37:0836(69)NG - - International Association of Fire Fighters, Local F-159 and Navy, Naval Station Treasure Island, San Francisco, CA - - 1990 FLRAdec NG - - v37 p836
[ v37 p836 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
37 FLRA No. 69
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE FIGHTERS
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL STATION TREASURE ISLAND
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA
DECISION AND ORDER ON NEGOTIABILITY ISSUES
September 28, 1990
Before Chairman McKee and Members Talkin and Armendariz.
I. Statement of the Case
This case is before the Authority on a negotiability appeal filed under section 7105(a)(2)(D) and (E) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute). It concerns the negotiability of two proposals relating to employees who are firefighters.
We conclude that Proposal 1, which limits the Agency's scheduling of drills, is nonnegotiable because it directly interferes with management's right to assign work under section 7106(a)(2)(B) of the Statute and is not an appropriate arrangement under section 7106(b)(3). We conclude that Proposal 2, which limits the particular duties that can be assigned on holidays and holiday weekends, is nonnegotiable because it directly interferes with management's right to assign work under section 7106(a)(2)(B) and the Union provides no basis for determining whether the proposal is negotiable as an appropriate arrangement.
II. Proposal 1
The employer agrees that training (drills) will not exceed two (2) hours in duration on any given work day, Monday through Friday of any work week.
A. Positions of the Parties
The Agency claims that, because Proposal 1 would restrict the assignment of training to Monday through Friday and limit the duration to 2 hours, the proposal interferes with management's right to assign work under section 7106(a)(2)(B). The Union asserts that the proposal is intended to prevent fatigue that firefighters experience as a result of participating in drills that last longer than 2 hours.
B. Analysis and Conclusions
Proposal 1 concerns the Agency's scheduling of drills for firefighters. Drills are training activities assigned during the duty hours of firefighters and constitute an assignment of work. For example, American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 1931 and Department of the Navy, Naval Weapons Station Concord, California, 32 FLRA 1023, 1038 (1988) rev'd as to other matters sub nom. Department of the Navy, Naval Weapons Station Concord, California v. FLRA, No. 88-7408 (9th Cir. Feb. 7, 1989) (Naval Weapons Station, Concord); International Association of Fire Fighters, Local F-61 and Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, 3 FLRA 438, 439 (1980) (Philadelphia Naval Shipyard). The determination as to when and for what duration drills will occur is a matter encompassed by management's right to assign work under section 7106(a)(2)(B). Id. Proposal 1 can be read to restrict the assignment of training to Monday through Friday and limit its duration to 2 hours per day, as claimed by the Agency, or simply to limit to 2 hours the duration of any training assigned on Monday through Friday. Under either interpretation, by limiting the Agency's scheduling of drills, Proposal 1 directly interferes with management's right to assign work. See id.
The Union does not expressly claim that its proposal is intended as an appropriate arrangement for employees adversely affected by the exercise of a management right within the meaning of section 7106(b)(3). Even if we assume, however, that the Union's claim that Proposal 1 is intended to prevent fatigue experienced by firefighters as a result of participating in drills that last longer than 2 hours is intended as an assertion that the proposal constitutes such an arrangement, the proposal is nonetheless nonnegotiable.
In Naval Weapons Station, Concord (Provision 12), the union proposed to limit firefighters' night drills to no more than one per month with at least half of the drills required to be scheduled prior to 10 p.m. in order to prevent undue interruption of firefighters' allotted hours for sleeping. The agency argued that the provision was not an appropriate arrangement because it would prevent the agency from conducting drills and training exercises during times and under circumstances necessary for it to accomplish its mission. The Authority agreed with the agency and determined that the provision eliminated management's discretion to determine the amount of training sufficient to correct deficiencies that are identified by the agency in performance or readiness. 32 FLRA at 1039. The Authority judged that the burden on the exercise of management's right to assign training and to ensure that firefighters are adequately prepared to meet the work demands of their positions was not outweighed by the benefit to employees of uninterrupted sleep time. Id. at 1039-40.
We similarly conclude here that the burden of Proposal 1 on the exercise of management's right to assign training and to ensure that firefighters are adequately prepared to meet the work demands of their