15:0570(121)NG - NFFE Local 1363 and Army, HQ, Army Garrison, Yongsan, Korea -- 1984 FLRAdec NG



[ v15 p570 ]
15:0570(121)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:


 15 FLRA No. 121
 
 NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL
 EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1363
 Union
 
 and
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY,
 HEADQUARTERS, U.S. ARMY GARRISON,
 YONGSAN, KOREA
 Agency
 
                                            Case No. O-NG-818
 
                   ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR REVIEW
 
    This case is before the Authority pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(E)
 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute)
 on a petition for review of negotiability issues filed by the Union.
 
    The record before the Authority in this case indicates that during
 negotiations between the Agency and the Union, the Union submitted two
 proposals on the ration control system in effect at Agency controlled
 post exchanges, commissaries, and other outlets in Korea.  The Union
 requested an allegation with respect to its proposals from the Agency.
 Receiving no such allegation the Union then filed the instant appeal
 with the Authority seeking a determination, pursuant to section
 7117(c)(1) of the Statute and section 2424.1(a) of the Authority's Rules
 and Regulations, as to whether the disputed proposals were within the
 duty to bargain.  Subsequently the Agency did file a counterproposal,
 and in its statement filed with the Authority, pursuant to section
 2424.6 of the Authority's Rules, the Agency in effect asserted that by
 failing to respond to the Union's request for an allegation, it was not
 alleging that the proposals which are the subject of the Union's
 petition were nonnegotiable.  Rather, the Agency stated that the reason
 it had not responded to the Union's request for a written allegation was
 because it "understood that the Union accepted its oral representations
 to the effect that, although the activity was concerned about the
 relationship of the proposal to the U.S./Republic of Korea Status of
 Forces Agreement (SOFA), it had not alleged the Union's proposal to be
 nonnegotiable."
 
    Since the Agency does not view the proposals as nonnegotiable, there
 is no longer any issue as to whether the proposals in this case are
 within the parties' duty to bargain under the Statute.  Cf. American
 Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 3028 and Department
 of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Alaska Area Native
 Health Service, 13 FLRA No. 112 (1984) (wherein the Authority found that
 failure to respond to a union's request for an allegation was
 constructive declaration of nonnegotiability so as to give rise to a
 right of appeal).
 
    Accordingly, and apart from other considerations, IT IS HEREBY
 ORDERED that the Union's petition for review herein be, and it hereby
 is, d