26:0207(26)NG - Defense Logistics Council of American Federation of Government Employees Locals and Defense Logistics Agency -- 1987 FLRAdec NG



[ v26 p207 ]
26:0207(26)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:


 26 FLRA No. 26
 
 DEFENSE LOGISTICS COUNCIL 
 OF AMERICAN FEDERATION OF 
 GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES LOCALS
 Union
 
 and
 
 DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY
 Agency
 
                                            Case No. 0-NG-1063 
                                             (20 FLRA No. 19)
 
                       DECISION AND ORDER ON REMAND
 
                         I.  Statement of the Case
 
    This case is before the Authority pursuant to a remand from the
 United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit for
 the entry of an order requiring bargaining on the following two
 subsections of one multi-part proposal:  /1/
 
          (2)(d) The affected employee and/or his/her representative may
       request that the provisions of Article 39, Stays of Personnel
       Actions, be involved.
 
          (2)(e) All actions taken by the Employer, under this article
       are subject to provisions of Article 36, Grievance Procedures.
 
                      II.  Background and Conclusion
 
    In the previous decision in this case, Defense Logistics Council of
 American Federation of Government Employees Locals and Defense Logistics
 Agency, 20 FLRA No. 19 (1985), the Union sought to negotiate one
 multi-part proposal, including the above subsections, concerning
 implementation of a Department of Defense Directive which established
 procedures for expedited suspensions of driving privileges on Agency
 installations on the basis of arrest or apprehension for intoxicated
 driving.  Although the parties provided separate arguments concerning
 individual sections of the proposal the Authority did not sever the
 individual sections of the proposal but rather, found that the proposal
 as a whole directly interfered with the Agency's right under section
 7106(a)(1) of the Statute to determine its internal security practices.
 
    The Union appealed the Authority's decision to the U.S. Court of
 Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.  On January 27, 1987, the
 Court affirmed in part and reversed in part the Authority's decision.
 Defense Logistics Council of American Federation of Gov ernment
 Employees Locals v. FLRA, No. 85-1743 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 27, 1987).  The
 Court found that the Authority improperly treated the individual
 sections of the proposal as inseverable.  While the Court affirmed the
 Authority's decision as to the balance of the proposal the Court also
 held the Authority improperly applied the "direct interference" test to
 the above two subsections of the proposal.  As to these two subsections,
 the Court held