23:0204(27)NG - AFSCME Local 2477 and Library of Congress -- 1986 FLRAdec NG



[ v23 p204 ]
23:0204(27)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:


 23 FLRA No. 27
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE,
 COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES,
 LOCAL 2477, AFL-CIO
 Union
 
 and
 
 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
 Agency
 
                                            Case No. 0-NG-1195
 
                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) and concerns the
 negotiability of three proposals.  The Union made the proposals in
 response to an Agency decision to require warehouse personnel to wear
 uniforms.  We hold that Union Proposals 1 and 2 are within the duty to
 bargain /1/ and that Union Proposal 3 is nonnegotiable.
 
                             Union Proposal 1
 
          Each employee will receive 5 complete sets of clothing
       including long and short sleeve shirts.
 
                             Union Proposal 2
 
          Each employee will receive a jacket.
 
                             Union Proposal 3
 
          Staff will be allowed 10 minutes after the start and before the
       end of each workday to change clothes.
 
                       II.  Positions of the Parties
 
    The Agency asserts that it imposed the uniform requirement to promote
 quick identification of warehouse personnel for security purposes.  It
 contends that it has no obligation to bargain over Union Proposals 1 and
 2 because of a "zipper clause" in the parties' contract.  It contends
 that it has no obligation to bargain over Union Proposal 3 because it
 interferes with the Agency's right under section 7106(a)(2)(B) to assign
 work.
 
    The Union argues that the contract language relied upon by the Agency
 does not foreclose bargaining on Union Proposals 1 and 2.  It also
 argues that Union Proposals 1, 2 and 3 are appropriate arrangements for
 employees adversely affected by the Agency's requirement that they wear
 uniforms.
 
                              III.  Analysis
 
            A.  Effect of Question Concerning Interpretation of
 
                Contract Language on the Negotiability of Proposals 1
 
                and 2
 
    The Agency raises a question as to its duty to bargain over Proposals
 1 and 2 in light of contract language which it maintains amounts to a
 zipper clause which forecloses further bargaining on the subject of
 requiring employees to wear uniforms.  This is the only ground raised by
 the Agency in support of its allegation that these two proposals are
 nonnegotiable.  In a negotiability appeal the Authority decides only the
 negotiability issues presented under section 7