19:0544(72)AR - Marine Corps Logistics Base, Albany, GA and AFGE Local 2317 -- 1985 FLRAdec AR
[ v19 p544 ]
19:0544(72)AR
The decision of the Authority follows:
19 FLRA No. 72
MARINE CORPS LOGISTICS BASE,
ALBANY, GEORGIA
Activity
and
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 2317
Union
Case No. O-AR-929
DECISION
This matter is before the Authority on an exception to the award of
Arbitrator H. Ellsworth Steele filed by the Agency under section 7122(a)
of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute and part 2425
of the Authority's Rules and Regulations.
A grievance was filed and submitted to arbitration challenging
management's assignment of a portion of the grievant's duties to
military personnel. The Arbitrator concluded that it had not been
demonstrated that civilian employees cannot successfully perform the
duties in question and that the Activity did not have the right to move
duties from a civilian employee position to military personnel without
negotiating with the Union. Thus, the Arbitrator determined that the
Activity had acted improperly and accordingly ordered as follows:
Unless the parties agree otherwise within 60 days from the date
of this award, the duties at issue must be returned to civilians.
In its exception the Agency contends that the award is deficient as
contrary to section 7106(a) of the Statute. The Authority agrees.
The Authority has repeatedly recognized that the plain language of
section 7106 provides that "nothing" in the Statute shall "affect the
authority" of an agency to exercise the rights enumerated in that
section. E.g., American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO,
Local 1968 and Department of Transportation, Saint Lawrence Seaway
Development Corporation, Massena, New York, 5 FLRA 70, 79 (1981), aff'd
sub nom. AFGE Local 1968 v. FLRA, 691 F.2d 565 (D.C. Cir. 1982), cert.
denied, 461 U.S. 926 (1983). Therefore, the Authority has consistently
held that no arbitration award may improperly deny an agency the
authority to exercise its rights under that section or result in the
substitution of the arbitrator's judgment for that of the agency in the
exercise of these rights. Id.; National Treasury Employees Union and
U.S. Customs Service, 17 FLRA No. 12 (1985), U.S. Customs Service,
Laredo, Texas and Chapter 145, National Treasury Employees Union, 17
FLRA No. 17 (1985). Section 7106(a)(2)(B) of the Statute, in
particular, reserves to management officials the authority to assign
work. Encompassed within this right is the discretion to determine the
particular personnel to whom work will be assigned. E.g., National
Treasury Employees Union, Chapter 204 and Federal Election Commission,
19 FLRA No. 25 (1985), slip op. at 2-3. Furthermore, the Authority has
consistently found proposals that would limit management's right to
assign bargaining-unit work outside the bargaining unit to conflict with
management's right to assign work. E.g., International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers, Local 570, AFL-CIO-CLC and Department of the Army,
Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona, 14 FLRA 432 (1984) (proposals 1-3);
National Association of Air Traffic Specialists and Department of
Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, 6 FLRA 588 (1981)
(proposal 5). In terms of this case, the Authority similarly finds that
the award conflicts with management's right to assign work. By
directing that the disputed duties be returned to civilians, the
Arbitrator, contrary to section 7106(a)(2)(B), has substituted his
judgment for that of management as to whom will be assigned that work.
Therefore, the Authority finds that the award is deficient as contrary
to management's right to assign work pursuant to section 7106(a)(2)(B)
of the Statute. /1/ Accordingly, the award is modified by striking the
order of the Arbitrator quoted above. /2/
Issued, Washington, D.C., August 12, 1985
Henry B. Frazier III, Acting
Chairman
William J. McGinnis, Jr., Member
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
/1/ In this regard with respect to the agency policies cited by the
Arbitrator, the Arbitrator did not find and it is not apparent that the
award is otherwise authorized by such policies.
/2/ In view of this decision, it is not necessary that the Authority
address other provisions of section 7106(a) raised by the Agency in its
exception.