26:0580(69)RO - Navy Resale and Ssevice Support Office, Field Support Office, San Diego, CA and NAGE Local R12-38, SEIU and NFFE Local 63 -- 1987 FLRAdec RP
[ v26 p580 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
26 FLRA No. 69 NAVY RESALE AND SERVICES SUPPORT OFFICE, FIELD SUPPORT OFFICE SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA Acitivity and NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL R12-38, SEIU/AFL-CIO Petitioner and NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 63 Incumbent Labor Organization Case No. 8-RO-60010 ORDER DENYING APPLICATION FOR REVIEW On February 20, 1987, the National Association of Government Employees, Local R12-38, SEIU/AFL-CIO (NAGE) filed a timely application for review pursuant to section 2422.17(a) of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, seeking to set aside the Regional Director's Decision and Order on Petition for Certification of Unit in the above-named case. In its application for review, NAGE contends that compelling reasons exist within the meaning of section 2422.17(c) of the Authority's Regulations for granting the application. The Regional Director concluded that the representation petition filed by NAGE was untimely under section 2422.3(e) of the Authority's Regulations. In its application, NAGE contends that the Regional Director's decision raises a substantial question of law and policy regarding the interpretation and application of section 2422.3(e), due to the absence of Authority precedent. Section 2422.3(e) of our Regulations is the same in all material respects as section 202.3(d) of the Assistant Secretary's Regulations applicable under Executive Order 11491, as amended. 29 C.F.R. Section 202.3(d) (1977). The Assistant Secretary explained the underlying purpose of that language in Department of the Navy, Great Lakes Naval Base, Public Works Center, Great Lakes, Illinois, 7 A/SLMR 1003 (1977). He concluded that the regulation was promulgated to address the situation where, because of the filing of a petition for an election and its subsequent withdrawal by a rival union, the activity and the incumbent union are deprived of the full "insulated" period within which to negotiate a new agreement. The regulation therefore provided for a 90-day period free from rival claim for the activity and the incumbent to consummate a new agreement. Under section 7135(b) of the Statute, that decision remains in full force and effect. See Florida National Guard, St. Augustine, Florida, 25 FLRA No. 60 (1987) (in which the Authority noted in a similar situation that the Assistant Secretary's decision remains in full force and effect unless revised or superseded by decisions issued pursuant to the Statute). Therefore, we conclude that section 2422.3(e) of our Regulations reflects that same purpose. Upon consideration of NAGE's application for review, we conclude that no compelling reason exists for granting the application. Rather, NAGE in essence simply expresses disagreement with the Regional Director's application of our Regulations. The Regional Director's application has not been shown to be in error, a departure from precedent or to have prejudicially affected the rights of any party. Accordingly, pursuant to section 2422.17(f)(3) of our Rules and Regulations, the application for review of the Regional Director's Decision and Order on Petition for Certification of Unit is denied. Issued, Washington, D.C., April 15, 1987. /s/ Jerry L. Calhoun Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman /s/ Henry B. Frazier III Henry B. Frazier III, Chairman /s/ Jean McKee Jean McKee, Member FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY.