18:0036(5)NG - Congressional Research Employees Association and Library of Congress -- 1985 FLRAdec NG

[ v18 p36 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:

 18 FLRA No. 5
                                            Case No. 0-NG-717
    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 raises the
 question of the negotiability of the following Union proposal:
          The Library shall ensure that the phone numbers now assigned to
       work stations of those employees who are being relocated will be
       reassigned to the work station to be occupied by each employee.
    Upon careful consideration of the entire record, including the
 parties' contentions, the Authority makes the following determinations.
 The Union's proposal requires that an employee relocated to a new work
 station retain the telephone number assigned to that employee at the
 prior work station.  The Agency asserts that the proposal is
 nonnegotiable because it does not concern conditions of employment as
 defined in section 7103(a)(14) of the Statute and because the proposal
 concerns the technology, methods and means of performing work under
 section 7106(b)(1) /1/ of the Statute.
    Section 7103(a)(14) defines "conditions of employment" as personnel
 policies, practices, and matters whether established by rule or
 regulation, or otherwise, affecting work conditions.  In construing that
 statutory phrase, the Authority has found proposals which concern
 matters directly affecting the "work situation and employment
 relationship" of bargaining unit employees to be within the duty to
 bargain.  E.g., National Treasury Employees Union and Internal Revenue
 Service, 3 FLRA 693 (1980).  See also American Federation of Government
 Employees, AFL-CIO and Air Force Logistics Command, Wright-Patterson Air
 Force Base, Ohio, 2 FLRA 604, 606 (1980), enforced as to other matters
 sub nom. Department of Defense v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 659
 F.2d 1140 (D.C. Cir. 1981), cert. denied sub nom. AFGE v. FLRA, 455 U.S.
 945 (1982).  In this regard, the record indicates that telephones are
 assigned to each work station.  The telephone is used every day by the
 Agency employees involved in the performance of their official duties.
 Under these circumstances, usage of the telephone is a matter directly
 affecting the "work situation and employment relationship" of these
 employees and, therefore, is within the duty to bargain.  Cf. American
 Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 2477
 and Library of Congress, Washing