24:0209(27)CA - Navy, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, NH and FEMT Council -- 1986 FLRAdec CA



[ v24 p209 ]
24:0209(27)CA
The decision of the Authority follows:


 24 FLRA No. 27
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
 PORTSMOUTH NAVAL SHIPYARD 
 PORTSMOUTH, NEW HAMPSHIRE
 Respondent
 
 and
 
 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES METAL TRADES 
 COUNCIL, AFL-CIO
 Charging Party
 
                                            Case No. 1-CA-40290
 
                            DECISION AND ORDER
 
    I.  Statement of the Case
 
    This unfair labor practice case is before the Authority on exceptions
 filed by the Respondent (Agency).  The General Counsel filed an
 opposition to the exceptions.  The issue is whether it is an unfair
 labor practice under the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations
 Statute (the Statute) for the Respondent to refuse a request, made
 pursuant to section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute, to provide the Charging
 Party (Union) with the names and home addresses of employees in a
 bargaining unit which the Union exclusively represents.
 
    In a recent Decision and Order on Remand, Farmers Home Administration
 Finance Office, St. Louis, Missouri, 23 FLRA No. 101 (1986) (FHAFO), we
 reviewed the Authority's previous decision concerning the release of the
 names and home addresses of bargaining unit employees to exclusive
 representatives.  We concluded that the release of the information is
 not prohibited by law, is necessary for unions to fulfill their duties
 under the Statute, and meets all of the other requirements established
 by section 7114(b)(4).  We also determined that the release of the
 information is generally required without regard to whether alternative
 means of communication are available.  Consistent with our decision on
 remand in FHAFO, we conclude that Respondent's refusal to provide the
 Union with the names and home addresses sought in this case violated
 section 7116(a)(1), (5) and (8) of the Statute.
 
    II.  Facts
 
    The Union requested the names and home addresses of the unit
 employees it represents.  The Respondent denied the request on the
 ground that the information sought was not available under the Statute
 or the parties' negotiated agreement.  The Respondent also contended
 that the information was not subject to disclosure under the provisions
 of the Privacy Act.  /1/
 
    III.  Administrative Law Judge's Decision
 
    The Judge concluded that the Respondent failed to comply with the
 requirements of section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute in violation of
 section 7116(a)(1), (5) and (8) of the Statute when it refused to
 provide the Union, upon request, with the names and home addresses of
 all unit employees represented by the exclusive representative.  In
 reaching this conclusion, the Judge found that the home addresses were
 necessary and relevant within the meaning of section 7114(b)(4) of the
 Statute for the Union to carry out its representational obligations;
 that the alternative means of communicating with unit employees which
 were available to the Union were not effective;  that the disclosure of
 home addresses was not prohibited by law or regulation;  and that the
 Union's need for home addresses in order to effectively communicate with
 the employees it represents outweighed the minimal intrusion on employee
 privacy rights which would result.
 
    IV.  Positions of the Parties
 
    The positions of the parties are set forth in the Respondent's
 exceptions and the General Counsel's opposition.  /2/
 
    In its exceptions, the Respondent essentially disagrees with the
 Judge's findings and conclusions and asserts that it was not obligated
 to furnish the requested information to the Union.
 
    In its opposition, the General Counsel argues that the Judge's
 findings and conclusions are supported by a preponderance of the
 evidence and are consistent with law.  The General Counsel therefore
 urges the Authority to adopt the Judge's decision in its entirety.
 
    V.  Analysis and Conclusion
 
    As noted above, the Authority in the decision on remand in FHAFO
 concluded that the release of home addresses of bargaining unit
 employees to the exclusive representatives of these employees is not
 prohibited by law, is necessary for unions to fulfill their duties under
 the Statute, and meets the other requirements of section 7114(b)(4).  We
 also determined that agencies are required to furnish such information
 without regard to whether alternative means of communication are
 available.  Based on our decision on remand in the FHAFO case and in
 agreement with the Judge in this case, we find that the Respondent was
 required to furnish the Union with the names and home addresses of the
 employees in the bargaining unit.  Thus, we conclude that the
 Respondent's refusal to furnish the requested information in this case
 was in violation of section 7116(a)(1), (5) and (8) 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, it is ordered that the Department of the Navy, Portsmouth Naval
 Shipyard, Portsmouth, New Hampshire, shall:
 
    1.  Cease and desist from:
 
    (a) Refusing to furnish, upon request by the Federal Employees Metal
 Trades Council, AFL-CIO, the exclusive representative of its employees,
 the names and home addresses of all employees in the bargaining unit it
 represents.
 
    (b) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, or
 coercing its employees in the exercise of the rights assured them by the
 Statute.
 
    2.  Take the following affirmative action in order to effectuate the
 purposes and policies of the Statute:
 
    (a) Upon request by the Federal Employees Metal Trades Council,
 AFL-CIO, the exclusive representative of its employees, furnish it with
 the names and home addresses of employees in the bargaining unit it
 represents.
 
    (b) Post at all its facilities where bargaining unit employees
 represented by the Federal Employees Metal Trades Council, AFL-CIO are
 located, 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 a senior official of the Department of the Navy,
 Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, New Hampshire, 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 Authority's Rules and
 Regulations, notify the Regional Director, Region I, Federal Labor
 Relations Authority, in writing, within 30 days from the date of this
 Order, as to what steps have been taken to comply.
 
    Issued, Washington, D.C., November 26, 1986.
 
                                       Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman
                                       Henry B. Frazier III, Member
                                       Jean McKee, 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 refuse to furnish, upon request by the Federal Employees
 Metal Trades Council, AFL-CIO, the exclusive representative of our
 employees, the names and home addresses of all employees in the
 bargaining unit it represents.
 
    WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain,
 or coerce our employees in the exercise of the rights assured them by
 the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.
 
    WE WILL, upon request by the Federal Employees Metal Trades Council,
 AFL-CIO, the exclusive representative of our employees, furnish it with
 the names and home addresses of all employees in the bargaining unit it
 represents.
                                       (Activity). . .
 
    Dated:. . .  By:  (Signature) (Title). . .
 
    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 I, Federal Labor Relations Authority, whose address is:
  441 Stuart Street, 9th Floor, Boston, MA 02116 and whose telephone
 number is:  (617) 223-0920.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -------------------- ALJ$ DECISION FOLLOWS --------------------
 
    Case No. 1-CA-40290
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, PORTSMOUTH NAVAL 
 SHIPYARD (PORTSMOUTH, NEW HAMPSHIRE)
    Respondent
 
                                    and
 
 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES METAL TRADES COUNCIL, AFL-CIO
    Charging Party
 
 
    Mr. Thomas F. Wood
    Mr. Richard H. Greenberg
    For the Respondent
 
    Mr. Stephen Perry
    For the Charging Party
 
    Marilyn H. Zuckerman, Esquire
    For the General Counsel
 
    Before:  GARVIN LEE OLIVER
    Administrative Law Judge
 
                                 DECISION
 
                           Statement of the Case
 
    This decision concerns an unfair labor practice complaint issued by
 the Regional Director, Region I, Federal Labor Relations Authority,
 Boston, Massachusetts against the Department of the Navy, Portsmouth
 Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, New Hampshire (Respondent), based on an
 amended charge filed by the Federal Employees Metal Trades Council,
 AFL-CIO (Charging Party or Union).  The complaint alleged, in substance,
 that Respondent violated sections 7116(a)(1), (5) and (8) of the Federal
 Service Labor-Management Relations Statute, 5 U.S.C. Section 7101 et
 seq. (the Statute), by refusing to furnish to the Union the names and
 addresses of bargaining unit employees represented by the Union.
 
    Respondent's answer admitted the jurisdictional allegations as to the
 Respondent, Charging Party, and the charge, but denied that the
 requested information fell within the scope of section 7114(b)(4) of the
 Statute and that it violated the Statute.
 
    A hearing was held in Portsmouth, New Hampshire.  The Respondent,
 Charging Party, and the General Counsel were represented and afforded
 full opportunity to be heard, adduce relevant evidence, examine and
 cross-examine witnesses, and file post-hearing briefs.  The Respondent
 and General Counsel, FLRA filed helpful briefs.  Based on the entire
 record, including my observation of the witnesses and their demeanor, I
 make the following findings of fact, conclusions of law, and
 recommendations.
 
                             Findings of Fact
 
    At all times material, the Union has been recognized as the exclusive
 representative of an appropriate unit of Respondent's employees.  The
 current collective bargaining agreement between the parties became
 effective October 15, 1981.
 
                        The Request and The Anwser
 
    By letter dated May 17, 1984, the Union requested that the Respondent
 furnish it with "a complete listing of all unit employees and their
 telephone numbers and current addresses." /3/ Both prior to and
 subsequent to the request, Union representatives advised management that
 the information was necessary in order to represent all unit employees.
 Union representatives explained that the Union needed the information in
 order to contact unit employees with active grievances who were on leave
 at their homes regarding the processing of their grievances.  The Union
 also wanted to send all unit employees a monthly Union newsletter which
 would "explain general employee benefits, offer insurance premium which
 aren't offered by the Federal Government, et cetera."
 
    By letter dated May 24, 1984 Respondent formally replied to the
 request.  The letter stated, in part, as follows:
 
       The telephone numbers and current addresses of unit employees is
       not information available under the provisions of the Federal
       Service Labor-Management Relations Statute or the current
       Agreement between the parties.  Furthermore, that information is
       not subject to disclosure under the provisions of the Privacy Act
       of 1974.
 
          At the present time, your organization receives a semi-annual
       eligibility listing of all unit employees. Current addresses and
       telephone numbers may be requested from individual employees
       during non-duty hours;  however, the employees are under no
       obligation to release such information.
 
                    Availability of Employee Addresses
 
    Respondent maintains the home addresses of employee's in official
 personnel folders and on Roladex circular files in the shops and main
 office.  Such information, along with other personnel information, is
 secured at night in locked cabinets or offices.  Access to home
 addresses and telephone numbers is limited and strictly enforced.  Some
 employees have from time to time expressed concern to personnel
 employees that individuals "that had no business getting it would have
 access to their personal information." They have been assured that names
 and home addresses would only be released to persons who have a need to
 know on an official basis.
 
    Chapter 294 of the Federal Personnel Manual (FPM) sets forth the
 instructions of the Office of Personnel Management concerning the
 availability of information to the public under the Freedom of
 Information Act, 5 U.S.C. Section 552.  Appendix C to Subchapter 7,
 "Guides for Responding to Labor Organization Requests for Names of
 Employees and Identifying Information," specifically states:
 
       Agencies should not comply with requests from labor organizations
       for lists of home addresses or home telephone numbers of
       employees.  Official release of this information would be an
       unwarranted intrusion into an employee's personal privacy.
 
    See also 5 C.F.R. Part 294, Subpart G - Official Personnel Folder
 (1984);  FPM Letter 294-6, July 25, 1977.  But see FPM Supplement 711-1,
 Instruction 18 (August 10, 1978);  45 FR 78415, 78417 (November 25,
 1980);  47 FR 16489 (April 16, 1982);  49 FR 36954, 36956 (September 20,
 1984) (information may be disclosed to officials of labor organizations
 when relevant and necessary to their duties of exclusive
 representation).
 
                 Union Difficulty in Contacting Grievants
 
    There are about 130 grievances filed by the Union each month.  The
 only instance reflected in the record where the Union has been unable to
 contact a bargaining unit employee concerning the processing of a
 grievance occurred in 1982.  Steward Stephen Perry was representing
 employee Peter Hamlin.  Perry testified that because he did not have
 Hamlin's home address he could not contact Hamlin at home and could not
 pursue Hamlin's grievance from the second to the third step within the
 contractual time frames.  It is undisputed that the parties agreement
 provides for the extension of the time limits under the grievance
 procedure.  Such extensions are common.  Perry testified that he spoke
 with his chief steward, Richard Ian, concerning the possibility of
 requesting a waiver of the time limits in Hamlin's grievance, but Ian
 refused, saying he wanted to "stick strictly to the time limit" because
 the Respondent had extended the time limits so much "that he couldn't
 keep his schedule straight".  As a result, no waiver was requested
 concerning the Hamlin grievance.
 
            Circumstances Relating to Union Access to Employees
 
    Portsmouth Naval Shipyard is situated on an island about 275 acres in
 size.  There are two entrance bridges.  Employees enter by cars, buses,
 and vans or by foot over four sidewalks.  There are parking areas inside
 and outside the shipyard.
 
    There are close to 9,000 employees working at the shipyard, about
 5,500 of whom are in the bargaining unit of the Charging Party.
 Approximately 2,500 bargaining unit members are members of the Union on
 dues deduction.  The record does not reflect the number of bargaining
 unit employees, if any, who are members of the Union but are not on dues
 deduction.  Employees work three shifts.  Most of the bargaining unit
 employees work in a controlled industrial area approximately 80 acres in
 size.
 
    The Union uses the following means to communicate with bargaining
 unit employees:
 
    a.  List of bargaining unit employees.  Pursuant to Article 35,
 Section 1 of the collective bargaining agreement, Respondent furnishes
 the Union semiannually an up-to-date list of all unit employees by name,
 job/position title, grade, check number, and type of appointment.  The
 chief spokesman for the Union stated during negotiations for the
 agreement that the Union needed the job/position title and type of
 appointment information on employees so that the Union could solicit new
 members.
 
    b.  Bulletin boards.  Under Article 35, Section 7 of the agreement,
 Respondent provides the Union at least one bulletin board or space on
 existing bulletin boards in each shop for posting notices concerning
 Union recreational and social activities, elections, and meetings.
 Other information can be posted only with Respondent's consent.
 Shipyard rules do not permit employees to view the bulletin board on
 work time;  however, enforcement of this rule varies among the
 supervisors, and some supervisors do permit it.
 
    c.  New employees' orientation.  By Article 5, Section 6 of the
 agreement, an appropriate Union representative is provided an
 opportunity to meet with all new employees in a shop or code to given
 them a brief outline of the Union's function.
 
    d.  Officers and stewards.  Under the provisions of Article 7 of the
 agreement, the Union has three officers who spend 40 hours a week on
 official time.  The Union also has 17 chief stewards and 55 stewards to
 perform representational functions.  The ratio is one steward or chief
 steward for each 75 employees.  The agreement provides that permission
 will be secured for an employee-steward visit and the purpose of the
 visit will be explained to the appropriate supervisor.  This formal
 procedure is generally not followed except where there are personality
 problems between the steward and supervisor.  A steward can generally
 approach an employee within his work area for a brief visit, such as to
 secure the correct address of a Union member, without special
 permission.  Employees in the bargaining unit are distinguishable from
 non-unit employees, such as supervisors, by the color of the hard hats
 they are required to wear.  A shop steward would be familiar with almost
 all of the employees in his work area even without the hard hats.
 Stewards do not receive official time for distribution of literature or
 for polling employees.
 
    e.  Handbilling.  The Union on several occasions in the past has
 distributed material relating to important issues to bargaining unit
 employees by direct handbilling.  Handbilling must be performed during
 non-duty hours.  If it involved matters of a political nature, the
 handbilling has been done off the premises at the entrances while
 employees are coming to work.  There is no way to distinguish unit
 employees from the non-unit employees and supervisors among the
 approximately 9,000 employees of the shipyard unless some are personally
 recognized by the Union member doing the handbilling.  The commotion of
 large numbers of employees coming to work and the three shifts make
 handbilling of all employees very difficult.  Where the issues have
 strictly involved the shipyard, handbilling has been performed inside
 the shipyard by employees who are off-duty giving literature to
 employees who are also off-duty.  In both cases, whether the handbilling
 was done outside or inside the shipyard, large quantities of the
 literature have been left at time clocks and lunch rooms where employees
 congregate.
 
    f.  Telephone.  Union officers are able to use the telephones in the
 Union office to contact individual employees by telephone at their work
 locations.  If the telephone extension is not known, it must be secured
 from the personnel office.  It is difficult to contact employees working
 on a submarine or drydock.  There may be two or three telephone
 extensions for the 200-400 employees working on a submarine and one
 telephone extension for those working in the drydock.
 
    g.  Union meetings.  The Union and affiliated locals hold meetings
 once a month on varying dates.  The Union may post notices of these
 meetings on bulletin boards.  Non-members of the Union do not generally
 come to the meetings.
 
    h.  Internal mail system.  The Union has used the internal mail
 system to send documents or letters to management offices concerning
 representational matters and to individual employees concerning their
 grievances.  There is no evidence that it is an established practice for
 the Union to use the internal mail system for mass mailings to all
 employees.
 
    i.  Direct mail.  The Union has in its possession the names and
 addresses of all of its members.  These are obtained from application
 forms and dues deduction forms.  In the past the Union and Locals have
 occasionally used the lists to send out newsletters to members' homes
 during election campaigns or to request feedback for contract proposals.
  /4/ Ten years ago an insurance company was authorized to use the
 mailing list on at least one occasion in an attempt to sell insurance to
 Union members.  Following complaints from members, additional requests
 from the same company were turned down.
 
    The information concerning Union members, including their names,
 addresses, and other information, is maintained by the Union in the form
 of address cards which are physically located in open trays on top of
 file cabinets in the Union office.  The address cards are not secured
 and are accessible to anyone who has access to the Union office.  The
 names and addresses of Union members have also recently been added to a
 computer which will automatically affix gummed address labels to the
 proposed monthly newsletter.  The Union wants to add to this computer
 file the home addresses of all unit employees who are not Union members
 so that they too may receive the newsletter.
 
                Discussion, Conclusion, and Recommendations
 
    The issue for determination is whether Respondent violated section
 7116(a)(1), (5), and (8) of the Statute by refusing to provide the Union
 with the home addresses of bargaining unit employees.  The General
 Counsel claims that (1) the home addresses are presumptively relevant
 and necessary information;  (2)the Union, in any event, demonstrated
 that the information requested was necessary and relevant;  (3) the
 names and home addresses are disclosable under the Statute
 notwithstanding the Privacy Act or Federal Personnel Manual;  (4) there
 is no obligation for an exclusive representative to prove that it was
 not feasible to reach bargaining unit employees through alternative
 means;  and (5), to the extent relevant, all alternative means of access
 are insufficient.
 
    Respondent defends on the basis that (1) the information requested is
 not relevant and necessary under section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute;  (2)
 the Charging Party has other adequate means of communicating with
 bargaining unit employees;  and (3) Respondent is prohibited by law from
 releasing employees' home addresses.
 
    As pertinent here, section 7114(b)(4) /5/ of the Statute requires an
 agency, upon request, to furnish an exclusive representative with data
 which is "necessary for full and proper discussion, understanding and
 negotiation of subjects within the scope of collective bargaining." It
 is well established that under section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute a union
 is entitled to receive information necessary to the performance of its
 representational responsibilities including negotiations, administration
 of the collective bargaining agreement, and the effective evaluation and
 processing of grievances.
 
    An exclusive representative is responsible for representing the
 interests of all employees in the unit (section 7114(a)(1)) and must
 have effective means of communicating with them.  Here the Union is
 seeking the home addresses of all employees in the unit in order to
 contact employees with active grievances and to send all unit employees
 a monthly newsletter.  The publication of a newsletter is a common means
 used by organizations to present information, reports, analyses, and
 forecasts to members or other special audiences.  Newsletters are also
 often used to seek responses or other actions.  Such a newsletter can be
 a very effective means of communication.  Therefore, the home addresses
 of bargaining unit employees are relevant in this respect to the Union's
 carrying out of its representational obligations and "for full and
 proper discussion, understanding and negotiation of subjects within the
 scope of collective bargaining."
 
    However, since furnishing the home addresses of employees impinges to
 some degree on the personal privacy of employees, it is necessary to
 determine whether the Union has other effective means of communicating
 with the employees.  Cf. Internal Revenue Service, Office of the
 District Director, Jacksonville District, Jacksonville, Florida, 2
 A/SLMR 214, affirmed FLRC No. 72A-50, 2 FLRC 106 (1974).  I agree with
 the General Counsel that the other means available to the Union are
 ineffective for the intended purpose of sending newsletters to all unit
 employees.  /6/ Dissemination of a newsletter or its contents to all
 unit employees by means of bulletin boards, new employee's orientation,
 officers and stewards on non-duty time, handbilling on non-duty time,
 telephone, and union meetings would be a cumbersome, inefficient, and a
 hit or miss proposition in terms of reaching all unit employees.  The
 record does not reflect that the internal mail system can be used for
 mass mailings to all employees.  The use of the U.S. mails would be the
 most reliable means of reaching all unit employees with a lewsletter.
 Therefore, the home addresses of employees are "necessary for full and
 proper discussion, understanding and negotiation of subjects within the
 scope of collective bargaining."
 
    Section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute requires an agency to furnish data
 only "to the extent not prohibited by law".  The Freedom of Information
 Act, 5 U.S.C. Section 552, as amended, provides that information in the
 possession of government agencies is available to the public except when
 the information is subject to one of the exemptions of the act.  For
 example, personnel and similar files cannot be released where disclosure
 would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy (5
 U.S.C. Section 552(b)(6)).  Chapter 294 of the Federal Personnel Manual
 sets forth the instructions to all government agencies concerning the
 availability of information to the public under the Freedom of
 Information Act.  Appendix C to Subchapter 7, "Guides for Responding to
 Labor Organization Requests for Names of Employees and Identifying
 Information," specifically states that agencies should not furnish labor
 organizations with employees' home addresses or telephone numbers since
 release of such information would constitute an "unwarranted intrusion
 into an employee's personal privacy".  This instruction is labeled a
 "Guide" and must be treated as such.  The Office of Personnel Management
 has otherwise recognized in publishing notices of its systems of records
 that a "routine use" of information in employee personnel records, /7/
 including home residences and mailing addresses, is disclosure "to
 officials of labor organizations recognized under 5 U.S.C. Chapter 71
 when relevant and necessary to their duties of exclusive representation
 concerning personnel policies, practices, and matters affecting working
 conditions." See FPM Supplement 711-1, Instruction 18 (August 10, 1978);
  45 FR 78415, 78417 (November 25, 1980);  47 FR 16489 (April 16, 1982);
 49 FR 36954, 36956 (September 20, 1984).  Therefore, it is concluded
 that the disclosure of home addresses is not specifically prohibited by
 law or regulation.
 
    Since, as noted, the furnishing of employee home addresses would
 impinge to some degree on the employee's rights to privacy, the needs of
 a labor organization for data to effectively represent the unit
 employees must be balanced against the employee's right to privacy.  The
 furnishing by the Respondent to the Union of employee home addresses for
 representational pruposes would not constitute an unwarranted intrusion
 on the privacy of such employees.  The Union is not an unknown, outside
 organization to such employees.  It has a lawful relationship to them.
 There is no evidence that the Union would make any improper use of the
 home addresses or, in light of the Union's previous bad experience with
 outside organizations using their mailing list some years ago, that such
 organizations would be given access to the addresses again.  The daily
 personal mail of most persons brings a steady barrage of unsolicited
 flyers, advertisements, and solicitations.  Employees may have to spend
 a moment or two deciding whether to read the Union's newsletter or to
 toss it out along with other unwanted mail.  Considering the needs of
 the Union to effectively communicate with unit employees, any intrusion
 on employees' personal privacy caused by the furnishing of home
 addresses to the Union for representational purposes is minimal and not
 unwarranted.
 
    Respondent's conduct in refusing to grant the Union's request for the
 addresses of unit employees constitutes a failure to comply with section
 7114(b)(4) of the Statute in violation of sections 7116(a)(1) and (8)
 and a refusal to bargain in good faith with the Union in violation of
 sections 7116(a)(1) and (5) of the Statute.
 
    Based on the foregoing findings and conclusions, it is recommended
 that the Authority issue the following Order:
 
                                   ORDER
 
    Pursuant to section 2423.29 of the Rules and Regulations of the
 Federal Labor Relations Authority and section 7118 of the Statute, the
 Authority hereby orders that the Department of the Navy, Portsmouth
 Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, New Hampshire shall:
 
    1.  Cease and desist from:
 
          (a) Refusing or failing to furnish upon request of the Federal
       Employees Metal Trades Council AFL-CIO, the addresses of all unit
       employees.
 
          (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 Statute.
 
          (a) Upon request, furnish to the Federal Employees Metal Trades
       Council, AFL-CIO, the names and addresses of all unit employees.
 
          (b) Post at its facilities at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard,
       copies of the attached Notice marked "Appendix" on forms to be
       furnished by the Authority.  Upon receipt of such forms, they
       shall be signed by the Commander, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard and
       shall be posted and maintained by him for 60 consecutive days
       thereafter, in conspicuous places, including all bulletin boards
       and other places where notices to employees are customarily
       posted.  The Commander shall take reasonable steps to insure that
       such notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other
       material.
 
          (c) Pursuant to 5 C.F.R. section 2423.30 notify the Regional
       Director, Region I, Federal Labor Relations Authority, Boston,
       Massachusetts, in writing, within 30 days from the date of this
       order, as to what steps have been taken to comply herewith.
 
                                       /s/ GARVIN LEE OLIVER
                                       Administrative Law Judge
 
    Dated:  April 25, 1985
    Washington, DC
 
 
 
                ---------------  FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
 
 
    (1) Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. Section 552a (1982).
 
    (2) When the Authority decided, for reasons discussed more fully in
 FHAFO, to review the entire issue of the release of employees' names and
 home addresses and invited agencies, unions, and interested persons to
 submit amicus briefs addressing the issue, this case was one of those
 listed as being under consideration.  While the parties in this case did
 not submit amicus briefs, the Department of the Navy and the Metal
 Trades Department of the AFL-CIO did file amicus briefs outlining their
 positions.
 
    (3) The Union has withdrawn its request for the home telephone
 numbers
 
    (4) The former recording secretary of the Union testified without
 contradiction that the Union solicited comments concerning contract
 proposals from Union members, but that he was unaware of any formal
 solicitation of comments from non-members;  further, the collective
 bargaining agreement is subject to ratification only by Union members
 
    (5) Section 7114(b)(4) provides that the "duty of an agency and an
 exclusive representative to negotiate in good faith shall include the
 obligation --
 
          (4) in the case of an agency, to furnish to the exclusive
       representative involved, or its authorized representative, upon
       request and, to the extent not porhibited by law, data --
 
          (A) which is normally maintained by the agency in the regular
       course of business;
 
          (B) which is reasonably available and necessary for full and
       proper discussion, understanding, and negotiation of subjects
       within the scope of collective bargaining;  and
 
          (C) which does not constitute guidance, advice, counsel, or
       training provided for management officials or supervisors,
       relating to collective bargaining(.)"
 
    (6) With respect to the Union's alleged need for all home addresses
 in order to contact employees with active grievances, the Union officer
 and steward network at the shipyard should normally suffice to obtain
 the home addresses of employees with active grievances.  This should be
 one of the first items of information obtained during the initial
 steward contact with a grievant.  In those emergency situations where
 the information is not available to the Union and it is necessary for a
 steward to contact a grievant at home, it could be argued that the
 agency would be required to furnish the home address pursuant to section
 7114(b)(4) for the effective processing of a grievance.
 
    (7) The official personnel folder of each employee is under the
 jurisdiction and control of, and is part of the records of, the Office
 of Personnel Management, 5 C.F.R. Section 293.303 (1984).
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                 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 refuse or fail to furnish upon request of the Federal
 Employees Metal Trades Council, AFL-CIO, the addresses of all unit
 employees.
 
    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, upon request, furnish to the Federal Employees Metal Trades
 Council, AFL-CIO, the names and addresses of all unit employees.
                                       (Agency or Activity). . .
 
    Dated:  . . .  By:  (Signature) . . .
 
    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 I,
 whose address is:  441 Stuart Street, 9th Floor, Boston, MA 02116, and
 whose telephone nu