18:0040(6)NG - AFGE Local 900 and Army, Office of the Adjutant General, Army Reserve Components Personnel and Administrative Center, St. Louis, MO -- 1985 FLRAdec NG

 18 FLRA No. 6
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF 
 GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO 
 LOCAL 900
 Union 
 
 and 
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, OFFICE 
 OF THE ADJUTANT GENERAL, 
 U.S. ARMY RESERVE COMPONENTS 
 PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE 
 CENTER, ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 
 Agency
 
                                            Case No. 0-NG-909
 
                 DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE
 
    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 presents an issue
 concerning the negotiability of a provision of a local agreement
 disapproved by the Agency head pursuant to section 7114(c) of the
 Statute.  Upon careful consideration of the entire record, including the
 parties' contentions, the Authority makes the following determinations.
 /1/
 
          Except in cases of emergency, tours of duty will be established
       or changed at least two (2) weeks in advance, and will continue
       for at least two (2) pay periods.  Tours of duty shall be
       announced in writing and posted in the work area at least three
       (3) workdays prior to the beginning of the administrative workweek
       affected.
 
    The disputed provision in the instant case is to the same effect as
 Provision 1 in American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO,
 Local 2484 and U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Detrick, Maryland, 17 FLRA No.
 106 (1985) which also required two weeks advance notice of changes in
 tours of duty and which the Authority found to be inconsistent with an
 applicable Government-wide regulation.  In the cited case the Authority
 determined that 5 CFR 610.121(b)(2) (1984) obligates an agency head to
 revise an employee's administrative workweek to comport with the hours
 during which the employee will actually be required to work "(w)hen the
 head of an agency knows in advance of an administrative workweek" that
 such revision is necessary.  Thus, the Authority concluded that as the
 provision would prevent the Agency head from revising an employee's work
 schedule unless he or she became aware of the need to change work
 schedules not less than two weeks prior to the rescheduling, it was
 inconsistent with a Government-wide regulation and outside the duty to
 bargain.  /2/ Therefore, based on U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Detrick,
 since in the instant provision would also, in certain circumstances,
 prevent the Agency from complying with a Government-wide regulation, it
 is likewise outside the duty to bargain pursuant to section 7117(a)(1)
 of the Statute.
 
    Accordingly, pursuant to section 2424.10 of the Authority's Rules and
 Regulations, IT IS ORDERED that the Union's petition for review be, and
 it hereby is, dismissed.  Issued, Washington, D.C., May 14, 1985
                                       Henry B. Frazier III, Acting
                                       Chairman
                                       William J. McGinnis, Jr., Member
                                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
 
 
    /1/ The Union's petition for review originally contained six
 provisions.  However, in its Reply Brief the Union withdrew its request
 for review as to five of these provisions.  Accordingly, the five
 provisions are not considered further herein.  The Union's contention
 that the collective bargaining agreement is binding on the parties as
 executed because the Agency head's disapproval was not served on the
 Union within 30 days from the date the agreement was executed cannot be
 sustained.  The record indicates that the agreement was executed on
 August 4, 1983, and that the Agency head's disapproval was served on the
 Union, within the meaning of sections 2429.27(b) and (d) of the
 Authority's Rules and Regulations, (i.e., deposited in the mail by
 certified mail) on September 2, 1983, within 30 days from the date the
 agreement was executed.
 
 
    /2/ The Authority also found a second provision requiring one pay
 period advance notice of non-workday rotation schedule changes to be
 inconsistent with the same Government-wide regulation and outside the
 duty to bargain.