24:0917(88)NG - NLRBU and NLRB, Office of the General Counsel and the Board -- 1986 FLRAdec NG

 24 FLRA No. 88
 
 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS 
 BOARD UNION
 Union
 
 and
 
 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 
 OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL 
 AND THE BOARD
 Agency
 
                                            Case No. 0-NG-900
 
                 DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUE
 
                         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 a single Union proposal.  We find this proposal to be
 negotiable.
 
                              II.  Background
 
    The Union in this case filed three unfair labor practice charges
 against the Agency.  In the first charge, filed concurrently with this
 appeal, the Union alleged that management had bargained in bad faith
 when it refused to negotiate over a proposal similar to the one under
 review here.  The second and third charges, filed subsequent to this
 appeal, alleged that violations of section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute
 occurred when the Agency refused to furnish the names and addresses of
 employees in two units represented by the Union.  In each instance, the
 Union elected to have the dispute processed under unfair labor practice
 procedures first.
 
    In each case, the Authority's Regional Office declined to issue a
 complaint.  The first charge was dismissed by the Regional Director
 because the dispute was not appropriate for processing under unfair
 labor practice procedures.  The second and third complaints were
 dismissed by the Regional Director on the basis that the information
 sought was readily available from other sources, and, therefore, the
 Agency's refusal to provide home addresses did not violate the Statute.
 After the refusals to issue complaints were sustained on appeals to the
 General Counsel, the Union asked that we resume processing this
 negotiability appeal.
 
                           III.  Union Proposal
 
       The Agency shall furnish the (Union) National President, the
       Washington District Vice President, and the Washington Local
       President, on an annual basis, a list of employees in the units to
       include:  name;  mailing address;  position title;  grade;  Agency
       E.O.D.; and date of last promotion.  The foregoing will be
       prepared as of December 31 each year and delivered by the end of
       February of each year.
 
                       A.  Positions of the Parties
 
    The Agency contends that disclosure of unit employees' home addresses
 is prohibited by law, specifically the Privacy Act of 1974. The Agency
 also points out that the Union has other "effective, expeditious ways"
 of communicating with the employees it represents.  In light of this
 fact, the Agency contends that the "routine use" exception to the
 Privacy Act is inapplicable to this dispute.
 
    While acknowledging that out decision in Farmers Home Administration
 Finance Office, St. Louis, Missouri, 19 FLRA No. 21 (1985) involved a
 dispute nearly identical to the one in this case, the Union asserts that
 "the Authority, upon reconsideration, will reverse itself." In asserting
 this position