12:0469(92)UC - Navy, Aviation Supply Office and AFGE Local 1698 -- 1983 FLRAdec RP



[ v12 p469 ]
12:0469(92)UC
The decision of the Authority follows:


 12 FLRA No. 92
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
 AVIATION SUPPLY OFFICE
 Activity
 
 and
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
 GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES,
 LOCAL 1698, AFL-CIO
 Petitioner
 
                                            Case No. 2-UC-8
 
                            DECISION AND ORDER
 
    Upon a petition filed with the Federal Labor Relations Authority
 under section 7112(d) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations
 Statute (the Statute), a hearing was held before a hearing officer of
 the Authority.  The Authority has reviewed the hearing officer's rulings
 made at the hearing and finds that they are free from prejudicial error.
  The rulings are hereby affirmed.
 
    Upon the entire record in this case, including the parties'
 contentions, the Authority finds:
 
    The American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1698, AFL-CIO
 (Union) filed the subject petition seeking to consolidate four units
 located at the Department of the Navy, Aviation Supply Office compound
 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for which it is the exclusive
 representative.  The four bargaining units are composed of employees of
 four different Activities of the Department of the Navy:  Aviation
 Supply Office (ASO);  Naval Publication and Forms Center (NPFC);  Naval
 Air Technical Services Facility (NATSF);  and Navy International
 Logistics Control Office (NAVILCO).  /1/ The unit descriptions are set
 forth in the appendix.  The proposed consolidated unit is described by
 the Union as:
 
          All non-professional civilian employees of the Aviation Supply
       Office (ASO), Naval Air Technical/Services Facility
       (NAVAIRTECHSERVFAC), Navy International Logistics Control Office
       (NAVILCO), and nonprofessional general schedule employees of the
       Naval Publications and Forms Center (NPFC).  Excluded:  all wage
       grade employees of the Public Works (ASO);  all wage grade
       employees of the Naval Publications and Forms Center (NPFC);
       guards;  professional employees, management officials;
       supervisors;  confidential employees;  employees engaged in
       personnel work in other than a clerical capacity;  employees
       engaged in administering the Statute;  employees engaged in
       intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative or security work
       which directly affects national security;  employees primarily
       engaged in investigative or audit functions affecting the internal
       security of the Agency, as described in 5 U.S.C. 7112B 2, 3, 4, 6
       and 7.
 
 The Activities oppose the petition on the basis that the proposed
 consolidated unit is not appropriate under the provisions of section
 7112(a)(1) of the Statute, /2/ because such unit does not ensure a clear
 and identifiable community of interest among the employees in the unit,
 nor does it promote effective dealings with, and efficiency of the
 operations of, the agency involved.
 
    The four Activities involved in the petition are all co-located at a
 compound at 700 Robbins Avenue, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.  In
 addition, three other Activities are at this compound:  Navy
 Publications and Printing Service (NPPS);  Defense Industrial Supply
 Center (DISC);  and the Defense Mapping Agency (DMA).
 
    The compound is an area of about three square blocks containing a
 series of office buildings and warehouses.  ASO is the "host" activity
 and the others are, in essence, "tenants." As host, ASO is in control of
 all space, indoors and out, which is not specifically assigned to a
 tenant.  ASO provides protective, custodial and maintenance services, as
 well as recreational facilities.  In addition, ASO provides personnel
 services for the five U.S. Navy organizations at the compound, through
 the Consolidated Civilian Personnel Division (CCPD).
 
    In Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 5 FLRA No. 89
 (1981), the Authority, in dismissing petitions to consolidate units,
 noted that, section 7112(a)(1) of the Statute requires any unit found
 appropriate to conform to the three criteria established by that section
 and held that these criteria applied as well to unit consolidation
 proceedings pursuant to section 7112(d) of the Statute.  /3/
 
    With regard to the community of interest criterion set forth in
 section 7112(a)(1), the Authority will consider the degree of
 commonality and integration of the mission and function of the
 components involved;  the distribution of the employees involved
 throughout the organizational and geographical components of the agency;
  the degree of similarity of the occupational undertakings of the
 employees in the proposed unit;  and the locus and scope of personnel
 and labor relations authority and functions.  Department of the Navy,
 U.S. Marine Corps, 8 FLRA No. 4 (1982).  In the instant case, the
 Authority concludes that the , employees who would be included in the
 proposed consolidated units do not share a clear and identifiable
 community of interest.  Thus, the record establishes that the
 organizational components involved herein do not share any significant
 degree of commonality or integration of mission.  Rather, there is a
 wide disparity of missions and functions, as well as command
 responsibility among the various Activities involved herein.  For
 example, the mission of ASO is to procure, manage, distribute and
 control spare parts for aircraft weapons systems;  the mission of NPFC
 is to act as the control point for all Navy publications and forms, and
 to be the Authorization Accounting Activity for a number of
 installations and activities;  the mission of NATSF is to provide
 technical services in the development, production and distribution of
 aeronautical technical manuals for the maintenance of aircraft weapons
 systems;  and the mission of NAVILCO is to provide supply and accounting
 services to foreign governments pursuant to the Navy's Security
 Assistance Program.  In addition, the chain of command for each
 component is different:  NAVILCO is under the command of the Naval
 Supply Systems Command;  NATSF is under the command of the Naval Air
 Systems Command;  NPFC is under Naval Supply Systems Command, but also
 relies for guidance on the Navy Comptroller;  and ASO is under both the
 Naval Supply Systems Command and the Naval Air Systems Command.
 Further, reflecting the divergence of their respective missions, the
 work processes of the components are not integrated or interdependent,
 nor do they require coordinated work schedules.  The record also
 establishes a lack of significant similarity in job classifications,
 skills and duties, again reflecting the disparate missions of the
 respective Activities involved.  The record reveals no interchange of
 employees among Activities, and the incidence of permanent transfers
 among the Activities primarily reflects the movement of clerical and
 secretarial employees.  Although certain clerical and secretarial
 classifications are common in all the Activities, many job
 classifications and skills are specialized and unique and are not shared
 by the Activities.  Thus, ASO employs packaging and equipment
 specialists and weapons logistics specialists;  NPFC employs
 warehousemen;  NAVILCO employs computer systems operators and analysts
 who are unique in the entire U.S. Navy;  and NATSF employs
 micro-photographers, archivists, librarians and engineering
 documentation specialists.  Finally, although CCPD provides personnel
 and labor relations services for each of the Activities, the record
 establishes that it performs these duties as an agent on behalf of each
 command, deferring to the discretion exercised by each commander, and
 does not establish common or uniform policies applicable to all the
 Activities.
 
    Based on these factors, the Authority finds that the petitioned for
 consolidated unit would not ensure a clear and identifiable community of
 interest among the employees involved and will order that the petition
 be dismissed.  /4/
 
                                   ORDER
 
    IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition in Case No. 2-UC-8 be, and it
 hereby is, dismissed.  Issued, Washington, D.C., August 4, 1983
                                       Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman
                                       Ronald W. Haughton, Member
                                       Henry B. Frazier III, Member
                                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
                                 APPENDIX
 
    Unit No. 1:  Included:  All employees of the Aviation Supply Office,
 Phila., Penna.
 
    Excluded:  Professional and managerial employees, guards and
 supervisors as defined in the Executive Order, and employees engaged in
 personnel work in other than a clerical capacity.
 
    Unit No. 2:  Included:  All graded (Classification Act) employees of
 the Naval Publications and Forms Center, Philadelphia, Pa.
 
    Excluded:  All managerial executives, supervisors, professional
 employees, employees engaged in personnel work in other than a purely
 clerical capacity and all non-supervisory guards and detectives of the
 Police Branch, Administrative Department.
 
    Unit No. 3:  Included:  All eligible employees of Naval Air Technical
 Services Facility.
 
    Excluded:  Management officials, professional employees and
 supervisory personnel.
 
    Unit No. 4:  Included:  All permanent employees of Navy International
 Logistics Control Office.
 
    Excluded:  Management officials, supervisory personnel, professional
 employees, confidential employees, employees engaged in Federal
 personnel work in other than a purely clerical capacity and guards as
 defined in Executive Order 11491, as amended.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
 
 
    /1/ The Union is also the exclusive representative for bargaining
 units in two other Activities also located at the compound:  the Defense
 Industrial Supply Center (DISC), and the Defense Mapping Agency (DMA).
 In addition, the Laborers International Union of North America (LIUNA)
 also exclusively represents units in ASO, NPFC and DMA, and the National
 Association of Government Employees (NAGE) exclusively represents a unit
 in Navy Publications and Printing Service (NPPS), also located in the
 compound.
 
 
    /2/ Section 7112(a)(1) provides:
 
          Sec. 7112.  Determination of appropriate units for labor
       organization representation
 
          (a)(1) The Authority shall determine the appropriateness of any
       unit.  The Authority shall determine in each case whether, in
       order to ensure employees the fullest freedom in exercising the
       rights guaranteed under this chapter, the appropriate unit should
       be established on an agency, plant, installation, functional, or
       other basis and shall determine any unit to be an appropriate unit
       only if the determination will ensure a clear and identifiable
       community of interest among the employees in the unit and will
       promote effective dealings with, and efficiency of the operations
       of, the agency involved.
 
 
    /3/ Section 7112(d) provides as follows:
 
          (d) Two or more units which are in an agency and for which a
       labor organization is the exclusive representative may, upon
       petition by the agency or labor organization, be consolidated with
       or without an election into a single larger unit if the Authority
       considers the larger unit to be appropriate.  The Authority shall
       certify the labor organization as the exclusive representative of
       the new larger unit.
 
 
    /4/ Inasmuch as all three criteria of section 7112(a)(1) of the
 Statute must be satisfied in order for the Authority to find that the
 proposed consolidated unit is appropriate, and a failure to satisfy any
 one of them must result in a finding that the unit sought is
 inappropriate, see U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, 11 FLRA No.
 28 (1983);  Department of the Navy, Navy Publications and Printing
 Service Branch Office, Vallejo, California, 10 FLRA No. 108 (1982);
 Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 5 FLRA No. 89 (1981),
 the Authority's finding that the unit sought h