11:0243(51)NG - AFGE Local 2375 and 79th U.S. Army Reserve Command, Willow Grove, PA -- 1983 FLRAdec NG
[ v11 p243 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
11 FLRA No. 51 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 2375 Union and 79th UNITED STATES ARMY RESERVE COMMAND, WILLOW GROVE, PENNSYLVANIA Agency Case No. O-NG-102 DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUES The petition for review in this case comes before the Authority pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute), and raises issues relating to the negotiability of ten Union proposals. Upon careful consideration of the entire record, including the parties' contentions, the Authority makes the following determinations. The ten proposals at issue in this case were presented by the Union in response to the Agency's implementation of a "Military Technician Conversion Program." This program, initiated as a test on the recommendation of Congress, lasted from March 1979 through June 1980. Its purpose was to ascertain whether the military reserve components, i.e., the Army and Air Force Reserves and the National Guard, could attract and retain active duty military personnel to fill vacant positions in the reserve components previously held by civilian technicians. Six of the ten proposals herein, set forth in the appendix, relate solely to the now terminated test program. Thus, these six proposals became moot as of July 1980. However, as the record in this case also indicates that Congress, after reviewing the test results, authorized the Agency to continue converting civilian technician positions, the remaining four proposals which are applicable to such conversions are decided herein. See American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 3742 and Department of the Army, Headquarters, 98th Division (Training), Webster, New York, 11 FLRA No. 42 (1983), and American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 1900 and Department of the Army, Headquarters, 76th Division (Training), West Hartford, Connecticut, 11 FLRA No. 49 (1983). Union Proposal 3 Guaranteed opportunities for advancement and lateral transfers of civilian personnel (employees). Union Proposal 4 Guaranteed opportunities for civilian technicians to advance to first level supervisory/or management positions. Union Proposal 5 Guaranteed opportunities for women and minorities to advance as civilian technicians. These three Union proposals are essentially similar to Union Proposals 6, 6 and 7 in the 98th Division case. Noting that the Agency would be required to structure its organization in a manner assuring promotional opportunities for civilian technicians, the Authority, in the cited case, concluded that those three proposals conflicted with management's right to determine its "organization" under section 7106(a)(1) of the Statute. Thus, for the reasons set forth in that decision and the cases cited therein, Union Proposals 3, 4 and 5 in this case are outside the duty to bargain. Union Proposal 7 There will be no annual conversion goals. In the absence of an explanation by the Union, the Authority adopts the Agency's reasonable interpretation that "this proposal refers to the number of civilian technician positions either being established or becoming vacant which will be converted to military slots." Thus, this proposal would prevent management from determining the ratio between civilian technician positions and military positions it desires to attain at the end of any annual period. As the Authority noted concerning Union Proposal 8 in the 98th Division decision, when an Agency establishes the ratio between military and civilian positions in an organizational element, it is exercising its right under section 7106(a)(1) of the Statute to determine its "organization." The instant proposal, by preventing management from planning the future numbers of civilian positions and positions to be occupied by military personnel, respectively, directly interferes with management's section 7106(a)(1) right to determine its "organization" and is, therefore, outside the duty to bargain. See also National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 1431 and Veterans Administration Medical Center, East Orange, New Jersey, 9 FLRA No. 139 (1982). Accordingly, pursuant to section 2424.10 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, IT IS ORDERED that the Union's petition for review be, and it hereby is, dismissed. Issued, Washington, D.C., February 3, 1983 Ronald W. Haughton, Chairman Henry B. Frazier III, Member Leon B. Applewhaite, Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY APPENDIX - PROPOSALS WHICH ARE MOOT Union Proposal 1 a. Only entry level positions will be utilized for the test program GS-5, GS-6). b. All other vacancies (GS-07 - up) above entry level will be announced. If through competitive procedures no civilians fill these vacancies, then and only then, the vacancies may be filled by Military Technicians. Union Proposal 2 There will be no abolishment of ART positions on TDA's, instead entry positions will be reported as "Temporary Fills" by military technicians. Union Proposal 6 Any civilian employee(s) who are reassigned for the test program purposes will be returned to his/her original position upon completion of the test. Union Proposal 8 It is agreed all present civilian employees of the 79th ARCOM will be covered by a "grandfather" clause, effective 15 March 1979. Union Proposal 9 The test period will run for a 12 month period. Union Proposal 10 AFGE Local 2375 will be involved in the test evaluation process.