16:0928(125)CA - IRS and NTEU -- 1984 FLRAdec CA



[ v16 p928 ]
16:0928(125)CA
The decision of the Authority follows:


 16 FLRA No. 125
 
 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
 Respondent
 
 and
 
 NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES UNION
 Charging Party
 
                                            Case No. 3-CA-1073
 
                            DECISION AND ORDER
 
    The Administrative Law Judge issued the attached Decision in the
 above-entitled proceeding finding that the Respondent had engaged in the
 unfair labor practices alleged in the complaint and recommending that it
 be ordered to cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative
 action.  Thereafter, both the Respondent and the Charging Party filed
 exceptions to the Judge's Decision and the Charging Party filed an
 opposition to the Respondent's exceptions.
 
    Pursuant to section 2423.29 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations
 and section 7118 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations
 Statute (the Statute), the Authority has reviewed the rulings of the
 Judge made at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was
 committed.  The rulings are hereby affirmed.  Upon consideration of the
 Judge's Decision and the entire record, the Authority hereby adopts the
 Judge's findings, conclusions /1/ and Recommended Order, except as
 modified herein.
 
    The Judge ordered, among other things, that the Respondent bargain,
 upon request, with the Union over the Respondent's parking regulation.
 However, inasmuch as there is no regulation in effect at this time
 requiring the collection of parking fees, /2/ it is unnecessary to order
 that the Respondent negotiate with the Union regarding this matter at
 the present time.  Moreover, in agreement with the Judge, the Authority
 finds that granting the Union's request that employees be reimbursed for
 all parking fees collected pursuant to the regulation is not warranted
 in these circumstances.
 
                                   ORDER
 
    Pursuant to section 2423.29 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations
 and section 7118 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations
 Statute, the Authority hereby orders that the Internal Revenue Service
 shall:
 
    1.  Cease and desist from:
 
    (a) Unilaterally implementing parking regulations and refusing to
 bargain on request with the National Treasury Employees Union, its
 employees' exclusive representative, concerning the impact and
 implementing procedures with regard to such regulations.
 
    (b) Unilaterally eliminating employee parking spaces without
 providing the National Treasury Employees Union an opportunity to
 bargain concerning the impact and implementing procedures with regard to
 such change.
 
    (c) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, or
 coercing its employees in the exercise of their rights assured by the
 Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.
 
    2.  Take the following affirmative action in order to effectuate the
 purposes and policies of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations
 Statute:
 
    (a) Upon request meet and negotiate to the extent consonant with law
 and regulation with the National Treasury Employees Union concerning the
 elimination of employee use of parking spaces effective on or after
 November 1, 1979.
 
    (b) Post at its facilities nationwide copies of the attached Notice
 on forms to be furnished by the Federal Labor Relations Authority.  Upon
 receipt of such forms, they shall be signed by the Commissioner of the
 Internal Revenue Service, or his designee, and shall be posted and
 maintained for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places,
 including bulletin boards and all other places where notices to
 employees are customarily posted.  Reasonable steps shall be taken to
 insure that such Notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any
 other material.
 
    (c) Pursuant to section 2423.30 of the Authority's Rules and
 Regulations, notify the Regional Director, Region III, Federal Labor
 Relations Authority, in writing, within 30 days from the date of this
 Order, as to what steps have been taken to comply herewith.
 
    Issued, Washington, D.C., December 18, 1984
 
                                       /s/ Henry B. Frazier III
                                       Henry B. Frazier III, Acting
                                       Chairman
                                       /s/ Ronald W. Haughton
                                       Ronald W. Haughton, Member
                                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
 
 
 
                          NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
 
  PURSUANT TO A DECISION AND ORDER OF THE FEDERAL LABOR
 RELATIONS
 AUTHORITY AND IN ORDER TO EFFECTUATE THE POLICIES OF CHAPTER 71
 OF TITLE
 5 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT
 RELATIONS
 WE HEREBY NOTIFY OUR EMPLOYEES THAT:
 
    WE WILL NOT unilaterally implement parking regulations and refuse to
 bargain on request with the National Treasury Employees Union, our
 employees' exclusive representative, concerning the impact and
 implementing procedures with regard to such regulations.
 
    WE WILL NOT unilaterally eliminate employee parking spaces without
 providing the National Treasury Employees Union an opportunity to
 bargain concerning the impact and implementing procedures with regard to
 such change.
 
    WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain,
 or coerce our employees in the exercise of their rights assured by the
 Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.
 
    WE WILL upon request meet and negotiate to the extent consonant with
 law and regulation with the National Treasury Employees Union concerning
 the elimination of employee use of parking spaces effective on or after
 November 1, 1979.
                                       (Agency)
 
    Dated:  By:  (Signature)
 
    This Notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date
 of posting, and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other
 material.
 
    If employees have any questions concerning this Notice or compliance
 with its provisions, they may communicate directly with the Regional
 Director, Federal Labor Relations Authority, Region III, whose address
 is:  P.O. Box 33758, Washington, D.C. 20033-0758 and whose telephone
 number is:  (202) 653-8456.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ---------
 
  FOLLOWS -----------
                                Respondent
 
    and
 
    NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES UNION,
                              Charging Party
 
                                       Case No. 3-CA-1073
 
    Michael Sussman,
    Attorney for Respondent
 
    Eric J. Genser,
    Attorney for the General Counsel
 
    Federal Labor Relations Authority
    Mark Maxin
    Representative for the Charging Party
 
    Before:  Isabelle R. Cappello
    Administrative Law Judge
 
                                 DECISION
 
    This is a proceeding under the Federal Service Labor-Management
 Relations Statute, 92 Stat. 1191 (1978), 5 U.S.C. 7101 et seq. (Supp.
 III 1979) (hereinafter referred to as the "Statute"), and the rules and
 regulations issued thereunder and published at 45 Fed.Reg. 3482 et seq.,
 5 C.F.R. 2421 et seq.
 
    Based on a Charge filed on April 7, 1980, the Regional Director of
 the Federal Labor Relations Authority (hereinafter, the "Authority"),
 Region III, issued a Complaint and Notice of Hearing dated December 31,
 1980.  The Complaint alleges that the Internal Revenue Service
 (hereinafter, "IRS") has violated Sections 7116(a)(1) and (5) of the
 Statute, /3/ by releasing parking spaces at IRS's Canton, Ohio, facility
 without bargaining with National Treasury Employees Union ("NTEU") over
 the substance of the decision, and by implementing changes in employee
 parking procedures without bargaining with NTEU over the impact and
 implementation of the changes.
 
    A hearing was held on the matter in Washington, D.C., on March 12,
 1981.  The parties appeared, put on evidence, and examined and
 cross-examined witnesses.  On April 22, 1981, NTEU submitted a brief, in
 the form of a letter.  On April 27, the General Counsel and IRS
 submitted their briefs.  Based on the record made at the hearing, my
 observation of the witnesses, and the briefs, the following findings and
 conclusions are made and order recommended.
 
                           Findings of Fact /4/
 
    1.  It is admitted that IRS is an "agency" within the meaning of the
 Statute.  It is also admitted that NTEU is a "labor organization,"
 within the meaning of the Statute, and is recognized by IRS as the
 exclusive representative of certain of its employees at offices
 throughout the country.  Issues involving more than one office are
 bargained at the national level of IRS and NTEU.  At all times pertinent
 to this proceeding, Susan Barliant and Jean Savage have represented IRS,
 and Frank Ferris has represented NTEU concerning national-level,
 bargaining issues.  These representatives have weekly dealings with each
 other, meeting about once a month and corresponding or talking by phone
 in between meetings.
 
    2.  In April 1979, President Carter announced a new policy on parking
 for Federal employees.  On April 6, 1979, the Office of Management and
 Budget ("OMB") sent to all heads of departments and agencies, and
 employee unions, a draft circular, the stated purpose of which was to
 establish the new policy governing the acquisition and allocation of
 parking facilities, and the establishment and determination of charges
 to be paid for parking by Federal employees.  The draft provided that
 the General Services Administration ("GSA") should issue implementing
 regulations, and that agencies should "issue such instructions as may be
 needed to implement the provisions of this Circular and regulations
 issued by GSA." (R1.7, paragraph 5(b)(4)).  The draft provided that
 agencies should collect fees "effective October 1, 1979." (R1.7
 paragraph 8(b)(3)).  It was stipulated that NTEU was sent a copy of this
 draft circular.
 
    3.  On August 13, OMB issued Circular No. A-118 to all heads of
 departments and agencies.  Its purpose is as stated in the draft.  See
 finding 2, above.  It states that it incorporates many of the comments
 received from agencies and unions following circulation of the April 6
 draft.  It places a number of responsibilities upon agency heads.  For
 example, agency heads are instructed "to institute more effective
 carpooling incentives." (GC 2.2) Agency contracting officers are to
 amend lease contracts to accomplish the new policies.  (GC 2.4,
 paragraph 5) Acquisition of new parking facilities are to be consistent
 with the new policies and based upon analysis of public transportation
 and carpooling projected to be reasonably available or feasible, with
 such analyses to be initiated by agency heads and conducted by GSA.  (GC
 2.4, paragraph 7) Agency heads are given responsibility for allotting
 parking spaces, based on new priorities, and with some discretion "to
 assign a limited number of convenient parking spaces to certain
 executive personnel and employees with unusual hours . . . " (GC 2.5,
 paragraph 8) Agency heads are allowed to conduct their own appraisals of
 fair parking fees.  (GC 2.8, paragraph 10b(4)) Agency heads are to
 implement an effective mechanism for deterring abuse of parking space
 assignments made to the handicapped, vanpools and carpools.  (GC 2.8,
 paragraph 10b(7)) OMB set November 1 as the issuance date for "(f)inal
 agency regulations," and October 1 as the date for GSA regulations.  (GC
 2.10, paragraph 15)
 
    4.  On September 6, GSA issued Temporary Regulation D-65, in which it
 prescribes policies and procedures for the assignment of Federal
 employee parking spaces and the assessment of charges for the use of
 these spaces.  The regulation was made effective as of November 1.  The
 regulation specifically provides that, upon request by agencies,
 "parking spaces not required for 'official' parking may be used for
 EMPLOYEE parking," for which a monthly fee of not less than $10 a month
 must be assessed, unless a waiver is obtained under OMB Circular A-118
 (GC 3.3, paragraph 7b).
 
    5.  On September 26, IRS sent a letter to Robert Tobias, NTEU's
 Executive Vice-President and General Counsel.  The letter advised him of
 the OPM and GSA issuances and forwarded copies of them.  /5/ The letter
 states that the new policy on parking would be implemented on November
 1.  (R 2.2) The letter also states that:  "After all OMB and GSA
 documents have been issued, a Manual Supplement will be developed (by
 IRS) to address specific parking allocation and fee collection
 procedures to be utilized throughout the Service." (R 2.2, last
 paragraph) The letter concludes with the advice:  "If you have any
 comments regarding the new federal parking regulations, please refer
 them to Jean Savage or Susan Barliant at 376-0575 not later than October
 12, 1979." (R 2.3) Ms. Savage prepared the September 26 letter so that
 IRS "might comply with our requirement under CSRA (i.e., the Statute) to
 notify the union about changes that would be affecting employees working
 conditions." (TR 130)
 
    6.  On October 5, Mr. Ferris and Ms. Savage were having a telephone
 conversation about a mid-term bargaining issue concerning voucher
 examiners.  She recalls bringing up the matter of the parking situation
 and mentioning the September 26 letter addressed to Mr. Tobias, with its
 October 12 deadline.  She recalls Mr. Ferris indicating that he thought
 he had seen it, would ask Mr. Tobias about it, and "would get back to
 us." (TR 137) She recalls telling Mr. Ferris that IRS was anxious to
 move on the parking matter because of the mandated November 1
 implementation date.  When Mr. Savage had not heard back from Mr. Ferris
 by October 17, she made an assumption that NTEU did not desire to
 bargain on the parking regulations.
 
    7.  Mr. Ferris could not recall the October 5 conversation with Ms.
 Savage, but did not deny that it could have taken place.  Ms. Barliant
 testified that Ms. Savage told her about it.  Ms. Savage put notes on
 the conversation in a file.  On October 17, not having heard from Mr.
 Ferris by the October 12 deadline set in the letter, she read her notes,
 and typed up their substance.  Such is not an unusual practice because,
 as she explained, memories grow dim, and cases are frequently
 transferred from one person to another.  Ms. Savage appeared sure of her
 facts, gave her testimony in a positive and direct manner, and was
 corroborated, to a certain extent.  I found Ms. Savage to be a credible
 witness;  and I accept, as true, the facts to which testified, as set
 out in finding 6, above.
 
    8.  By early October, several local chapters of NTEU, apparently
 aware of the OMB and GSA issuances, were working to obtain waivers of
 parking fees at their IRS field offices.  Provisions for waivers are
 contained in the OMB and GSA issuances here involved.
 
    9.  By October 24, IRS had drafted its revised intra-agency parking
 regulations, in response to the OMB Circular.  A copy of the draft was
 never sent to NTEU because of Ms. Savage's assumption that NTEU was not
 interested in bargaining over the issue.  On November 6, they were
 issued as a Manual Transmittal, pursuant to what IRS refers to as the
 OMB and GSA "guidelines." (GC 5.4, paragraph 481(3)) Basically the IRS
 regulations track and clarify the OMB and GSA guidelines.  Some
 clarifications not explicitly found in the OMB and GSA guidelines are:
 no payroll deductions being allowed for parking-fee collections;  no
 discount or refund of fees being allowed to accommodate absences of the
 permit holder;  and a mandatory penalty being imposed for an employee
 committing enumerated violations with respect to the parking program.
 
    10.  Mr. Ferris, Ms. Savage and Ms. Barliant met on November 7, to
 discuss several mid-term issues.  Mr. Ferris brought up the non-agenda
 subject of parking, said he had been hearing from several NTEU chapters
 about changes taking place in the field, and inquired as to whether
 there were some nationwide regulations on the matter.  The IRS
 representatives replied that nationwide changes were taking place, and
 that NTEU had received written notification of them.  When Mr. Ferris
 replied that he knew of no such notice, Ms. Savage left the room and
 returned with a copy of the September 26 letter and the OMB and GSA
 issuances.  She did not give him a copy of the November 6 IRS Manual
 Transmittal detailing how the new policy on employee parking would be
 implemented at IRS locations nationwide, or tell him that such an IRS
 document had been issued.  When Mr. Ferris raised some questions about
 parking, Ms. Savage referred him only to the OMB Circular and the
 September 26 letter.  The answers to his particular questions were to be
 found in the OMB and GSA issuances, and the September 26 letter.
 
    11.  Subsequent to the November 7 meeting, Mr. Ferris claims that he
 checked with NTEU officials, as well as various NTEU files, and found no
 record or indication that NTEU had ever received the September 26
 letter.  I credit his testimony on this point.  He appeared to be candid
 and forthright, in testifying.  What IRS characterizes as his
 nonresponsiveness was simply an unwillingness to be led, on
 cross-examination.  The fact that he could not recall the October 5
 conversation with Ms. Savage about parking (see findings 6 and 7 above)
 is believable, since she interjected the parking matter into a
 conversation dealing with an entirely different matter.
 
    12.  On November 14, Mr. Ferris sent a letter to Ms. Barliant which
 contained certain proposals concerning the parking program, and a
 request to negotiate.  The NTEU proposals were to waive parking fees,
 wherever permitted, and to conform at once to the OMB Circular mandate
 in regard to priorities in assigning close-in parking spaces.  The
 letter stated NTEU's objections to establishing a bargaining position
 until NTEU received a draft, manual supplement, or other policy document
 from IRS from which NTEU could see how IRS was proposing to use its
 discretionary powers.
 
    13.  On December 13, IRS gave NTEU a copy of its November 6 Manual
 Transmittal.  Ms. Savage apologized for not sending it to NTEU earlier.
 She explained that the failure was due to a clerical error.  Ms. Savage
 informed NTEU that IRS would not negotiate with NTEU about the parking
 regulations in the Manual Transmittal.
 
    14.  Pursuant to the new policy on parking, parking fees have been
 implemented at IRS's Cincinnati, Ohio, and Austin, Texas, Service
 Centers.  Implementation at Cincinnati took place in November.  There is
 no evidence as to when implementation occurred at Austin.
 
    15.  On November 1, at its Canton, Ohio, Regional Office, IRS ceased
 its practice of allowing bargaining-unit employees the use of 15 parking
 spaces at the building.  Some 30 bargaining-unit employees had been
 using the spaces, for their private cars, when scheduled for an official
 business trip to conduct field audits.  Now these employees must find
 parking spaces in commercial lots.  There is one such lot, charging $10
 a month, within one block of the IRS Canton office.  Employees are
 reimbursed for parking their cars, in commercial lots, on those days
 when they use them for official business.  Reimbursement is obtained
 through submission of monthly travel vouchers.  IRS still controls the
 15 vacated spaces at its Canton office building.  Even if employees had
 been allowed continued use of the 15 spaces, the employees would have
 had to pay $10 a month, under the OMB and GSA issuances, on a
 reimbursable basis.  At present, IRS pays $16.50 a month to GSA for each
 of the spaces, but is not allowing any employee use of them.  /6/ On
 October 31, an IRS agent of the Cleveland, Ohio, District Office
 informed an agent of NTEU that it would be "releasing parking spaces" at
 various locations within the Cleveland District.  The Canton office is
 such a location.  On November 6, a local agent of NTEU requested an
 opportunity to negotiate over this matter.  Such bargaining has not
 taken place.
 
    16.  GSA Temporary Regulation D-65, in paragraph 12a, makes agencies
 responsible for assigning parking spaces of employees and, in paragraph
 8a, specifically provides that:
 
          If necessary for operational purposes, an agency may issue on a
       fee basis a limited number of parking permits to individuals who
       regularly use their privately owned vehicles for Government
       business.
 
 (GC 3.4) Regular use is defined as being 12 or more workdays a month for
 which reimbursement is made for mileage and parking fees under
 Government travel regulations.
 
                        Discussion and Conclusions
 
    1.  The parking regulations.
 
    The parties agree that IRS was obliged to bargain with NTEU over the
 impact and implementation of its parking regulations, though not over
 their subject matter.  Their agreement correctly reflects the state of
 the law.  It is also well established that agencies must give adequate
 notice to the exclusive representative of their employees, and an
 opportunity to bargain, before implementing any changes in conditions of
 employment, such as parking.  See e.g. Department of the Air Force,
 Scott Air Force Base, 5 FLRA No. 2 (1981), statutory obligations when it
 failed to give NTEU such notice and opportunity.
 
    IRS's main contention is that the notice it gave NTEU of the OMB and
 GSA "guidelines" (to use IRS's own characterization) was sufficient
 notice to allow NTEU to make a responsible input into the IRS parking
 plan, which was drawn from and integrally a part of the OMB and GSA
 issuances.  See RBr 8-13.  This argument ignores the fact that IRS,
 itself, as well as OMB, enunciated clearly that IRS would be issuing
 implementing regulations clarifying how it would exercise its
 responsibilities, at its facilities.  Even had NTEU learned of the OMB
 and GSA guidelines in time to make meaningful proposals to IRS, it was
 still entitled to a bargaining opportunity when it was presented with
 IRS's own proposals.  IRS has never given such an opportunity to NTEU.
 
    NTEU did not waive its bargaining rights by failing to meet the
 deadline set by IRS in its September 26 letter forwarding the OMB and
 GSA guidelines.  Such a waiver must be "clear and unmistakable." See
 pages 1 and 3 of the Scott decision cited above, 5 FLRA No. 2.  All the
 chief spokesman of NTEU ever indicated to IRS was that he would be
 getting back to IRS, after he located the September 26 letter.  The
 deadline would, understandably, mean little to NTEU, as it had every
 reason to believe that it would receive a copy of IRS's own proposals
 before its bargaining proposals would have to be formulated.  Instead of
 jumping to the conclusion that NTEU was not interested in bargaining
 about the parking matter, because it had allowed IRS's deadline to pass,
 IRS's labor relations officer could have inquired of NTEU's interest, in
 one of her frequent contacts with NTEU's chief spokesman.  This would
 have been a simple, reasonable action to have taken.  Instead, IRS's
 labor relations officer spent her time making a written record of NTEU's
 failure to meet an IRS-imposed deadline.  See finding 7, above.
 
    The record evidence leaves the impression that IRS, hard-pressed to
 meet the OMB deadline, was overly anxious to assume that NTEU was not
 going to exercise bargaining rights, and complicate further the ability
 of IRS to get its regulations out in time.  OMB imposed no penalty on an
 agency's failure to meet its deadline;  and IRS did fail to meet it.  Of
 course, the OMB-established deadline was no excuse for IRS to cut off
 NTEU's bargaining rights granted by the Statute.
 
    IRS also takes the position that no change of substantial impact
 resulted from its parking regulations.  A "substantial impact rule" is
 applied to failure-to-bargain situations, before an unfair labor
 practice is found.  See page 3 of the decision of Judge Randolph D.
 Mason in Office of Program Operations, Field Operations, Social Security
 Administration, San Francisco Region, adopted by the Authority in 5 FLRA
 No. 45 (March 20, 1981).  The evidence here established that
 paid-parking programs have been instituted at IRS's Cincinnati, Ohio,
 and Austin, Texas, Service Centers.  It also establishes just how IRS
 will be allotting parking spaces at all future acquired facilities.
 Indeed, one whole section of the IRS regulations is devoted to
 "Procedure for Acquiring New or Additional Space." (GC 5.4) Thus, the
 regulations have a nationwide scope, with future impact not yet clearly
 ascertainable.  Given the fact that IRS can exercise considerable
 discretion over how rates are determined and how it allots and manages
 the space it acquires (see finding 3, above), it is impossible to
 conclude that the IRS parking regulations will have no substantial and
 possibly adverse impact upon its employees.  No working condition is as
 liable to touch a sensitive nerve, in employees, as access to parking
 spaces for their cars.  How IRS is going to acquire space and allot and
 charge for it cannot be passed off as a matter of no substance.
 
    2.  The release of 15 parking spaces at IRS's Canton, Ohio office
 building.
 
    IRS gave a local NTEU official one day's notice before it stopped its
 practice of allowing bargaining-unit employees the use of 15 spaces, at
 its Canton, Ohio, office building.  IRS does not argue that such notice
 was adequate.  It clearly was not.  IRS argues, instead, that there was
 "no net effect" on the employees formerly using these spaces because
 they were only allowed to use them when scheduled for field trips, and
 now, when scheduled for field trips, the employees are reimbursed,
 monthly, for any parking fees incurred in commercial lots, at least one
 of which is within a block of the building.  See RBr 17-19.  Having to
 look for space in commercial lots, walk to the office on days of
 inclement weather, and wait for a period of up to one month for
 reimbursement of monies expended, add up to a substantial, adverse
 effect on employees, contrary to IRS's view of the matter.  Furthermore,
 IRS had left these spaces unused for over three months, as of the date
 of the hearing, and denied NTEU the opportunity to bargain over use of
 them by carpools, handicapped employees, and employees with unusual
 hours-- all options left to IRS by OMB.  See finding 3, above.  This
 denied NTEU an opportunity to demonstrate its clout and bargain for such
 use of these spaces by employees.  Instead, IRS made NTEU look
 ineffectual to members of the bargaining unit, thereby discouraging
 employees from exercising their right to join a labor organization and
 be represented by it.  See Section 7102 of the Statute.
 
    The record made in this proceeding establishes, by a preponderance of
 the evidence, that IRS's unilateral actions in imposing revised parking
 regulations, and eliminating employee use of parking spaces, at Canton,
 Ohio, has had, or will have a reasonable likelihood of adversely
 affecting employees, in a substantial degree, and denied them the right,
 under Section 7102 of the Statute, to freely join a labor organization
 and to engage in collective bargaining with respect to conditions of
 employment through chosen representatives.  IRS thereby committed unfair
 labor practices within the meaning of Section 7116(a)(1) and (5) of the
 Statute.
 
    3.  The remedy
 
    The General Counsel seeks a nationwide posting of an order "fully
 remedial of all unlawful conduct, including a specific order to IRS to
 bargain, upon request by the Union, on all changes made with respect to
 employee parking to the extent consonant with applicable laws and
 regulations." (GCBr 10) Such a remedy is appropriate.  IRS parking
 regulations apply to all its facilities, throughout the country.  While
 a release of parking spaces was shown only at one facility, other
 releases may have since occurred and, given IRS's position on not
 negotiating such changes, would have occurred unilaterally.  The
 cease-and-desist order, as well as the bargaining order, should
 therefore apply to all such unilateral changes.
 
    Remittal of parking fees, urged by NTEU at pages 4 through 6 of its
 letter-brief, will not be ordered.  /7/ IRS had no choice in the
 collection of the parking fees which, as all parties agree, was not
 bargainable, under Section 7117(a)(1) of the Statute, as it was mandated
 by a Government-wide rule.  The only case cited by NTEU, in which a
 "make whole" remedy was imposed as to parking fees, involved an increase
 in fees ordered by an authority within a single department, and is thus
 distinguishable from the situation here.  See DOT, et al., A/SLMR No.
 1062 (1978), cited in footnote 9 of NTEU's letter-brief.
 
                        Ultimate Findings and Order
 
    Internal Revenue Service has violated Section 7116(a)(1) and (5) of
 the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute, as alleged in
 the Complaint.  Accordingly, the following remedial action shall be
 taken by the Internal Revenue Service:
 
    1.  Cease and desist from:
 
          (a) Interfering with, restraining and coercing its employees in
       the exercise of their rights under the Federal Service
       Labor-Management Relations Statute by unilaterally implementing
       parking regulations and eliminating employee use of parking
       spaces, and refusing to bargain with the National Treasury
       Employees Union concerning such regulations and changes to the
       extent consonant with the law and Government-wide rules and
       regulations.
 
          (b) In any like or related manner interfering with,
       restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of rights
       assured by the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.
 
    2.  Take the following affirmative action:
 
    (a) Upon request, meet and negotiate with the National Treasury
 Employees Union concerning IRS Manual Transmittal 1(14)50, dated
 November 6, 1979, and elimination of employee use of parking spaces
 effective on or after November 1, 1979, specifically including, but not
 limited to the elimination of employee use of spaces at the Internal
 Revenue Service building at Canton, Ohio.
 
    (b) Post, at all its offices nationwide, copies of the attached
 Notice, marked "Appendix," on a form to be furnished by the Federal
 Labor Relations Authority.  Upon receipt of such form, the Director of
 the Internal Revenue Service shall sign the Notice and direct that
 copies be posted and maintained, for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in
 conspicuous places, including bulletin boards and other places where
 notices are customarily posted.  The Director shall take reasonable
 steps to insure that such Notices are not altered, defaced, or covered
 by any other material.
 
    (c) Notify the Federal Labor Relations Authority, in writing, within
 30 days of this Order, as to what steps have been taken to comply with
 its provisions.
 
                                       /s/ Isabelle R. Cappello
                                       Isabelle R. Cappello
                                       Administrative Law Judge
 
    Dated:  August
    Washington, D.C.
 
 
 
                                 APPENDIX
 
                          NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
 
  PURSUANT TO A DECISION AND ORDER OF THE FEDERAL LABOR
 RELATIONS
 AUTHORITY AND IN ORDER TO EFFECTUATE THE POLICIES OF CHAPTER 71
 OF TITLE
 5 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT
 RELATIONS
 WE HEREBY NOTIFY OUR EMPLOYEES THAT:
 
    WE WILL, upon request, negotiate in good faith with the National
 Treasury Employees Union, concerning parking regulations and elimination
 of employee use of parking spaces, to the extent consonant with law and
 Government-wide rules and regulations.
 
    WE WILL NOT implement parking regulations, or eliminate employee use
 of parking spaces without negotiating in good faith with the National
 Treasury Employees Union, to the extent consonant with law and
 Government-wide regulations.
 
    WE WILL NOT, in any like or related manner, interfere with, restrain,
 or coerce employees in the exercise of rights assured by the Federal
 Service Labor-Management relations Statute.
                                       Agency or Activity
 
    Dated:  By:  Signature
 
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
 
 
    /1/ In agreement with the Judge's conclusion, the Authority finds
 that Respondent's unila