28:1103(143)CA - Naval Air Rework Facility, Norfolk, Virginia and IAM Local Lodge 39 -- 1987 FLRAdec CA



[ v28 p1103 ]
28:1103(143)CA
The decision of the Authority follows:


28 FLRA No. 143

NAVAL AIR REWORK FACILITY,
NORFOLK, VIRGINIA

                    Respondent

      and

LOCAL LODGE 39, INTERNATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS AND
AEROSPACE WORKERS, AFL-CIO

                    Charging Party

Case No. 34-CA-70352

DECISION AND ORDER

I. Statement of the Case

This matter is before the Authority under section 2429.1(a) of our Regulations based on the parties' stipulation of facts. The complaint alleges that the Respondent violated section 7116(a)(1), (5), and (8) of the Federal Service Labor - Management Relations Statute (the Statute) by refusing to provide the Charging Party (the Union) with the names and home addresses of bargaining unit employees. The Respondent and the General Counsel filed briefs. For the reasons below, we find that the Respondent has committed the unfair labor practices as alleged.

II. Facts

Local Lodge 39, International Association of machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL - CIO, is the exclusive representative of a unit of certain employees of the Respondent. By letter dated November 12, 1986, the Union requested the names and home addresses of all bargaining unit employees. By letter dated January 12, 1987, the Respondent declined to provide the information to the Union. The parties have stipulated that the names and home addresses of the employees are normally maintained by the Respondent in the regular course of business, are reasonably available, and do not constitute guidance, counsel, or training provided for management officials or supervisors relating to collective bargaining. [PAGE]

III. Positions of the Parties

A. The Respondent

The Respondent contends that disclosure of the names and home addresses of all bargaining unit employees to the Union is prohibited by the Privacy Act. Additionally, the Respondent argues that the information is not necessary to the Union's representational responsibilities and that there are alternative means to communicate with the employees.

B. The General Counsel

The General Counsel argues that this case is controlled by the Authority's decision on remand in Farmers Home Administration Finance Office, St. Louis, Missouri, 23 FLRA No. 101 (1986) (Farmers Home), petition for review filed sub nom. U.S. Department of Agriculture and Farmers Home Administration Finance Office, St. Louis, Missouri v. FLRA, No. 86-2579 (8th Cir. Dec. 23, 1986). The General Counsel submits that the Respondent's admitted failure to provide the names and home addresses of bargaining unit employees violates section 7116(a)(1), (5), and (8) of the Statute.

IV. Analysis and Conclusions

in our decision on remand in Farmers Home, we held 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 of section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute. Our decision in Farmers Home analyzed the two exceptions to the Privacy Act's bar to disclosure of personal information pertinent to the release of employees' names and home addresses: exception (b)(2), concerning the Freedom of Information Act, and exception (b)(3), relating to "routine use" of information. We found that both exceptions to the Privacy Act's bar applied so as to authorize release of the information under the Privacy Act. We also determined that the release of the information is generally required without regard to whether alternative means of communication are available.

Consistent with our decision in Farmers Home, we therefore find that the Respondent was required to furnish the Union with the names and home addresses of the employees in the bargaining unit and its refusal to do so violated section 7116(a)(1),(5), and (8) of the Statute. [ v28 p2 ]

ORDER

Pursuant to section 2423.29 of t