13:0529(88)UC - Army Support Command, Hawaii and Hawaii Federal Lodge 1998, IAM -- 1983 FLRAdec RP
[ v13 p529 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
13 FLRA No. 88 U.S. ARMY SUPPORT COMMAND, HAWAII Activity/Petitioner and HAWAII FEDERAL LODGE 1998, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERS, AFL-CIO Labor Organization/Petitioner Case No. 8-UC-20001 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly 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 contentions of the parties, the Authority finds: The U.S. Army Support Command, Hawaii (Activity) and the Hawaii Federal Lodge 1998, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO (IAM), jointly filed the instant petition seeking to consolidate four units for which the IAM is the exclusive representative. The units presently represented by IAM and covered by the petition are set forth in the Appendix. /1/ IAM and the Activity stipulated that the following proposed consolidated unit is appropriate under the Statute: Included: All employees assigned to the SUP/SVCS Division, Munitions Division, Maintenance Division, and Contracting Division, Directorate of Industrial Operations; All permanent employees assigned to the Housing Division, Building and Grounds Division and Utilities Division, Directorate of Engineering and Housing; All GS employees assigned to the Management Information Systems Office; All area TMDE employees, Support Branch, HI (MICOM) and all employees of the Schofield Barracks Commissary (Western Field Office, USA Trp Spt Agency). Excluded: All management officials, professional employees, guards, confidential employees, employees engaged in personnel work in other than a purely clerical capacity, and all other employees not specifically included above in the aforementioned unit. The Activity and the IAM assert that while they are agreed that the above-described proposed consolidated unit would be appropriate, they are unable to adequately describe the unit as a result of a series of reorganizations which have occurred since these units came into existence. At the time of the hearing herein, the Activity, headquartered at Fort Shafter, Hawaii, provided a variety of support services to all U.S. Army elements located in Hawaii. Under the direction of a Commander and Executive Officer, the Activity is organized into a large number of offices, directorates and divisions. In addition, there are offices and directorates attached, but not subordinate, to the Activity. The proposed consolidated unit encompasses the Directorate of Industrial Operations (DIO) and elements of the Directorate of Engineering and Housing (DEH), as well as the Management Information Services Office (MISO). The total number of employees in all four IAM units is approximately 950-1000. In addition to the four bargaining units involved in the instant petition, there are two other bargaining units at the Activity: an Activity-wide unit of all non-appropriated fund employees, who are assigned to the Directorates of Personnel and Community Activities, Industrial Operations, and Engineering and Housing, represented by Service Employees International Union, AFL-CIO; and a unit of employees assigned to the Fort Shafter and Schofield Barracks motor pools, Division of Transportation, Directorate of Industrial Operations, represented by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO. There were approximately 500-600 Activity civilian employees unrepresented at the time of the hearing herein. In Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 5 FLRA No. 89 (1981), the Authority dismissed petitions to consolidate units noting that section 7112(a)(1) of the Statute /2/ requires any unit found appropriate to conform to the three criteria established by that section-- a clear and identifiable community of interest among the employees in the unit, and the promotion of effective dealings with, and the efficiency of the operations of, the agency involved. The Authority further noted that section 7112(d) of the Statute, /3/ which provides for the consolidation of existing units into a single more comprehensive unit, requires that such consolidated unit meet the same three criteria required of any proposed unit. With regard to the community of interest criterion, 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 in 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 record reveals that approximately 12-13 members of bargaining unit No. 1 set forth in the Appendix, assigned to "AREA TMDE Support Branch Hawaii (MICOM)," are employed by the TMDE Support Group U.S. Missile Command, U.S. Army Materiel Development and Readiness Command. Further, approximately 88 full-time and 67 part-time members of bargaining unit No. 2, assigned to the Schofield Barracks Commissary, are employed by the Western Region Commissary Office, U.S. Army Troop Support Agency. Both the Area TMDE Support Branch Hawaii (MICOM) and the Schofield Barracks Commissary are tenants of the Activity, and receive personnel and labor relations services from the Activity's Civilian Personnel Office under separate servicing agreements which take due regard of each tenant command's policies governing such matters. Thus, between 15% and 20% of the employees in the proposed consolidated unit are individuals who, as a result of past reorganizations, are no longer employed by the Activity but instead are employed by other tenant commands and serviced by the Activity's personnel office. These employees are subject to personnel and labor relations policies which may be separate and distinct from those covering the Activity's employees in the proposed consolidated unit. The Authority finds that the proposed consolidated unit is not appropriate for the purposes of exclusive recognition under the provisions of section 7112(a)(1) of the Statute. Thus, as noted above, employees of the Area TMDE Support Branch Hawaii and the employees of the Schofield Barracks Commissary do not share, with each other or with other employees in the proposed consolidated unit, common mission, supervision, or uniform personnel and labor relations policies. Based on these facts, the proposed consolidated unit would not ensure a clear and identifiable community of interest among the employees involved. See U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, 11 FLRA No. 28 (1983). While the parties have jointly petitioned to consolidate the four units exclusively represented by the IAM, the Authority concludes that a unit consolidation proceeding is not the appropriate vehicle for clarifying previously recognized or certified units to reflect changes occasioned by reorganizations. Accordingly, without passing upon whether a proposed consolidated unit limited to employees of the Activity alone would be appropriate, the Authority will order that the instant petition be dismissed. /4/ ORDER IT IS ORDERED that the petition in Case No. 8-CU-20001 be, and it hereby is, dismissed. Issued, Washington, D.C., December 22, 1983 Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman Ronald W. Haughton, Member Henry B. Frazier III, Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY APPENDIX UNIT NO. 1: INCLUDED: All Classification Act and Wage Grade employees assigned to Supply Division and Maintenance Division, Directorate of Industrial Operations and Hawaii Calibration Section (Sacramento Army Depot). EXCLUDED: Supervisors, management officials, professional employees, guards and employees engaged in personnel work in other than a purely clerical capacity. UNIT NO. 2: INCLUDED: All Classification Act and Wage Grade employees assigned to Services Division, Housing Division, and Procurement Division, Directorate of Industrial Operations and Schofield Barracks Commissary (Western Field Office, USA Troup Support Agency). EXCLUDED: Supervisors, management officials, professional employees, guards and employees engaged in personnel work in other than a purely clerical capacity. UNIT NO. 3: INCLUDED: All permanent Classification Act and Wage Grade employees assigned to the Maintenance, Repair, and the Utilities Function of the Directorate of Facilities Engineering, specifically including all employees assigned to the Buildings and Grounds and Utilities Division of Fort Schafter and Schofield Barracks. EXCLUDED: Supervisors, management officials, professional employees, guards, and employees engaged in personnel work in other than a purely clerical capacity. UNIT NO. 4: INCLUDED: All Classification Act employees assigned the Management Information Systems Office. EXCLUDED: Supervisors, management officials, professional employees, guards, and employees engaged in personnel work in other than a purely clerical capacity. --------------- FOOTNOTES$ --------------- /1/ The Appendix sets forth the descriptions for each of the units as now set forth in the parties' collective bargaining agreement. The descriptions of units 1, 2 and 3 reflect the many changes resulting from reorganizations in previous years for which neither the IAM nor the Activity filed appropriate petitions for clarification under Sec. 2422.1(c) or (d) of the Authority's Rules and Regulations. As noted at p. 4, infra, a unit consolidation proceeding is not an appropriate vehicle for clarifying previously recognized or certified units to reflect changes occasioned by reorganizations. /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 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 herein fails to meet the community of interest criterion makes it unnecessary to address the other two criteria.