17:0019(9)NG FLRA CASE INFORMATION SHEET DIGEST HEADINGS STATUTE DIGEST NOTES ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR REVIEW -- 1985 FLRAdec NG
[ v17 p19 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
17 FLRA NO. 9
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, AFL-CIO, LOCAL GCC 1 Union and DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Agency Case No. 0-NG-1052
This case is before the Authority pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service Labor - Management Relations Statute and section 2424.1 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations on a petition for review of negotiability issues filed by the Union. For the reasons indicated below, it has been determined that the Union's petition for review must be dismissed.
The record in this case indicates that on about July 23, 1984, the local parties executed a collective bargaining agreement and submitted it to the agency head for review and approval pursuant to section 7114(c) of the Statute. Subsequently, in a memorandum addressed to the Administrator of the activity, the Department of Energy disapproved several provisions in the local parties' agreement as contrary to Agency regulation. The Union was apparently notified of the Agency's determination on August 29, 1984.
Section 7114(c)(3) of the Statute provides that an agreement which has not been approved or disapproved by the Agency involved within 30 days after the date of its execution becomes effective and binding on the parties on the 31st day, without the approval of the Agency, subject only to the requirements of the Statute and any other applicable law, rule or regulation.
Consequently, since the Agency's disapproval was served on the Union more than 30 days after the contract was executed, the entire agreement as negotiated and executed by the parties became effective and binding on August 23, 1984. Thus, the petition for review raises no dispute concerning the terms of such agreement which is cognizable under section 7117 of the Statute. [ v17 p19 ]
However, our conclusion that the instant petition is not cognizable in the present proceeding does not, of course, mean that any provisions in the agreement which are contrary to Statute or any other applicable law, rule or regulation, are thereby enforceable. Rather, a question as to the validity of such provisions may be raised in other appropriate proceedings (such as grievance arbitration and unfair labor practice proceedings) and, if the agreement provisions are there found to be violative of the Statute or any other applicable law, rule or regulation, they would not be enforceable but would be deemed void and unenforceable. See, American Federation of Government Employees, AFL - CIO, Local 1858 and U.S. Army Missile Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, 4 FLRA 361 (1980); American Federation of Government Employees, AFL - CIO, Local 1858 and U.S. Army Missile Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, 4 FLRA 363 (1981); and Point Mugu Joint Council of National Association of Government Employees, Local R12-33 and National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 1374 and Department of the Navy, Pacific Missile Test Center, Point Mugu, California, 8 FLRA 389 (1982).
Accordingly, since the Union's appeal does not meet the conditions for review under section 7117 of the Statute and section 2424.1 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, and apart from other considerations,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Union's appeal be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
For the Authority. Issued, Washington, D.C., February 22, 1985 Harold D. Kessler Managing Director for Case Processing
[ v17 p20 ]