18:0490(66)CA - SSA and Northeastern Program Service Center and AFGE Local 1760 -- 1985 FLRAdec CA



[ v18 p490 ]
18:0490(66)CA
The decision of the Authority follows:


 18 FLRA No. 66
 
 SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 
 AND NORTHEASTERN PROGRAM SERVICE 
 CENTER 
 Respondent
 
 and 
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT 
 EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1760, AFL-CIO 
 Charging Party
 
                                            Case No. 2-CA-30368
 
 
                            DECISION AND ORDER
 
    The Administrative Law Judge issued the attached Decision in the
 above-entitled proceeding finding that the Respondent had engaged in
 certain unfair labor practices as alleged in the complaint, and
 recommending that it be ordered to cease and desist therefrom and take
 certain affirmative action.  Thereafter, the Respondent filed exceptions
 to the Judge's Decision and a supporting brief.
 
    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 and recommended Order as modified below.
 
    The Judge found that the Respondent violated section 7116(a)(1), (5)
 and (8) of the Statute by failing to comply with the provisions of
 section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute, when it refused to provide the
 Charging Party with information regarding the types and frequencies of
 details for Reconsideration (Recon) Reviewers, sanitized copies of all
 Recon employees' leave records, and the number of Recon employees denied
 leave and the reasons for such denials.  The Judge determined that the
 information requested by the Charging Party was "necessary," within the
 meaning of section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute, in order for the Charging
 Party to process a unit employee's grievance.  The grievance concerned
 an employee's request for compensatory time off in lieu of overtime
 wages which was denied by her supervisor because of the heavy workload
 in the Reconsideration Branch.
 
    The Respondent excepted to the Judge's decision insofar as her order
 pertained to the furnishing of leave records of supervisors.  The
 Authority agrees with the Judge's conclusion that the information
 requested with regard to bargaining unit employees was "necessary" for
 the Charging Party's processing of the grievance and that the
 Respondent's failure to provide such information to the Charging Party
 was violative of section 7116(a)(1), (5) and (8) of the Statute.
 However, the Authority disagrees with the Judge's conclusion that the
 data was "necessary and relevant to an intelligent processing of the
 grievance by the Union" and, thus that the Respondent was obligated to
 furnish such records of its supervisors.  In this regard, the Authority
 notes that the Judge concluded that if supervisors were allowed to take
 large amounts of leave during the period when the grievant was denied
 compensatory time off, such evidence would be of help in demonstrating
 that the workload was not sufficient to justify the denial of the
 employee's leave request.  Conversely, the Judge noted, if supervisors
 were on extended sick leave, the Charging Party might be convinced of
 the validity of the heavy workload excuse.  The Authority does not find
 this rationale or surmise by the Judge persuasive in determining whether
 the Charging Party's request for information regarding the Respondent's
 supervisors was for "necessary" data within the meaning of the Statute.
 In the Authority's view, as supervisors perform different functions and
 have different duties from those of unit employees, the Respondent would
 be governed by different considerations in deciding whether to grant or
 deny leave to such personnel.  Thus, information regarding leave usage
 of supervisors would not ordinarily be necessary for the Union's
 performance of its responsibilities "to act for, and negotiate
 collective bargaining agreements covering, all employees in the unit" as
 provided in section 7114(a)(1) of the Statute.  In this regard,
 supervisors would ordinarily not be "similarly situated employees" for
 the purposes of showing disparity of treatment among employees in
 grievance administration.  See Department of the Air Force, Scott Air
 Force Base, Illinois, 18 FLRA No. 75 (1985).  As there is nothing in the
 record to establish, by reference to the particular circumstances of
 this case, that the General Counsel affirmatively demonstrated the
 necessity for the requested data regarding supervisors, the Authority
 concludes that the General Counsel has not established that the
 Respondent failed to comply with section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute, in
 violation of the Statute, by refusing to provide information regarding
 supervisors to the Charging Party.  The Order is therefore limited to
 require only that data regarding bargaining unit employees be furnished.
 
                                   ORDER
 
    Pursuant to section 2423.29 of the Federal Labor Relations
 Authority's Rules and Regulations and section 7118 of the Statute, it is
 hereby ordered that the Social Security Administration and Northeastern
 Program Service Center shall:
 
    1.  Cease and desist from:
 
    (a) Refusing to furnish requested information concerning bargaining
 unit employees to the exclusive representative, American Federation of
 Government Employees, Local 1760, AFL-CIO, which is necessary to
 effectuate the processing of grievances over denial of compensatory time
 in lieu of overtime wages to bargaining unit employees who perform work
 on overtime.
 
    (b) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, or
 coercing employees in the exercise of rights assured by the Statute.
 
    2.  Take the following affirmative action in order to effectuate the
 purposes and policies of the Statute:
 
    (a) Provide to the American Federation of Government Employees, Local
 1760, AFL-CIO, the following information with regard only to bargaining
 unit employees which was requested in connection with the grievance
 filed on January 25, 1983 on behalf of a bargaining unit employee who
 was denied compensatory time in lieu of overtime wages for work she
 performed on overtime, and which is necessary to the processing of said
 grievance:  (1) types and frequencies of details for Reconsideration
 Reviewers for the period October 1, 1982 to January 28, 1983;  (2)
 sanitized copies of all Reconsideration employees' leave records for the
 period October 1, 1982 to January 28, 1983;  and (3) the number of
 Reconsideration employees denied leave and the reasons for such denials
 during the period of October 1, 1982 to January 28, 1983.
 
    (b) Post in the Reconsideration Branch of the Northeastern Program
 Service Center, 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 Chief of the Reconsideration Branch, or a
 designee, and shall be posted and maintained for 60 consecutive days
 thereafter, in conspicuous places, including bulletin boards and other
 places where notices to employees are customarily posted.  Reasonable
 steps shall be taken to insure that said 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 II, 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., June 21, 1985
 
                                       Henry B.Frazier III, Acting
                                       Chairman
                                       William J. McGinnis, Jr., 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 refuse to furnish requested information regarding
 bargaining unit employees to the exclusive representative, American
 Federation of Government Employees, Local 1760, AFL-CIO, which is
 necessary to effectuate the processing of grievances over denial of
 compensatory time in lieu of overtime wages to bargaining unit employees
 who perform work on overtime.
 
    WE WILL NOT, in any like or related manner, interfere with, restrain,
 or coerce employees in the exercise of rights assured by the Statute.
 
    WE WILL provide to the American Federation of Government Employees,
 Local 1760, AFL-CIO, the following information with regard only to
 bargaining unit employees, requested in connection with the grievance
 filed on January 25, 1983 on behalf of a bargaining unit employee who
 was denied compensatory time in lieu of overtime wages for work she
 performed on overtime, and which is necessary to the processing of said
 grievance:  (1) types and frequencies of details for Reconsideration
 Reviewers for the period October 1, 1982 to January 28, 1983;  (2)
 sanitized copies of all Reconsideration employees' leave records for the
 period October 1, 1982 to January 28, 1983;  and (3) the number of
 Reconsideration employees denied leave and the reasons for such denials
 during the period of October 1, 1982 to January 28, 1983.
                                       (Activity)
 
    Dated:  By:  (Signature) (Title)
 
    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 any of its provisions, they may communicate directly with the
 Regional Director of the Federal Labor Relations Authority, Region II,
 whose address is:  26 Federal Plaza, Room 2237, New York, New York
 10278, and whose telephone number is:  (212) 264-4934.
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -------------------- ALJ$ DECISION FOLLOWS --------------------
 
    Daniel H. Green,
    Representative for Respondent
 
    Herbert Collender,
    President, Local 1760
 
    Robert J. Fabii,
    Counsel for the General Counsel
    Federal Labor Relations Authority
 
    Before:  ISABELLE R. CAPPELLO, Administrative Law Judge
 
                                 DECISION
 
    This is a proceeding under Title VII of the Civil Service Reform Act
 of 1978, Pub. L. No. 95-454, 92 Stat. 1192, 5 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.
 (1982), commonly known as the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations
 Statute, and hereinafter referred to as the "Statute," and the rules and
 regulations issued thereunder and published at 5 CFR 2411 et seq.
 
    Pursuant to a charge of an unfair labor practice filed on April 6,
 1983, the General Counsel of the Federal Labor Relations Authority
 (hereinafter, the "Authority") investigated and, on June 30, 1983,
 issued the complaint initiating this action.
 
    The complaint alleges that Respondent has violated Sections
 7116(a)(1), (5), and (8) of the Statute by its refusal to furnish
 certain information requested by Local 1760 in connection with its
 processing of a grievance.  /1/ Respondent denies violating the Statute.
 
    A hearing was held on August 16, 1983, in New York City.  The parties
 appeared and submitted a stipulation of facts in lieu of testimony.  The
 stipulation was accepted into evidence as Joint Exhibit 1.  Briefs were
 filed on October 28, in compliance with an order dated September 8,
 which so extended the briefing time, upon a showing of good cause by
 Respondent, and without objection.
 
                             Findings of Fact
 
    1.  The original charge herein was filed by the Charging Party on
 April 6, 1983, and a copy thereof was served upon the Respondent, by
 certified mail on April 8, 1983.
 
    2.  On June 30, 1983, the Acting Regional Director for the Authority,
 Region II, issued a Complaint and Notice of Hearing which was served on
 all parties by certified mail on the same date.
 
    3.  On July 20, 1983, the Respondent filed its Answer to the above
 Complaint, seeking dismissal thereof.
 
    4.  At all times material herein, the Charging Party is and has been
 a labor organization within the meaning of Section 7103(a)(4) of the
 Statute.
 
    5a.  At all times material herein, the Social Security
 Administration, is and has been an agency with the meaning of Section
 7103(a)(3) of the Statute.
 
    5b.  At all times material herein, Northeastern Program Service
 Center is and has been a constituent entity within Social Security
 Administration and an agent acting on its behalf.
 
    6.  At all times material herein, the following named person has
 occupied the position set forth below, opposite this name:
 
          Geore Shainswit-- Chief Reconsideration Branch, Northeastern
       Program Service Center
 
    7.  At all times material herein, the person named above in paragraph
 6, has been and is now a supervisor or management official within the
 meaning of Section 7103(a)(10) and (11), respectively, of the Statute
 and has been, and is now an agent of Respondent acting on its behalf.
 
    8a.  At all times material herein, American Federation of Government
 Employees, AFL-CIO, has been the exclusive representative of employees
 in a unit consisting of all nonsupervisory employees (including
 professionals) in the Social Security Administration Program Service
 Centers, excluding all management officials and employees engaged in
 federal personnel work in other than a purely clerical capacity.
 
    8b.  At all times material herein, American Federation of Government
 Employees has delegated to the National Council of SSA Payment Centers
 ("Council") authority to act as its representative for the purpose of
 collective bargaining for certain of Respondent's employees, including
 employees at the Northeastern Program Service Center, and has been
 recognized by Respondent as such.
 
    8c.  At all times material herein, American Federation of Government
 Employees, Local 1760, AFL-CIO, has acted as agent for the Council for
 the purpose of collective bargaining for certain of Respondent's
 employees, including employees at the Northeastern Program Service
 Center, and has been recognized by Respondent as such.
 
    9.  On January 25, 1983, a bargaining unit employee, a
 "Reconsideration Reviewer" in "Sec. 2" in the Reconsideration Branch of
 Respondent's Northeastern Program Service Center, filed a grievance
 under the parties' negotiated grievance procedure over management's
 denial, on January 19, of the employee's request for compensatory time
 in lieu of overtime wages for work performed by the employee on
 overtime.  See Exhibit 5 to Joint Exhibit 1.  The employee's request was
 denied by her supervisor because of the heavy workload situation in the
 Reconsideration Branch.
 
    10.  On January 28, 1983, Herbert Collender, President of Local 1760,
 American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, and the above said
 employee's union representative, sent a memorandum to George Shainswit,
 Chief of Respondent's Reconsideration Branch, wherein he requested
 certain information in connection with the above grievance.
 Specifically, in his January 28 memorandum, Mr. Collender requested that
 management furnish him with:
 
          (1) "Recon Pacer" reports for October 1, 1982 to the present;
 
          (2) Demand Listings in Recon for the same period of time;
 
          Types and frequencies of details for Reconsideration Reviewers
       during the above cited period of time;
 
          (4) Sanitized copies of all Recon employees' leave records for
       the period referenced above;
 
          (5) the number of Recon employees denied leave and the reasons
       for such denials during the period described above.
 
 See Exhibit 6 to Joint Exhibit 1.
 
    11.  On January 31, 1983, Mr. Shainswit sent a memorandum to Mr.
 Collender in response to Mr. Collender's January 28 request for
 information.  Mr. Shainswit agreed to furnish the Recon "Pacer" reports;
  denied Mr. Collender's request in regard to the remainder of the
 information (Items 2, 4 and 5) on the basis that the information
 requested was not relevant to the grievance;  and, in regard to Item 3,
 the assumption was that it referred to details away from the Branch and
 that there were no such details.
 
    12.  On February 1, Mr. Collender sent a memorandum to Mr. Shainswit,
 explaining the reasons why the denied information was necessary to the
 Union, and further requested a response from Mr. Shainswit by close of
 business February 4.  Mr. Collender explained that:
 
          The request for information under Item 3 covers "details"
       within the Branch.  Requests for relevant and necessary data
       embraced by Items 2 through 5 would be in order so that I may
       assess the alleged high workloads, the sole reason for denying the
       grievant's request for compensatory time.
 
          Leave information will be used to determine if any employees
       were denied leave because of alleged high workloads or for other
       reasons.  This data will assist the union in its presentation and
       argument that it is feasible to grant compensatory time.
 
    13.  Mr. Shainswit responded with a memo to Mr. Collender on or about
 February 1, 1983, again affirming that the Recon "Pacer" reports would
 be furnished, but that the remainder of the information requested would
 not be furnished, on the basis that it was not relevant to the
 grievance.  Mr. Shainswit stated, as to the leave records:
 
          You have requested leave record information which would entail
       sanitized copies of all Branch employee leave records, the number
       of employees denied leave and the reason for such denials.  I
       assume that this request covers annual leave, sick leave and
       religious comp. time.  You are now asking for information
       regarding leave which can be considered a "right" of an employee,
       assuming the basis for request was valid.  SSA policy and the
       Union Management Agreement require liberal consideration in
       granting annual leave and to ensure balanced schedule of vacation
       leave.  Major usage of leave in the Branch involves annual leave,
       particularly since we have a large number of employees in the
       excess leave category.  I see no reasonable basis to expend the
       amount of time necessary to accommodate your request for data
       relative to all leave granting and denials from October 1, 1982 to
       the present, when the policies for granting this leave are not
       similar to the granting of compensatory time.  I see no relevancy
       in your request.
 
    14.  The Charging Party has been furnished with the Recon "Pacer"
 reports as requested.  The "Demand Listings in Recon . . ." (item 2 of
 Mr. Collender's request) did not exist at the time Charging Party made
 its request for information, and currently do not exist.  It is
 stipulated that the remainder of the information requested by the
 Charging Party is normally maintained by the Respondent in the regular
 course of business and is reasonably available, but has not been
 furnished to Charging Party by management to date.
 
    15.  On June 11, 1982, the parties executed a National Master
 Collective Bargaining Agreement.  Article 10, Section 2E provides that:
 
          Employees covered by Title 5 CFR, when approved by management,
       can accrue and use compensatory time.  When feasible, the employer
       shall grant such an employee's request for compensatory time
       rather than payment for overtime.
 
 See page 19 of Exhibit 4 to Joint Exhibit 1.
 
    Article 31, Time and Leave, provides, inter alia, that:
 
          The use of accrued annual leave is the right of the employee,
       subject to the right of the employer to approve the time at which
       leave may be taken . . . .  Normally, leave requested in advance
       will be granted except where conflicts of scheduling or undue
       interference with the work of the Administration would preclude
       it.
 
 See pages 89-90 of Exhibit 4 to Joint Exhibit 1.
 
    Article 31 also provides that leave without pay "is a right which
 accrues to an employee and may not be demanded by an employee." See page
 92 of Exhibit 4 to Joint Exhibit 1.  Article 3, Section 2, provides
 that:  "All employees shall be treated fairly and equitably in all
 aspects of personnel management . . . ." See page 4 of Exhibit 4 to
 Joint Exhibit 4.
 
    16.  At all times material herein, the Respondent has continuously
 taken the position that the information requested by the Charging Party
 is not relevant or necessary to the grievance, and thus it is under no
 obligation to furnish said information to the Charging Party pursuant to
 Section 7115(b)(4) of the Statute.
 
                                  Issues
 
    Was the information requested by Local 1760 (details within the
 branch, leave records for all employees, and number of denials of leave
 and reasons therefore) relevant and necessary information within the
 meaning of Section 7114(b)(4)(B) of the Statute for the purpose of
 processing a grievance filed on January 25, 1983.
 
    Was Respondent obligated by Section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute to
 provide the information requested.
 
    Did Respondent, by its denial of the requested information, violate
 Sections 7116(a)(1)(5) and (8) of the Statute.
 
    If a violation of the Statute occurred, how wide should any posting
 order be.
 
                        Discussion and Conclusions
 
    The General Counsel has demonstrated, by a preponderance of the
 evidence, /2/ that Respondent has violated the Statute, as alleged, by
 its failure to furnish the requested data on details and leave, within
 the Reconsideration Branch, in connection with the processing of a
 grievance over a denial of compensatory time off to an employee in that
 Branch, on the sole ground of a heavy workload situation in that Branch.
 
    It is stipulated that the data requested is normally maintained by
 the agency in the regular course of business, and that the data at issue
 has not been furnished pursuant to the Union's request and explanation
 of why it needs the data.  There is no claim or proof that the data
 requested falls into the statutory exemption for data that constitutes
 guidance, advice, or counsel relating to collective bargaining.
 
    The only reason given by Respondent for denying the requested data is
 one of relevancy.  The explanation offered for the need for the data is
 "to assess the alleged high workloads" in the branch where the grievant
 worked;  to enable the Union to determine "if employees were denied
 leave because of high workloads or for other reasons;" and to assist the
 Union "in its presentation and argument that it is feasible to grant
 compensatory time." See finding 12, supra.
 
    Superficially, at least, it would seem relevant to the grievance at
 issue to make a study of the pattern of detailing employees and granting
 and denying leave requests.  For example, if the data showed that
 Respondent was being very liberal in its grants of leave, including
 annual leave and leave without pay, this would be an indication that the
 workload was not unduly heavy.
 
    Respondent argues, at pages 4 and 5 of its brief, that different
 criteria apply to annual leave and leave-without-pay situations.
 Granting that some differences exist, such differences nevertheless do
 not render data on those types of leave irrelevant to the issue at hand.
  After all, under the collective bargaining agreement, annual leave may
 not be granted if "undue interference with the work of the
 (Reconsideration Branch) would preclude it;" and leave without pay "may
 not be demanded by an employee." See finding 15, supra.  In view of
 these provisions, the Union would find support for the grievance, if
 evidence showed that many unit employees, in the Branch, were enjoying
 grants of annual leave and leave without pay, which could have been
 denied had the workload been unduly heavy.
 
    On the other hand, if the information requested showed that employees
 had been taking unusually large amounts of sick leave, during the period
 involved, the Union would have grounds for believing that a heavy
 workload situation did exist to justify the denial of a request for
 compensatory time off;  and it might withdraw from the grievance.
 
    Respondent's argument, of page 4 of its brief, that no relevance was
 shown as to leave records for nonbargaining unit employees (the
 supervisors), is also rejected.  If supervisors were allowed to take
 large amounts of annual leave and leave without pay, during the period
 when the grievant was denied compensatory time off, such evidence would
 be of help in demonstrating that the workload was not so heavy as to
 justify the denial on that ground.  Conversely, if supervisors were on
 extended sick leave, the Union might be convinced of the validity of the
 heavy-workload excuse.
 
    As to the data sought on the types and frequencies of details for
 Reconsideration Reviewers (the type of job held by the grievant), within
 the Branch, this information too would shed light on the grievance.  For
 example, if the data showed that Reconsideration Reviewers were
 constantly being detailed into the section where the grievant worked,
 the heavy-workload excuse for the denial of the grievant's request for
 time off might appear to be fully justified by the Union, and justify a
 decision by it to withdraw from the grievance.
 
    Therefore it is concluded that all the data at issue is necessary and
 relevant to an intelligent processing of the grievance by the Union;
 and that denial of it constituted a violation of Section 7116(a)(1),
 (5), and (8) of the Statute.  See, e.g., Veterans Administration
 Regional Office, Denver, Colorado, 7 FLRA 629 (January 15, 1982).
 
    The remaining issue to be resolved is the scope of the remedy.  The
 General Counsel seeks a posting of a notice to all employees, concerning
 the violation, throughout the Northeastern Program Service Center.  See
 the proposed order attached to his brief.  Respondent, at page 6 of its
 brief, urges that any posting be limited to the office where the
 violation occurred and cites NTEU and U.S. Customs Service, 10 FLRA 579
 (Nov. 23, 1982).  Since the managerial decision which constitutes the
 violation was made by the Chief of the Reconsideration Branch, on a
 particular set of facts, and there is no evidence that other Chiefs in
 the Center have made similar misjudgements, a posting by the
 Reconsideration Chief, in his Branch, will sufficiently effectuate the
 purposes and policies of the Statute.
 
                        Ultimate Findings and Order
 
    Respondent has committed and is committing the unfair labor practices
 alleged in the complaint.
 
    Accordingly, and pursuant to 5 CFR 2423.29 and 5 U.S.C. 7118, it is
 hereby ORDERED that Respondent shall:
 
    1.  Cease and desist from:
 
          (a) Refusing to furnish information to the exclusive
       representative, American Federation of Government Employees, Local
       1760, AFL-CIO, which is relevant and necessary to effectuate
       processing of grievances over denial of compensatory time in lieu
       of overtime wages to bargaining unit employees who perform work on
       overtime.
 
          (b) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining
       or coercing employees in the exercise of rights assured by the
       Statute.
 
    2.  Take the following affirmative action in order to effectuate the
 purposes and policies of the Statute:
 
          (a) Provide to American Federation of Government Employees,
       Local 1760, AFL-CIO, the following information which was requested
       in connection with the grievance filed on January 25, 1983 on
       behalf of a bargaining unit employee who was denied compensatory
       time in lieu of overtime wages for work she performed on overtime,
       and which is relevant and necessary to the processing of said
       grievance:  (1) types and frequencies of details for
       Reconsideration Reviewers for the period October 1, 1982 to
       January 28, 1983;  (2) sanitized copies of all Recon employees'
       leave records for the period October 1, 1982 to January 28, 1983;
       and (3) the number of Recon employees denied leave and the reasons
       for such denials during the period of October 1, 1982 to January
       28, 1983.
 
          (b) Post in the Reconsideration Branch of the Northeastern
       Program Service Center, copies of the attached notice marked
       "Appendix." Copies of said notice, to be furnished by the Regional
       Director for Region 2, after being signed by the Chief of the
       Reconsideration Branch, shall be posted by him immediately upon
       receipt thereof, and be maintained by him for sixty consecutive
       days thereafter, in conspicuous places, including all places where
       notices to employees are customarily posted.  Reasonable steps
       shall be taken to insure that said notices are not altered,
       defaced, or covered by any other material.
 
          (c) Pursuant to 5 CFR 2423.30 notify that Regional Director,
       Region 2, Federal Labor Relations Authority, New York, New York,
       in writing within 30 days from the date of this order, as to what
       steps have been taken to comply herewith.
 
                                       ISABELLE R. CAPPELLO
                                       Administrative Law Judge
 
    Dated:  December 15, 1983
    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
 STATUTE WE HEREBY NOTIFY OUR EMPLOYEES THAT:
 
    WE WILL NOT refuse to furnish information to the exclusive
 representative, American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1760,
 AFL-CIO, which is relevant and necessary to effectuate processing of
 grievances over denial of compensatory time in lieu of overtime wages.
 
    WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain or
 coerce employees in the exercise of rights assured by the Statute.
 
    WE WILL provide to American Federation of Government Employees, Local
 1760, AFL-CIO, the following information which was requested in
 connection with the grievance filed on January 25, 1983 on behalf of a
 bargaining unit employee who was denied compensatory time in lieu of
 overtime wages for work she performed on overtime, and which is relevant
 and necessary to the processing of said grievance:  (1) types and
 frequencies of details for Reconsideration Reviewers for the period
 October 1, 1982 to January 28, 1983;  (2) sanitized copies of all Recon
 employees' leave records for the period October 1, 1982 to January 28,
 1983;  and (3) the number of Recon employees denied leave and the
 reasons for such denials during this period.
                                       (Agency or Activity)
 
    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 any of its provisions, they may communicate directly with the
 Regional Director of the Federal Labor Relations Authority, Region 2,
 whose address is:  26 Federal Plaza, Room 24-102, New York, New York
 10278, and whose telephone number is:  (212) 264-4934.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
 
 
    /1/ Section 7116 of the Statute provides, in pertinent part, that:
 
          (a) For the purpose of this chapter, it shall be an unfair
       labor practice for an agency--
 
          (1) to interfere with, restrain, or coerce any employee in the
       exercise by the employee of any right under this chapter;  (or) .
       . .
 
          (5) to refuse to consult or negotiate in good faith with a
       labor organiz