32:1195(158)CA - - SSA and AFGE Local 1923 - - 1988 FLRAdec CA - - v32 p1195



[ v32 p1195 ]
32:1195(158)CA
The decision of the Authority follows:


32 FLRA No. 158

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BEFORE THE

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

Respondent

and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT

EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1923, AFL-CIO

Charging Party

 Case No. 3-CA-80254

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.(*)

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 failing and refusing to provide the American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1923, AFL-CIO (the Union) with the names and home addresses of bargaining unit employees located at the Respondent's Baltimore, Maryland office. For the reasons stated below, we find that the Respondent committed the unfair labor practice as alleged.

II. Facts

The American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1923, AFL-CIO is the exclusive representative of a unit of employees at the Respondent's Baltimore, Maryland location. By letter dated February 2, 1988, the Union requested that the Respondent furnish it with the names and home addresses of "all AFGE Local 1923 bargaining unit employees[.]" The Union stated in its letter that because bargaining on a National Agreement was about to begin, "[i]t is therefore imperative that we be able to communicate with all our bargaining unit employees and to get their input into this process." By letter dated February 4, 1988, the Respondent refused to provide the Union with the information requested.

The parties stipulated that the names and home addresses of unit employees are normally maintained by the Respondent in the regular course of business, are reasonably available, and do not constitute guidance, advice, counsel, or training for management officials or supervisors relating to collective bargaining.

III. Positions of the Parties

The General Counsel argues that the Authority's decision on remand in Farmers Home Administration Finance Office, St. Louis, Missouri, 23 FLRA 788 (1986), enforced in part and remanded sub nom. U.S. Department of Agriculture and Farmers Home Administration Finance Office, St. Louis, Missouri v. FLRA, 836 F.2d 1139 (8th Cir. 1988), petition for cert. filed, U.S.L.W. (U.S. Aug. 26, 1988) (No. 88-349), in which the Authority concluded that section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute entitled the exclusive representative to the names and home addresses of employees in the bargaining unit, is dispositive of the issue in the case. The General Counsel contends that the Respondent's admitted failure to furnish the employees' names and home addresses constitutes a clear violation of section 7116(a)(1), (5), and (8) of the Statute.

The Respondent did not file a brief. However, in its "Motion to Void Stipulation and Remand Case," the Respondent requests the Authority to construe the stipulation "as preserving [R]espondent's contention that resolution of various issues requires analysis of evidence of alternative means of communications available to the [U]nion." Motion at 11 (footnote omitted). The Respondent identifies these issues as "whether the home address information is 'necessary' within the meaning of [s]ection 7114(b)(4), whether the operation of the normal Exemption 6 balancing test requires disclosure, and whether the information is 'necessary' within the meaning of the purportedly applicable routine use." Id. at n.2.

IV. Analysis and Conclusion

In the Authority's Decision and Order on Remand in Farmers Home, the Authority concluded that the release of the names and home addresses of bargaining unit employees to their 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) of the Statute. The Authority also determined that the release of the information is generally required without regard to whether alternative means of communication are available. Further, from the parties' stipulation, it is evident that the other requirements of section 7114(b)(4)(A), (B), and (C) have been met in this case.

Based on the parties' stipulation and the Authority's decision on remand in Farmers Home, we find that the Respondent was required to furnish the Union with the names and home addresses of employees in the bargaining unit. The Respondent's refusal to do so violated section 7116(a)(1), (5), and (8) of the Statute. See also United States Department of the Navy and Philadelphia Naval Shipyard v. FLRA, 840 F.2d 1131 (3d Cir. 1988), petition for cert. filed, U.S.L.W. (U.S. Aug. 26, 1988) (No. 88-356), enforcing Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, 24 FLRA 37 (1986); U.S. Department of the Air Force, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois v. FLRA, 838 F.2d 229 (7th Cir. 1988), petition for cert. filed, U.S.L.W. (U.S. Aug. 26, 1988) (No. 88-354), affirming Department of the Air Force, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, 24 FLRA 226 (1986); Department of Health and Human Services, Social Security Administration v. FLRA, 833 F.2d 1129 (4th Cir. 1987), petition for cert. filed, U.S.L.W. (U.S. Aug. 26, 1988) (No. 88-355), affirming Department of Health and Human Services, Social Security Administration, 24 FLRA 543 (1986); Department of Health and Human Services, Social Security Administration and Social Security Administration Field Operations, New York Region, 24 FLRA 583 (1986); Department of Health and Human Services, Social Security Administration, 24 FLRA 600 (1986).

ORDER