15:0125(23)RO - Navy, Naval Hospital, Submarine Base Bangor Clinic, Bremerton, WA and IAM District Lodge 160, Local Lodge 282 -- 1984 FLRAdec RP
[ v15 p125 ]
15:0125(23)RO
The decision of the Authority follows:
15 FLRA No. 23
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL HOSPITAL
SUBMARINE BASE BANGOR CLINIC
BREMERTON, WASHINGTON
Activity
and
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERS,
AFL-CIO, DISTRICT LODGE 160, LOCAL
LODGE 282
Labor Organization/Petitioner
and
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 48
Labor Organization/Intervenor
Case No. 9-RO-30020
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under section 7111(b)(1) of the Federal
Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute), a hearing was
held before a hearing officer of the Authority. The hearing officer's
rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are
hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, including the contentions of the
parties, /1/ the Authority finds: The Petitioner, International
Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, District Lodge
160, Local Lodge 282 (IAM), seeks to exclusively represent all
non-professional general schedule employees at the Naval Regional
Medical Clinic, Submarine Base Bangor (Subbase Bangor), excluding all
professional employees, management officials, supervisors and employees
described in section 7112(b)(2), (3), (4), (6) and (7) of the Statute.
The Intervenor, American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO,
Local 48 (AFGE) is the exclusive representative of two units of Activity
employees: (1) all professional employees of the Naval Regional Medical
Center, Bremerton, Washington (now called the Naval Hospital, Bremerton,
Washington), including employees of the Branch Clinic, Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard, Bremerton, Washington, and employees of the Branch Clinic,
Naval Undersea Warfare Engineering Station, Keyport, Washington,
excluding non-professional employees, management officials, supervisors,
employees of the Naval Hospital, Whidbey Island, Washington, employees
of the Naval Regional Medical Clinic, Seattle, Washington, employees of
the Branch Hospital, Adak, Alaska, and employees described in section
7112 (b)(2), (3), (4), (6) and (7) of the Statute; and (2) all
non-professional employees of the Naval Hospital, Bremerton, Washington,
including employees of Branch Clinic Puget Sound Naval Shipyard,
Bremerton, Washington, excluding professional employees, management
officials, supervisors, employees of the Branch Clinic, Naval Undersea
Warfare Engineering Station, Keyport, Washington, employees of the Naval
Hospital, Whidbey Island, Washington, employees of the Naval Regional
Medical Clinic, Seattle, Washington, employees of the Branch Hospital,
Adak, Alaska and employees described in section 7112(b)(2), (3), (4),
(6) and (7) of the Statute. The AFGE units are covered by a multi-unit
negotiated agreement, effective May 25, 1983, for a duration of three
years.
The Activity argues that the proposed unit of non-professional
employees is inappropriate because the employees sought accreted to the
Naval Hospital bargaining unit exclusively represented by AFGE. It
contends, in addition, that the petitioned-for unit would fragment the
existing unit and would not ensure a clear and identifiable community of
interest nor promote effective dealings and efficiency of agency
operations, which are requirements for exclusive units under section
7112(a)(1) of the Statute. /2/ AFGE contends that it represents the
employees at the Bangor Clinic through accretion and that such employees
are covered under the parties' current multi-unit negotiated agreement.
On or about October 1, 1982, the Branch Clinic at Bangor was
organizationally transferred from the Commander at Subbase Bangor to the
Commander of the Naval Hospital, Bremerton, Washington. /3/ This
transfer of function was completed in August 1983. The employees of the
Branch Clinic at Bangor have not physically moved, are under the same
immediate supervision and perform the same work as they performed prior
to the reorganization. However, substantial organizational and
operational changes have occurred. Thus, the officer-in-charge (OIC) of
the Bangor Clinic now reports to the Commander of the Naval Hospital
instead of to the Subbase Commander, and the OIC now is considered a
department head of the Naval Hospital. Further, the Bangor Clinic
employees are now covered under the Naval Hospital's personnel policies
and practices. They share the same competitive area for
reductions-in-force and are in the same area of consideration for merit
promotions as other Naval Hospital employees. Also, all administrative,
personnel and labor relations services are centralized at the Naval
Hospital, and Bangor Clinic employees' personnel files have been
physically located at the Naval Hospital facility since the
reorganization. Bangor Clinic employees have the same position
classifications as other employees of the Naval Hospital, and have the
same accreditation requirements; thus, jobs are interchangeable among
employees at the hospital and its clinics, and at least one transfer has
occurred from the hospital to the Bangor Clinic. Further, the employees
at the Bangor Clinic have regular contact with employees at the Naval
Hospital concerning patient care, supplies and training.
Based on the foregoing, the Authority finds that following the
Activity's reorganization of October 1, 1982, the employees of the
Bangor Clinic, including the non-professional employees whom IAM here
seeks to represent in a separate bargaining unit, accreted to the
respective units of professional and non-professional employees at the
Naval Hospital exclusively represented by AFGE. It is clear that Bangor
Clinic employees are organizationally and functionally integrated into
the Naval Hospital's structure because, as noted, administrative,
personnel and labor relations functions are centralized at the Naval
Hospital level. Further, the Authority notes that the employees of the
Bangor Clinic and the employees in the AFGE units share common overall
working conditions; have similar position classifications and job
requirements; are in the same area of consideration for merit
promotions; and are in the same co