40:0897(73)CA - - Naval Aviation Depot and AFGE Local 2225 - - 1991 FLRAdec CA - - v40 p897

40 FLRA No. 73

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 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 March 27, 1989, the Union requested the Respondent to furnish it with the names and home addresses of the bargaining unit employees employed by the Respondent. Stipulation, Joint Exhibit 4. The Union stated that the requested information was "needed to fully represent [bargaining unit] employees . . . ." Id.

Since on or about April 26, 1989, and continuing to date, the Respondent has refused to provide the Union with the requested information. The Respondent stated that its position was that "the release of information of this nature [is prohibited] due to Privacy Act violations which may occur when this information is released." Id. at 5.

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, and do not constitute guidance, advice, counsel or training provided for management officials or supervisors relating to collective bargaining. The parties also stipulated that "alternative means of communication are available to the Union to contact employees . . . ." Stipulation, paragraph 10. The General Counsel asserts that "it is not necessary to determine if alternative means of communication with unit employees are available in order to reach a decision in this case."