46:0560(54)CA - - Marine Corps, Combat Development Command, Quantico Marine Corps Base, Quantico, Virginia and AFGE Local 1786 - - 1992 FLRAdec CA - - v46 p560
[ v46 p560 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
46 FLRA No. 54
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
U.S. MARINE CORPS
COMBAT DEVELOPMENT COMMAND
QUANTICO MARINE CORPS BASE
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
LOCAL 1786, AFL-CIO
DECISION AND ORDER
November 20, 1992
Before Chairman McKee and Members Talkin and Armendariz.
I. Statement of the Case
The Administrative Law Judge issued the attached decision in the above-entitled proceeding finding that the Respondent did not violate section 7116(a)(1), (5), and (8) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) by refusing to furnish the Union with the names and home addresses of the bargaining unit employees represented by the Union. Accordingly, the Judge dismissed the complaint. The Union filed exceptions to the Judge's decision. The Respondent filed an opposition to the Union's exceptions.(1) The General Counsel filed no submission.
Pursuant to section 2423.29 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations and section 7118 of the Statute, we have reviewed the rulings of the Judge made at the hearing and find that no prejudicial error was committed. We affirm the rulings. Upon consideration of the Judge's decision, the exceptions, the opposition, and the entire record, we find that the Union's conduct in 1990 prior to and during negotiations with the Respondent over the parties' new Master Labor Agreement (MLA) demonstrates that the Union waived its statutory right to receive unit employees' names and home addresses for the life of the 1990 MLA.(2) In this regard, as found by the Judge, the record shows that in 1990, the Union's representative "acceded to [the Respondent's] refusal to furnish the home addresses and agreed to continue the previous arrangement[,]" whereby the Respondent agreed to provide the Union with unit employees' names and work locations and also permitted the Union to distribute literature to unit employees during nonwork time in work areas. Judge's Decision at 9.
Accordingly, having found that the Union waived its statutory right to be furnished with unit employees' names and home addresses, we conclude that the Respondent did not violate section 7116(a)(1), (5), and (8) of the Statute by refusing to release the unit employees' names and home addresses requested by the Union. See U.S. Department of the Navy, United States Marine Corps (MPL), Washington, D.C. and Marine Corps Logistics Base, Albany, Georgia, 38 FLRA 632 (1990) (in a case involving the parties' 1985 MLA, the Authority found that the union waived its statutory right to receive unit employees' names and home addresses by negotiating over and agreeing to contractual provisions virtually identical to the provisions involved in the instant case).
The complaint in this case is dismissed.
(If blank, the decision does not have footnotes.)
1. The Respondent argues that the Union's exceptions should be dismissed "as failing to meet the requirements of 5 C.F.R. 2423.27(a)." Respondent's Opposition at 7. We conclude that the exceptions are sufficiently clear so as to satisfy the requirements of 5 C.F.R. 2423.27(a). See U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Long Beach, California, 39 FLRA 1347, 1347-48 (1991).
2. The Union disputes the Judge's conclusion that it did not withdraw its waiver of the right to unit employees' names and home addresses contained in the parties' 1985 MLA. In view of our conclusion that the Union's conduct in 1990 demonstrates that the Union waived its statutory right to receive unit employees' names and home addresses, we do not address or adopt the Judge's finding that the Union's letter of 1988 and statement to management in 1989 did not withdraw its 1985 waiver of that right.