10:0133(27)NG - AFGE Local 3400 and HHS, Health Care Financing Administration, Chicago Regional Office -- 1982 FLRAdec NG
[ v10 p133 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
10 FLRA No. 27 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 3400 (Union) and DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, HEALTH CARE FINANCING ADMINISTRATION, CHICAGO REGIONAL OFFICE (Activity) Case No. O-NG-668 ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION This case is before the Authority at this time on a motion filed by the union on October 25, 1982, seeking reconsideration of the Authority's Order of September 24, 1982, dismissing the union's petition for review. /1/ For the reason set forth below, the union's motion must be denied. Section 2429.17 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, effective September 10, 1981, provides, in pertinent part: Sec. 2429.17 Reconsideration. After a final decision or order of the Authority has been issued, a party to the proceeding before the Authority who can establish in its moving papers extraordinary circumstances for so doing, may move for reconsideration of such final decision or order. The motion shall be filed within ten (10) days after service of the Authority's decision or order . . . . As indicated above, the subject Order of the Authority was dated and served upon the union by mail on September 24, 1982. Therefore, under section 2429.17 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, and sections 2429.21 and 2429.22, which are also applicable to the time limit here involved, the union's motion for reconsideration had to be filed, i.e., received in the national office of the Authority, no later than the close of business on October 12, 1982, in order to be considered timely. However, since the union's motion was not filed until October 25, 1982, it is clearly untimely and must be denied on that basis. Accordingly, the union's motion for reconsideration is hereby denied. /2/ For the Authority. Issued, Washington, D.C., February 10, 1983 James J. Shepard, Executive Director --------------- FOOTNOTES$ --------------- /1/ The union's petition was dismissed because it appeared clear from the submissions of the parties in the record before the Authority that the union had sought to negotiate procedures for a specific, planned reduction-in-force (RIF), which RIF had been cancelled by the agency; and, further, that the parties had not been negotiating procedures that were to be applicable to any other RIF situation. It was therefore likewise apparent that the union was in effect seeking an advisory opinion from the Authority concerning its proposals for possible use in the future. Since section 2429.10 of the Authority Rules and Regulations precludes the issuance of advisory opinions, the union's petition was dismissed. /2/ It should be noted that the Authority's September 24, 1982 dismissal Order was without prejudice to the union seeking to negotiate procedures which would be applicable to RIF situations other than the one that was cancelled, submitting specific proposals for the purpose of such negotiations and duly filing a petition for review of any negotiability issues that might arise in connection with such negotiations, in accordance with the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute and the Authority's Rules and Regulations.