21:0635(80)NG - AFGE, National EPA Council and EPA -- 1986 FLRAdec NG



[ v21 p635 ]
21:0635(80)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:


 21 FLRA No. 80
 
    Case No. 0-NG-678
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT 
 EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, NATIONAL EPA COUNCIL
 Union
 
 and
 
 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
 Agency
 
                                            Case No. 0-NG-678
 
                DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUES
 
                         I.  Statement of the Case
 
    This case is before the Authority because of a negotiability appeal
 filed under section 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service
 Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute).  It concerns the
 negotiability of the following two Union proposals which relate to
 official time, overtime compensation, and travel and per diem for
 employees representing the Union in negotiations.
 
                             Union Proposal 1
 
          The employer agrees to provide official time, including travel
       and per diem costs, for three union representatives to prepare
       union counter proposals and other negotiations related duties for
       the union during actual negotiations.  These representatives will
       not be negotiators for the union.
 
                             Union Proposal 2
 
          EPA employees who are union negotiators will receive the same
       type of compensation, compensatory time or overtime, as does
       management where negotiations extend beyond normal duty hours.
 
                       II.  Positions of the Parties
 
    According to the Union, Union Proposal 1 is in response to the
 Agency's history of consistently limiting its negotiating team to one
 person.  Consequently, under section 7131(a) of the Statute, the Union's
 entitlements as to official time have been limited to one negotiation
 team member.  Union Proposal 1 is intended to allow official time,
 travel and per diem for an additional three representatives who will be
 available to provide support (e.g., preparation of counter proposals,
 research and clerical functions) to the Union team during negotiations.
 
    The Agency argues that employees representing unions in negotiations
 may receive only the amount of official time to which they are entitled
 under section 7131(a) of the Statute.  Because Union Proposal 1 would
 exceed that amount, the Agency argues that it is outside the duty to
 bargain.  As to the question of travel and per diem, the Agency argues
 that the Supreme Court's decision in Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
 Firearms v. FLRA, 464 U.S. 89 (1983) (BATF) requires a conclusion that
 the subject is not within the duty to bargain.  Regarding Union Proposal
 2, the Agency contends that neither the Statute nor the laws governing
 payment for overtime permit overtime compensation for employees
 representing a union in negotiations.