27:0147(27)NG - NAGE Local R14-76, and Wyoming Air NG, Cheyenne, WY -- 1987 FLRAdec NG



[ v27 p147 ]
27:0147(27)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:


 27 FLRA No. 27
 
 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT 
 EMPLOYEES, LOCAL R14-76
 Union
 
 and
 
 WYOMING AIR NATIONAL GUARD, 
 CHEYENNE, WYOMING
 Agency
 
                                            Case No. 0-NG-1284
 
                 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)(D) and (E) of the Federal Service
 Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) and concerns the
 negotiability of one proposal.  Based on the following, we find that the
 proposal is negotiable.
 
    II.  The Proposal
 
          The Administrative workweek for all Air National Guard
       Employees is Sunday through Saturday.  The basic workweek will
       consist of four (4) days of ten (10) hours each (exclusive of
       lunch periods) normally Monday through Friday except for those
       employees whose services are determined by the employer to warrant
       other basic workweeks.  To the maximum extent possible,
       non-workdays will be consecutive when other than Monday through
       Friday work weeks are established.  Every effort will be made to
       insure that the non-workdays will be the same each week.  (Only
       the underlined portion of the proposal is in dispute.)
 
                       A.  Positions of the Parties
 
    The Agency contends that the proposal, to the extent that it proposes
 alternative work schedules under the Work Schedules Act, is
 nonnegotiable because National Guard technicians are not subject to the
 Work Schedules Act.  /1/ Specifically, the Agency claims that National
 Guard technicians are excluded from the Act by 32 U.S.C. Section 709(g),
 which provides that the Secretaries of the Army and the Air Force shall
 prescribe technicians' hours of work "(n)otwithstanding sections 5544(a)
 or 6101(a) of title 5 or any other provision of law(.)" /2/
 
    In addition, the Agency argues that the proposal is outside the duty
 to bargain under section 7117(a)(1) of the Statute because it is
 inconsistent with 5 U.S.C. Section 6132, and under section 7117(a)(2)
 because it conflicts with Technician Personnel Regulation (TPR) 600
 (610.1), Section 1-1a and 1-4b, an Agency regulation for which a
 compelling need exists under the Authority's regulations.  Finally, the
 Agency contends that the proposal directly interferes with management's
 rights to assign work under section 7106(a)(2)(B) and to determine the
 numbers, types and grades of employees and positions assigned to a work
 project or tour of duty under section 7106(b)(1).
 
    The Union contends that the Work Sche