISMISSED.
 
    ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., APRIL 30, 1982
 
                       RONALD W. HAUGHTON, CHAIRMAN
 
                       HENRY B. FRAZIER III, MEMBER
 
                        LEON B. APPLEWHAITE, MEMBER
 
                     FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------- FOOTNOTES: ---------------
 
 
    /1/ THE UNION'S PETITION FOR REVIEW CONTAINED SEVERAL ADDITIONAL
 PROPOSALS, BUT THE PROPOSAL SET FORTH HEREIN IS THE SOLE MATTER
 REMAINING AT ISSUE.
 
    /2/ SECTION 7106(B)(1) PROVIDES, IN PERTINENT PART:
 
    (B) NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL PRECLUDE ANY AGENCY AND ANY LABOR
 ORGANIZATION FROM NEGOTIATING--
 
    (1) AT THE ELECTION OF THE AGENCY, ON THE NUMBERS, TYPES, AND GRADES
 OF EMPLOYEES OR
 
    POSITIONS ASSIGNED TO ANY ORGANIZATIONAL SUBDIVISION, WORK PROJECT,
 OR TOUR OF DUTY.  . . .
 
    /3/ IN REACHING THIS CONCLUSION, THE AUTHORITY DOES NOT REACH THE
 QUESTION OF WHETHER SUBSECTION 1(A) OF THE PROPOSAL, STANDING ALONE
 (I.E., WITHOUT THE IMPOSITION OF A FREEZE ON THE FILLING OF BARGAINING
 UNIT VACANCIES), IS NEGOTIABLE. 
 
 
 

---