[ v40 p652 ]
40:0652(59)CA
The decision of the Authority follows:
40 FLRA No. 59
Before Chairman McKee and Members Talkin and Armendariz.
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 Charging Party (the Union) with the names and home addresses of bargaining unit employees represented by the Union. For the reasons stated below, we find that the Respondent committed the unfair labor practice as alleged.
II. Facts
The Union is the exclusive representative of a unit of employees employed by the Respondent. By letter dated October 3, 1990, the Union requested the Respondent to furnish it with the names and home addresses of all the bargaining unit employees employed by the Respondent. By letter dated November 9, 1990, and continuing to date, the Respondent has refused to provide the Union with the requested information.
The parties stipulated that the names and home addresses of bargaining unit employees are normally maintained by the Respondent in the regular course of business, are reasonably available within the meaning of section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute, and do not constitute guidance, advice, counsel or training provided to 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) (Farmers Home), which was reaffirmed by the Authority in U.S. Department of the Navy, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, New Hampshire, 37 FLRA 515 (1990) (Portsmouth Naval Shipyard), application for enforcement filed sub nom. FLRA v. U.S. Department of the Navy, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Portsmouth, New Hampshire, No. 90-1949 (1st Cir. Oct. 1, 1990), is dispositive of the issue in the case. In Farmers Home, the Authority concluded that section 7114(b)(4) of the Statute entitled the exclusive representative to the names and home addresses of bargaining unit employees. 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 Union asserts that "having the names and home addresses of employees is the best way to ensure efficient communication for representation, bargaining and for organizing purposes." Union Brief. The Union argues that inasmuch as it is required to represent all unit members, "regardless of their membership status," the requested information is necessary and should be supplied by the Respondent. Id. Accordingly, the Union requests that the Authority find that the Respondent committed the alleged unfair labor practice.
The Respondent did not file a brief in this matter. However, in its November 9, 1990, letter denying the Union's request for the names and home addresses of unit employees, the Respondent noted that "the issue of whether home addresses of employees may be released to an exclusive representative has not been conclusively determined by the Federal courts." Stipulation, Joint Exhibit 4. Accordingly, the Respondent proposed to defer action on the Union's request "until the final legal determination on [the name and home address] issue is made." Id.
IV. Analysis and Conclusions
In Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, we reaffirmed Farmers Home and 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. We also determined that the release of the information is generally required without regard to whether alternative means of communication are available. Further, it is evident from the parties' stipulation that the other requirements of section 7114(b)(4)(A), (B), and (C) have been met in this case.
Accordingly, consistent with the parties' stipulation and based on the Authority's decision in Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, we find that the Respondent was required to furnish the Union with the names and home addresses of employees in the bargaining unit represented by the Union. Its refusal to do so violated section 7116(a)(1), (5), and (8) of the Statute.
V. Order
Pursuant to section 2423.29 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations and section 7118 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute, the General Services Administration shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Refusing to furnish, upon request of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 26, AFL-CIO, the exclusive representative of certain of its employees, the names and home addresses of all employees in the bargaining unit it represents.
(b) In any like or related manner, interfering with, restraining, or coercing its employees in the exercise of the rights assured them by the Statute.
2. Take the following affirmative action in order to effectuate the purposes and policies of the Statute:
(a) Furnish the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 26, AFL-CIO, the exclusive representative of certain of its employees, the names and home addresses of all employees in the bargaining unit it represents.
(b) Post at its facilities where bargaining unit employees represented by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 26, AFL-CIO are located, copies of the attached Notice on forms to be furnished by the Federal Labor Relations Authority. Upon receipt of such forms, they shall be signed by the Administrator and shall be posted in conspicuous places, including all bulletin boards and other places where notices to employees are customarily posted, and shall be maintained for 60 consecutive days thereafter. Reasonable steps shall be taken to ensure that such notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
(c) Pursuant to section 2423.30 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, notify the Regional Director, Washington, D.C. Regional Office, Federal Labor Relations Authority, in writing, within 30 days from the date of this Order as to what steps have been taken to comply.
NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
WE WILL NOT refuse to furnish, upon request of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 26, AFL-CIO, the exclusive representative of certain of our employees, the names and home addresses of all employees in the bargaining unit it represents.
WE WILL NOT, in any like or related manner, interfere with, restrain, or coerce our employees in the exercise of the rights assured them by the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.
WE WILL furnish the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 26, AFL-CIO, the exclusive representative of certain of our employees, the names and home addresses of all employees in the bargaining unit it represents.
(Activity)
Dated: By:
(Signature) (Title)
This Notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting, and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
If employees have any questions concerning this Notice or compliance with its provisions, they may communicate directly with the Regional Director, Washington, D.C. Regional Office, Federal Labor Relations Authority, whose address is: 1111 18th Street, N.W., 7th Floor, P.O. Box 33758, Washington, D.C. 20033-0758 and whose telephone number is: (202) 653-8500.
FOOTNOTES:
(If blank, the decision does not
have footnotes.)
*/ On April 17, 1991, the Authority issued an order directing the Union to show that its brief of April 5, 1991, has been served on the other parties, and stating that failure to so demonstrate may result in the Authority's not considering the brief. The Union has shown that it served that brief and we have considered it in this case. The Union also filed an additional brief, dated May 1, 1991, which we have not considered. See 5 C.F.R. § 2429.26.