23:0122(14)CA - VA Washington, DC and VA Medical Center and Regional Office, Sioux Falls, SD and AFGE Local 1509 -- 1986 FLRAdec CA
[ v23 p122 ]
23:0122(14)CA
The decision of the Authority follows:
23 FLRA No. 14
VETERANS ADMINISTRATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. AND VETERANS
ADMINISTRATION MEDICAL CENTER
AND REGIONAL OFFICE, SIOUX FALLS,
SOUTH DAKOTA
Respondent
and
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1509, AFL-CIO
Charging Party
Case Nos. 57-CA-50257
57-CA-50265
DECISION AND ORDER
I. Statement of the Case
This consolidated unfair labor practice case is before the Authority
because of exceptions filed by the General Counsel to the attached
Decision of the Administrative Law Judge, which are limited to the
Judge's findings with respect to Case No. 57-CA-50265. No exceptions
were filed by any party with respect to the Decision of the
Administrative Law Judge concerning Case No. 57-CA-50257. The Issue
raised in the General Counsel's exceptions is whether questioning by an
agent of the Respondent during a Union representative's interview for a
bargaining unit position constituted interrogation and thus interference
restraint, or coercion in violation of section 7116(a)(1) of the Federal
Service Labor-management Relations Statute (the Statute).
II. Background, Judge's Decision, and Adoption in Part
The Judge concluded with respect to the allegations raised in Case
No. 57-CA-50257, that the Respondent's refusal to bargain over its
decision to change a bargaining unit employee's starting and quitting
times constituted a violation of section 7116(a)(1) and (5) of the
Statute. Noting the absence of exceptions, we adopt the Judge's
conclusion and supporting rationale in Case No. 57-CA-50257.
With regard to the allegations raised in Case No. 57-CA-50265, the
Judge noted in his findings that during the interview, the agent of the
Respondent asked the Union representative "if he was chief union steward
and how much time he spent on union activities." Also, he was asked
"what would happen if . . . (he) . . . was needed at the warehouse at
the same time he was needed by the union . . . (and) . . . what he would
do if a truck needed to be unloaded and he was on official time
performing union duties." Finally, he was asked "if his position was an
elected or an appointed one."
The Judge viewed this questioning as permissible, concluding that it
did not interfere with the employee's protected rights in violation of
section 7116(a)(1) of the Statute. In reaching this conclusion, the
Judge relied upon the Authority's holding in Department of the Air
Force, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, 20 FLRA No. 89 (1985), petition
for review filed sub nom. Federal Association of Government Employees,
Local R7-23 v. FLRA, No. 86-1011 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 1, 1986). He viewed
that decision as standing for the proposition that when conflicts arise
between an employee's entitlement to official time for representational
functions under section 7131 of the Statute and the entitlement of
management under section 7106 of the Statute to manage, consistent with
effective and efficient Government, the parties must recognize the need
for and seek reasonable accommodations. In recognizing the need for
accommodation, the Judge found that it was reasonable for an agency to
"ask an employee the questions necessary to reasonably determine if a
conflict exists and how accomodations can be achieved." The Judge
concluded that the questioning by Respondent's agent here was directed
at ascertaining whether there would be such a conflict concerning
demands upon the employee's time in the warehouse position and was
therefore relevant to reaching a permissible goal.
III. Positions of the Parties
The General Consel alleges that any statements or questions which
suggest a relationship between an employee's protected activity and the
employee's present or future employment status constitute interrogation
and are violative of section 7116(a)(1) of the Statute. The General
Counsel also contends that the Judge's reliance on Department of the Air
Force, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, is misplaced. The General
Counsel argues that the cited case, and the cases cited therein, all
involve a specific problem with respect to the granting of official time
or an employee's inability to perform certain duties, whereas the
subject case involves the interrogation of a job applicant about his
union duties prior to his selection.
IV. Analysis
As previously held by the Authority, conduct by an agency which may
reasonably tend to interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the
exercise of their rights under the Statute is violative of section
7116(a)(1) of the Statute. See Department of the Treasury, Internal
Revenue Service, Louisville District, 20 FLRA No. 77 (1985), petition
for review filed sub nom. National Treasury Union v. FLRA, No. 86-1015
(D.C. Cir. Jan. 8, 1986), and the cases cited at n.2. Contrary to the
Judge, we find that this interrogation falls within that category. The
questions were asked of this labor organization representative during an
employment interview. The questions concerned his position in the
Union, how many hours he spends in activities on behalf of the Union,
and how he would resolve hypothetical conflicts between work and his
protected activities on behalf of the Union. The context of the
questioning establishes a connection between the protected activity and
the employee's chance to be selected for the position. We conclude that
this questioning reasonably tends to interfere with the employee's
rights under the Statute by communicating that time spent engaging in
protected activity could adversely affect his chance for future job
selection.
We agree with the General Counsel that the Judge's reliance on
Department of the Air Force, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, was
misplaced. That case involved a specific ongoing conflict between an
employee's right to use official time and the agency's right to manage
effectively and efficiently, The Authority held that when such conflicts
arise, the parties must recognize the need for and seek reasonable
accommodation. The Authority viewed the statements made by the agency
representative to the employee as an attempt to seek accommodation and,
in the circumstances, should have been understood to have been made in
that context by a reasonable employee. No such conflict has arisen in
this case.
V. Conclusion
Pursuant to section 2423.29 of the Authority's rules and Regulations
and section 7118 of the Statute, the Authority has reviewed the rulings
of the Judge made at the hearing, finds that no prejudicial error was
committed and thus affirms those rulings. The Authority has considered
the Judge's Decision, the exceptions to that Decision, the positions of
the parties and the entire record, and adopts the Judge's findings,
conclusions and recommendations, to the extent consistent with the
above. Thus, we adopt the Judge's conclusion in Case No. 57-CA-50257
that the Respondent violated section 7116(a)(1) and (5) of the Statute
by refusing to bargain over the change in starting and quitting times of
a bargaining unit employee. However, contrary to the Judge's finding in
Case No. 57-CA-50265, we find that the interrogation of the bargaining
unit employee during his interview for a bargaining unit position about
his protected activity constitutes interference, restraint and coercion
in violation of section 7116(a)(1) of the Statute.
ORDER
Pursuant to section 2423.29 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations
and section 7118 of the Federal service Labor-Management Relations
Statute, the Authority hereby orders that the Veterans Administration,
Washington, D.C. and Veterans Administration Medical Center and Regional
Office, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Instituting any change in the starting and quitting times of its
employees without affording the American Federation of Government
Employees, Local 1509, AFL-CIO, the exclusive bargaining representative
of its employees, the opportunity to negotiate with respect to any
proposal changes thereto.
(b) Interrogating and bargaining unit employees concerning their
protected right to represent the American Federation of Government
Employees, Local 1509, AFL-CIO, the exclusive representative of its
employees, during an interview for a bargaining unit position.
(c) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, or
coercing its employees in the exercise of their rights assured by the
Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.
2. Take the following affirmative action in order to effectuate the
purposes and policies of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations
Statute:
(a) Reestablish the previous starting and quitting times for employee
Raymond Ellis and afford the American Federation of Government
Employees, Local 1509, AFL-CIO, the opportunity to negotiate with
respect to any proposal changes thereto.
(b) Post at its facilities in the Veterans Administration Medical
Center and Regional Office, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, 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
Medical Center Director, or a designee, and shall be posted and
maintained for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places,
including all bulletin boards and other places where notices to
employees are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken to
ensure that such 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 V. 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, Washing, D.C., August 14, 1986.
/s/ Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman
/s/ Henry B. Frazier III, 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 institute any change in the starting and quitting times
of our employees without affording the American Federation of Government
Employees, Local 1509, AFL-CIO, the exclusive bargaining representative
of our employees, the opportunity to negotiate with respect to any
proposal changes thereto.
WE WILL NOT interrogate bargaining unit employees concerning their
protected right to represent the American Federation of Government
Employees, Local 1509, AFL-CIO, the exclusive representative of our
employees, during an interview for a bargaining unit position.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain,
or coerce our employees in the exercise of their rights assured by the
Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.
WE WILL reestablish the previous starting and quitting times for
employees Raymond Ellis and afford the American Federation of Government
Employees, Local 1509, AFL-CIO, the opportunity to negotiate with
respect to any proposed changes thereto.
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 its provisions, they may communicate directly with the Regional
Director, Region V, Federal Labor Relations Authority, whose address is:
Suite 1359-a, 175 Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604 and whose
telephone number is: (312) 353-6306.
-------------------- ALJ$ DECISION FOLLOWS --------------------
Case Nos. 57-CA-50257 57-CA-50265
VETERANS ADMINISTRATION, WASHINGTON D.C. AND
VETERANS ADMINISTRATION MEDICAL CENTER AND REGIONAL
OFFICE, SIOUX FALLS, SOUTH DAKOTA
Respondent
and
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1509, AFL-CIO
Charging Party
William H. Ranney, Esq.
For the Respondent
Patricia Niemann
For the Charging Party
Sandra LeBold, Esq.
For the General Counsel, FLRA
Before: SAMUAL A. CHAITOVITZ
Administrative Law Judge
DECISION
Statement of the Case
This is a proceeding under the Federal Service Labor-Management
Relations Statute, Chapter 71 of Title 5 of the U.S. Code, 5 U.S.C.
Section 7101 et seq., 92 Stat. 1191 (hereinafter referred to as the
Statute), and the Rules and Regulations of the Federal Labor Relations
Authority (FLRA), 5 C.F.R. Chapter XIV, Section 2410 et seq.
A charge against Veterans Administration, Washington, D.C.
(hereinafter called VA), and VA Medical Center and Regional Office,
Sioux Falls, South Dakota, (hereinafter called VA Sioux Falls). /1/ was
filed by AMERICAN Federation of Government Employees, Local 1509,
AFL-CIO, (herein called AFGE Local 1509), in January 21, 1985 in Case
No. 57-CA-50257 and was amended on March 8, 1985. Pursuant to the above
described charge and amended charge on March 12, 1985, the General
Counsel of the FLRA, by the Acting Regional Director for Region V,
issued a Complaint and Notice of Hearing alleging the Respondents
violated Sections 7116(a)(1) and (5) of the Statute by unilaterally
changing the duty hours of an employee.
A charge against the Respondents was filed by AFGE Local 1509 on
January 31, 1985 in Case No 57-CA-50265 and was amended on February 14,
1985 and was amended a second time on March 13, 1985. Pursuant to the
above described charge, as twice amended, on March 13, 1985 the General
Counsel of the FLRA, by the Regional Director for Region V, issued a
Complaint and Notice of Hearing alleging that Respondents violated
Section 7116(a)(1) of the Statute by interrogating an employee
concerning his union activities. By order dated March 13, 1985, Case
Nos. 57-CA-50257 and 57-CA-50265 were consolidated for the purpose of
hearing. Respondents filed timely Answers denying that the Statute had
been violated.
A hearing was conducted before the undersigned in Sioux Falls, South
Dakota. Respondents, Charging Party and General Counsel of the FLRA
were represented and afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine
and cross-examine witnesses, to introduce and to argue orally.
Post-hearing briefs were filed and have been fully considered.
Based upon the entire record in this matter, my observation of the
witnesses and their demeanor, and from my evaluation of the evidence, I
make the following:
Findings of Fact
At all times material herein American Federation of Government
Employees (AFGE) has been recognized as the exclusive collective
bargaining representative for an appropriate unit of VA employees,
including the employees assigned to VA Sioux Falls that are the subject
of this case. AFGE Local 1509 has been AFGE's representative on behalf
of the employees at VA Sioux Falls.
At all times material VA and AFGE have been parties to a Master
Collective Bargaining Agreement and VA Sioux Falls and AFGE Local 1509
have been parties to a local Argreement.
The laundry crew was staffed with 12 employees /2/ and, prior to
December 23, 1984, all employees of the laundry worked from 7:00 AM to
3:30 PM Monday through Friday, except for one employee in the linen room
worked from 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM. These hours were in effect during the
entire year except during the summer months when all employees commenced
work at 6:00 AM and worked to 2:30 PM, because of the extreme heat in
the laundry.
By memorandum to "Patricia Niemann, President, AFGE 1509" dated
November 15, 1984, VA Sioux Falls, proposed "a new tour of duty (6:00
AM-2:30 PM) for employees in both the sanitation of the laundry
sections. Half of the employees in the sanitation would be affected,
and Raymond Ellis, Laundry Machine Operator, would be the only laundry
employee who would start this tour."
On November 26, 1984, a meeting was held by representatives of VA
Sioux Falls and AFGE Local 1509 to discuss the proposed change. After
discussion AFGE Local 1509 agreed to the change in duty hours in the
sanitation section. AFGE Local 1509 raised the problem that Ellis and
his wife car pooled. VA Sioux Falls pointed out that Ellis' wife was on
sick leave and might not return, but if she did she could work the same
hours as Ellis. AFGE Local 1509 suggested that Ellis' hours of work,
7:00 AM-3:00 PM, he maintained. Chief of Personnel Elmer Richards
stated the hours were non-negotiable. The change in Ellis' hours was to
be made so that Ellis could have a washing cycle completed so that the
employees coming to work at 7:00 AM could immediately start drying,
ironing, folding, etc.
By memorandum dated November 28, 1984, to VA Sioux Falls, AFGE Local
1509, stated that Ellis was happy with his existing hours (7:00 AM-3:30
PM) and that the maintaining of two cars for car pooling was very
expensive. The memo also stated "Mr. Elmer Richards stated, In our
negotiating session on 11/28/84 that "Raymond Ellis, new tour of duty 6
AM-2:30 PM is non-negotiable." Please reply within (3) days with your
written answer stating if this new tour of duty 6 AM-2:30 PM is
non-negotiable."
By memorandum dated December 3, 1984, VA Sioux Falls responded to
AFGE Local 1509 that the new 6:00 AM-2:30 PM tour of duty for Ellis
would commence pay period 26 and "management will not negotiate tours of
duty." On December 23, 1984, the new duty hours for Ellis went into
effect.
Except for the change in Ellis' hours there has been no change in the
number of employees in grades and in the types of employees working in
the laundry section.
Case No. 57-CA-50265
At all times material herein, Gail Alexander, Assistant Chief, Supply
Service, and Carl Meyerhoff, Chief of Storage and Distribution section
and Chief of the Warehouse, were management officials and agents of VA
Sioux Falls. Meyerhoff is Alexander's subordinate.
On December 24, 1984, a vacant position in Storage and Distribution
was announced. In January 1985, Joe Turner, AFGE Local 1509 Chief
Steward, applied for the vacant position, was one of five finalists and,
as part of the promotional process, was interviewed.
On or about January 16, 1985 Turner was interviewed for the vacancy
by Alexander and Meyerhoff. Alexander asked Turner if she could
question him about his union activities. Turner agreed. During the
interview Alexander asked Turner, inter alia, how Turner came to work at
VA, what he thought the duties were of a warehouseman, etc. Alexander
asked Turner if he was chief union steward and how much time he spent on
union activities. Turner explained he was entitled to spend four hours
of official time per week on union activities but that sometimes he was
required to spend more than four hours per week on union business.
Turner stated that he was occasionally called by personnel to discuss a
problem or attend a meeting. Alexander asked what would happen if
Turner was needed at the warehouse at the same time he was needed by the
union; she asked what he would do if a truck needed to be unloaded and
he was on official time performing union duties. Alexander pointed out
that there were only limited people working in the warehouse. Turner
answered it was no problem and that he had always been able to resolve
such conflicts in his position in housekeeping. Alexander asked Turner
if his position was an elected or an appointed one. Turner answered
that he was appointed and had a right to keep the position as long as he
wished.
Discussion and Conclusions
Case No. 57-CA-50257
It is well settled that starting and quitting times of employees on
an established shift is a condition of employment and an agency violates
the Statute by not affording its employees' exclusive representative
opportunity to negotiate fully on the decision to change the starting
and quitting times. U.S. Customs, 9 FLRA 116 (1982) and Internal
Revenue Service, Los Angeles District, 10 FLRA 653 (1982); See also
Department of the Air Force, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, 20 FLRA No.
107 (1985).
The FLRA has also concluded that the establishment of a new shift or
tour of duty is negotiable only at the election of the agency because it
involves "numbers, types and grades of employees or positions assigned
to any organizational subdivision, work project or tour of duty" within
the meaning of Section 7106(b)(1) of the Statute. U.S. Customs, supra,
and National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 1461 and Department
of the Navy, U.S. Naval Observatory, 16 FLRA 995 (1984) and Department
of the Air Force, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, supra.
In the subject case, therefore, if the change in Ellis' hours
constituted a change in Ellis' starting and quitting time, VA. Sioux
Falls was obligated to negotiate with AFGE Local 1509 concerning the
substance of such a change. On the other hand, if the change in Ellis
hours constituted the establishment of a new shift, it would have
involved rights reserved to VA Sioux Falls by Section 7106(b)(1) of the
Statute and would have been negotiable only at the election of the
agency. These distinctions drawn by the FLRA are very fine ones and
somewhat arcane. Cf. National Treasury Employees Union v. FLRA, 732 F2d
703 (1984).
In light of the distinctions drawn by the FLRA, I conclude that VA
Sioux Falls changed Ellis' starting and quitting times and did not
establish a new shift. In so concluding, I note that Ellis continued to
work with the existing shift and employees. He was merely directed to
come in earlier so that he could have a load of wash ready for the rest
of his shift when it arrived an hour after Ellis. Ellis continued his
duties with the established shift. /3/ Further, VA Sioux Falls was
willing to let Ellis' wife, who also worked in the laundry, keep the
same hours as Ellis. Since she too worked on the same laundry shift, it
is clear that VA Sioux Falls merely perceived this as involving a
changing and adjusting of the starting and quitting times of Ellis, and
his wife, and not the establishment of a new shift.
In light of the foregoing conclusion VA Sioux Falls was obligated to
negotiate with AFGE Local 1509 concerning the decision to changing
Ellis' starting and quitting times. Its refusal to do so therefore
violated VA Sioux Falls' obligation as set forth in Section 7116(a)(1)
and (5) of the Statute. U.S. Customs, supra and Internal Revenue
Service, Los Angeles District, Supra.
Case No. 57-CA-50265
The FLRA has recognized conflicts between employees' entitlements to
official time for representational functions under Section 7131 of the
Statute and the entitlement of management under Section 7106 of the
Statute to manage, consistent with effective and efficient Government.
When such conflicts arise the FLRA has stated that the parties must
recognize the need for and seek reasonable accommodations. Department
of the Air Force, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, 20 FLRA No. 89 (1985)
and the cases cited therein.
Recognizing this need to seek accommodations it seems only reasonable
that an agency can ask an employee the questions necessary to reasonably
determine if a conflict exists and how accommodations can be achieved.
In the subject case, Alexander's questioning of Turner seemed directed
at ascertaining whether there would be such a conflict concerning
demands upon Turner's time in the warehouse position, and how Turner
would deal with such a conflict. Such questioning, since it was
relevant to reaching a permissible goal, and was clearly so stated,
would not interfere with an employee's protected rights and would not
violate Section 7116(a)(1) of the Statute. /4/ Although Alexander's
asking Turner how he was chosen as Steward seem unrelated to the rest of
questions, and, although, by itself it might seem suspicious, it is not,
in light of the total conversation, sufficient to constitute an
interference with Turner's protected rights. I conclude, in light of
the foregoing, that Alexander's questioning of Turner did not violate
Section 7116(a)(1) of the Statute.
Having found and concluded that in Case No. 57-CA-50257 VA Sioux
Falls violated Section 7116(a)(1) and (5) of the Statute and that in
Case No. 57-CA-50265 VA Sioux Falls did not violate the Statute, I
recommend that the FLRA issue the following:
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that the complaint in Case No. 57-CA-50265 be, and it
hereby is, dismissed.
Pursuant to section 2423.29 of the Federal Labor Relations
Authority's Rules and Regulations and section 7118 of the Statute, the
Authority hereby orders that the Veterans Administration, Washington,
D.C. and Veterans Administration Medical Center and Regional Office,
Sioux Falls, South Dakota, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Instituting any change in the starting and quitting times
of employees without affording the American Federation of
Government Employees, Local 1509, AFL-CIO, the exclusive
bargaining representative of its employees, the opportunity to
negotiate with respect to any proposed changes thereto.
(b) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining
or coercing employees in the exercise of their rights assured by
the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.
2. Take the following affirmative action in order to effectuate the
purposes and policies of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations
Statute:
(a) Reestablish the previous starting and quitting times for
employee Raymond Ellis and afford the American Federation of
Government Employees, Local 1509, AFL-CIO Union the opportunity to
negotiate with respect to any proposed changes thereto.
(b) Post at its facilities in the Veterans Administration
Medical Center and Regional Office, Sioux Falls, South Dakota,
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 Medical Center Director and shall be
posted and maintained for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in
conspicuous places, including all bulletin boards and other places
where notices to employees are customarily posted. Reasonable
steps shall be taken to insure that such Notices are not altered,
defaced, or covered by any other material.
(c) Pursuant to section 2423.30 of the Federal Labor Relations
Authority's Rules and Regulations, notify the Regional Director,
Region V, Federal Labor Relations Authority, 175 W. Jackson
Boulevard, Suite A-1359, Chicago, Illinois 60604, in writing,
within 30 days from the date of this Order, as to what steps have
been taken to comply herewith.
SAMUEL A. CHAITOVITZ
Administrative Law Judge
Dated: January 30, 1986 Washington, D.C.
--------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
(1) Collectively referred to herein as Respondents.
(2) Ten of these employees are WG-2 Laundry workers; One is a WG-3
Laundry Machine Operator; and WG-5 Laundry Machine Operator, Mr.
Raymond Ellis. The WG-3 Laundry Machine Operator ran the dryers and
Ellis ran the washers.
(3) In this regard, it is further noted that another member of the
shift had a starting time one hour after the bulk of the shift arrived.
(4) In so concluding I do not rely upon the fact that Alexander asked
Turner if she could question him about his union steward work. Such a
question to a job applicant could hardly be refused by the applicant.
Had the questioning been impermissible, asking permission to ask such
questions, in such circumstances, would hardly have cured the
fundamental nature of the questioning.
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 institute any change in the starting and quitting times
of employees without affording the American Federation of Government
Employees, Local 1509, AFL-CIO, the exclusive bargaining representative
of its employees, the opportunity to negotiate with respect to any
proposed changes thereto.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner, interfere with, restrain,
or coerce employees in the exercise of their rights assured by the
Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.
WE WILL reestablish the previous starting and quitting times for
employee Raymond Ellis and afford the American Federation of Government
Employees. Local 1509, AFL-CIO Union the opportunity to negotiate with
respect to any proposed changes thereto.
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 V,
whose address is: 175 W. Jackson Boulevard, Suite A-1359, Chicago,
Illinois 60604 and whose telephone number is: (312) 353-6306.