20:0354(36)NG - NFFE Local 405 and Army Aviation and Army Troop Support Command -- 1985 FLRAdec NG



[ v20 p354 ]
20:0354(36)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:


 20 FLRA No. 36
 
 NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL 
 EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 405 
 Union 
 
 and
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, U.S. 
 ARMY AVIATION SYSTEMS COMMAND 
 AND U.S. ARMY TROOP SUPPORT 
 COMMAND 
 Agency 
 
 Case No. 0-NG-1078
 
                 DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE
 
    The petition for review in this case comes before the Federal Labor
 Relations Authority (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 the following
 Union proposal:  /1/
 
          Article VII, Section 1, 1.: Representational duties to
       bargaining unit employees of other Commands having an exclusive
       with the Union.  Official time for this function will be
       authorized by the Commander on an individual basis.
 
 Upon careful consideration of the entire record, including the parties'
 contentions, the Authority makes the following determination.
 
    The record in this case indicates that the Union holds exclusive
 recognition for four separate bargaining units of Department of the Army
 employees in St. Louis as follows:  the U.S. Army Aviation Systems
 Command (AVSCOM);  the U.S. Army Troop Support Command (TROSCOM);  a
 detachment of the U.S. Army Information Systems Command (ISC);  and the
 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Louis District.
 
    As relevant herein, Article VII, Section 1 of the AVSCOM-Local 405
 collective bargaining agreement authorizes official time for Union
 representatives employed by AVSCOM for various representational
 functions listed in the agreement concerning AVSCOM employees.  An
 identical provision in the TROSCOM-Local 405 collective bargaining
 agreement applies to representation of TROSCOM employees by Union
 representatives employed by TROSCOM.
 
    The proposal here in dispute would amend both the AVSCOM and TROSCOM
 collective bargaining agreements to authorize official time on an
 individual basis for a Union representative employed by either AVSCOM or
 TROSCOM to represent employees in bargaining units other than the one in
 which such Union representative is employed.  While the Union claims
 that the intent of the proposal was only to permit Union representatives
 employed by AVSCOM to represent TROSCOM employees and vice versa, the
 express language of the proposal is not limited to AVSCOM and TROSCOM
 but applies to other commands in which the Union holds an exclusive
 recognition.  However, such distinction is not relevant in this case
 since under either interpretation of the proposal the essential issue to
 be addressed concerns whether section 7131(d) of the Statute /2/
 authorizes negotiation of official time for union representatives
 employed in one bargaining unit to represent employees employed in a
 different bargaining unit.
 
    In this respect the disputed proposal herein is to the same effect as
 the proposal found nonnegotiable by the Authority in American Federation
 of Government Employees, Local 1698 and Department of the Navy, Aviation
 Supply Office, Consolidated Civilian Personnel Division, 17 FLRA No.
 84(1985), petition for review filed sub nom.  American Federation of
 Government Employees v. FLRA, No. 85-3341 (3rd Cir. June 17, 1985).  In
 that case, the union sought to authorize official time pursuant to
 section 7131(d) of the Statute for a union official employed in one of
 four bargaining units represented by the union at a single activity to
 inter alia, represent the employees in the other three units.  The
 Authority, relying on its earlier decision in Department of the Navy,
 Naval Construction Battalion Center, Port Hueneme, California and
 National Association of Government Employees, Local R12-29, 14 FLRA
 360(1984), determined that no bargaining obligation arose pursuant to
 section 7131(d) of the Statute in such circumstances.  Hence, contrary
 to the Union's contention in this case, and, based on Aviation Supply
 Office and Port Hueneme, and the reasons and cases cited therein,
 section 7131(d) does not authorize bargaining on the disputed proposal
 herein.
 
    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., September 26, 1985
                                       (s) HENRY B. FRAZIER III
                                       Henry B. Frazier III, Acting
                                       Chairman
                                       (s) WILLIAM J. MCGINNIS JR.
                                       William J. McGinnis, Jr. Member
                                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
 
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
 
 
    /1/ During the pendency of this appeal the Union withdrew from
 consideration two additional subsections of Article VII, Section 1.
 Thus, these two subsections will not be considered further herein.
 
 
    /2/ Section 7131(d) of the Statute provides:
 
          (d) Except as provided in the preceding subsections of this
       section--
 
          (1) any employee representing an exclusive representative, or
 
          (2) in connection with any other matter covered by this
       chapter, any employee in an appropriate unit represented by an
       exclusive rep