14:0432(68)NG - IBEW Local 570 and Army, Yuma Proving Ground, AZ -- 1984 FLRAdec NG
[ v14 p432 ]
14:0432(68)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:
14 FLRA No. 68
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD
OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS,
LOCAL 570, AFL-CIO-CLC
Union
and
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY,
YUMA PROVING GROUND, ARIZONA
Agency
Case No. O-NG-444
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 presents issues
relating to the negotiability of six Union Proposals. /1/ Upon careful
consideration of the entire record, including the parties' contentions,
the Authority makes the following determinations.
Union Proposal 1
Article XVI, Section 12.
All work shall be performed by personnel familiar with the code
requirements and are qualified for the class of work to be
performed.
Union Proposal 2
Article I, New Section 4.
All work and work tasks normally performed by "nonsupervisory
employees whose jobs are classified within the Department of Army
wage board job family as inside, outside electricians, electrical
lineman, and electrical motor repairer" will come under the
jurisdiction of the International Brotherhood of Electrical
Workers, Local 570, and under no circumstances be assigned outside
the unit.
Union Proposal 3
Article V, Section 2.
Bargaining unit employees will not be displaced by those
outside the bargaining unit except in the event of an emergency.
In National Association of Air Traffic Specialists and Department of
Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, 6 FLRA 588 (1981), the
Authority determined that a proposal which would limit management's
right to assign bargaining unit work violated section 7106(a)(2)(B) of
the Statute /2/ and hence was nonnegotiable. In this context, Union
Proposal 1 herein bears no material difference from Union Proposal 5
held to be outside the duty to bargain in Federal Aviation
Administration which would have required the continued assignment of
bargaining unit work to "qualified" bargaining unit employees. The
plain language of Union Proposal 1, herein, similarly would require the
Agency to assign work to "personnel familiar with code requirements and
qualified for the class of work to be performed." Hence, it also is
outside the duty to bargain.
Union Proposal 2 would, among other things, require that all work
normally performed by employees within certain job classifications would
under no circumstances be assigned outside the unit. Union Proposal 3,
similarly, would prevent the Agency from assigning bargaining unit work
to employees outside the bargaining unit in non-emergency situations.
Thus, these proposals restrict management's right to assign work and,
for the reasons stated in Federal Aviation Administration, are
inconsistent with the Agency's right to assign work pursuant to section
7106(a)(2)(B) of the Statute and are outside the duty to bargain.
Union Proposal 4
Article V, Section 1.
Overtime work for bargaining unit employees shall be paid for
at not less than time and one-half for the first two (2) hours
overtime. All overtime in excess of two (2) hours shall be at
double the straight time rate. Saturday overtime for the first
eight (8) hours will be paid for at time and one-half and all work
in excess will be paid at double the straight time rate. All
Sunday work will be double time. Holiday work will be time and
one-half plus Holiday Pay. (Only the underlined portions are
alleged to be nonnegotiable.)
Union Proposal 5
Article V, Section 4.
Employees required to work more than two (2) hours overtime
after his normal quitting time will be provided with one of the
following:
(1) A hot meal to be eaten on employer's time.
(2) A meal ticket to be used at employee's convenience.
(3) One (1) hour straight time pay in lieu of either (1) or
(2).
Under section 7103(a)(14)(C) of the Statute, matters specifically
provided for by Federal statute are expressly excluded from the
definition of conditions of employment and, hence, are not within the
duty to bargain. Union Proposal 4 concerns rates of premium pay to be
paid under certain conditions. However, as the Authority stated in
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 2080, AFL-CIO-CLC
and Department of the Army, U.S. Corps of Engineers, Nashville,
Tennessee, 10 FLRA 222 (1982), the conditions under which premium pay
may be paid for prevailing rate employees, such as those involved in the
instant case, are specifically provided for by Federal statute, 5 U.S.C.
5544. /3/ Accordingly, Union Proposals 4 and 5 concern matters excluded
from the definition of "conditions of employment" and, therefore, are
not within the duty to bargain. American Federation of Government
Employees, AFL-CIO, Council of Federal Grain Inspection Locals and
United States Department of Agriculture, Federal Grain Inspection
Service, Washington, D.C., 3 FLRA 520 (1980), enforced sub nom. American
Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Council of Federal Grain
Inspection Locals v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 653 F.2d 669
(D.C. Cir. 1981).
Union Proposal 6
Article V, Section 5.
An employee shall receive at least a minimum of four (4) hours
pay at the appropriate overtime rate if he is called back to work
on an overtime basis within his basic work week, or on one of his
scheduled non-workdays, even if he is not utilized for the full
four (4) hours. Overtime continuous with the starting or ending
of a shift is not covered by this section. Overtime to commence
when call back is acknowledged, and freedom of movement is
restricted by the mandate to return to his duty station.
Employees will be compensated for standing by when on call back
status and will be reimbursed at the rate of twenty-five cents
(25[) for each mile 