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 (1