26:0474(57)CA - Navy, Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Vallejo, Calif., and FEMTC -- 1987 FLRAdec CA



[ v26 p474 ]
26:0474(57)CA
The decision of the Authority follows:


 26 FLRA No. 57
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
 MARE ISLAND NAVAL SHIPYARD 
 VALLEJO, CALIFORNIA
 Respondent
 
 and
 
 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES METAL 
 TRADES COUNCIL
 Charging Party
 
                                            Case No. 9-CA-60313
 
                            DECISION AND ORDER
 
                         I.  Statement of the Case
 
    This unfair labor practice case is before the Authority, in
 accordance with section 2429.1(a) of the Authority's Rules and
 Regulations, based on a stipulation of facts by the parties, who have
 agreed that no material issue of fact exists.  Briefs for our
 consideration were filed by the Respondent and the General Counsel.
 
    The complaint alleges that the Department of the Navy, Mare Island
 Naval Shipyard, Vallejo, California (Respondent) violated section
 7116(a)(1), (5) and (8) of the Federal Service Labor-Management
 Relations Statute (the Statute) by refusing a request, made pursuant to
 section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute, to provide the Federal Employees
 Metal Trades Council (the Union) with the names and home addresses of
 wage grade employees at the Respondent's Mare Island Naval Shipyard who
 are in a unit represented exclusively by the Union.  We conclude that
 the Respondent vioalted the Statute as alleged.
 
                          II.  Facts of the Case
 
    The Union is the exclusive representative of a unit of approximately
 6,000 wage grade employees of the Respondent, approximately half of whom
 are members of the Union.  The Union requested the names and home
 addresses of the unit employees in writing on May 1, June 10 and June
 24, 1986.  On June 25, the Respondent denied the requests.
 
                      III.  Positions of the Parties
 
    The Respondent argues that a complaint should not have been issued
 because at the time the "overwhelming case law" of the Authority
 prohibited disclosure of home addresses of unit employees.  The
 Respondent further asserts that the General Counsel should have followed
 FLRA precedent and not court decisions.  The Respondent also asserts
 that disclosure of employees' home addresses is an unwarranted invasion
 of privacy and is therefore prohibited by law.
 
    The General Counsel's position is that our decision on remand in
 Farmers Home Administration Finance Office, St. Louis, Missouri, 23 FLRA
 No. 101 (October 31, 1986), petition for review filed sub nom. U.S.
 Department of Agriculture and the Farmers Home Administration Finance
 Office, St. Louis, Missouri v. FLRA, No. 86-2779 (8th Cir. Dec. 23,
 1986), is controlling in this case.
 
                       IV.  Analysis and Conclusions
 
    A.  Timing of the Complaint
 
    1.  Discretion to Issue Complaints Under the Statute is Vested in the
 General Counsel
 
    Sections 7104(f)(2)(A) and (B), and 7118(a)(1) of the Statute provide
 that the General Counsel may investigate alleged unfair labor practices
 and file and prosecute complaints.  We will not review the adequacy of a
 precomplaint investigation in an unfair practice proceeding but rather
 will resolve the merits of a complaint once it reaches us.  See Delaware
 Army and Air National Guard, 16 FLRA 398 (1984).  Thus we will not
 address the Respondent's argument that the General Counsel should not
 have issued a complaint in this case.
 
    2.  The Authority Will Decide the Merits Based on Current Law
 
    The Respondent correctly notes that at the time it denied the Union's
 requests for home addresses, our case law held that the Privacy Act
 prohibited disclosure.  However, we decide an unfair labor practice
 complaint based on the state of the law at the time the case is before
 us.  See Director of Administration, Headquarters, U.S. Air Force, 17
 FLRA 372 (1985).  Therefore, whether the refusal to provide the Union
 with the home addresses of unit employees was an unfair labor practice
 must be determined under current case law.
 
    B.  Home Addresses of Unit Employees Should Be Released to the
 Exclusive Representative
 
    In our Decision and Order on Remand in FHAFO, we concluded that the
 release of the names and home addresses of bargaining unit employees to
 exclusive representatives 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.  The complaint based upon the stipulated record in this case
 was issued on September 19, 1986, before our decision on remand in FHAFO
 issued.  The briefs of both parties were submitted in February 1987, and
 take into account our decision in FHAFO.
 
    Based upon our decision on remand in FHAFO and for the reasons stated
 more fully in that decision, we reject the Respondent's assertion that
 disclosure of the information sought is prohibited by law and conclude
 that the Respondent's refusal to provide the Union with the home
 addresses of bargaining unit employees constituted a 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, the Department of the Navy, Mare Island Naval Shipyard,
 Vallejo, California, shall:
 
    1.  Cease and desist from:
 
          (a) Refusing to furnish, upon request of the Federal Employees
       Metal Trades Council, the exclusive representative of a unit 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,
       the exclusive representative of a unit of its employees, furnish
       it with the names and home addresses of all employees in the
       bargaining unit it represents.
 
          (b) Post at all its Mare Island Naval Shipyard facilities
       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 commanding officer of the Mare Island
       Naval Shipyard, Vallejo, California, and shall be posted and
       maintained for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous
       places, including all bulletin boards and other place