51:1419(115)CU_AC - - Navy, Naval Supply Center, Puget Sound, Bremerton, WA and Fleet and Industrial Supply Center, Puget Sound, Bremerton, WA and Bremerton Metal Trades Council and AFGE and AFGE Local 1931 - - 1996 FLRAdec RP - - v51 p1419



[ v51 p1419 ]
51:1419(115)AC
The decision of the Authority follows:


51 FLRA No. 115

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

_____

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, PUGET SOUND

BREMERTON, WASHINGTON

(Activity/Petitioner)

and

BREMERTON METAL TRADES COUNCIL

AFL-CIO

(Labor Organization)

SF-AC-50070

_____

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

FLEET AND INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CENTER, PUGET SOUND

BREMERTON, WASHINGTON

(Activity/Petitioner)

and

BREMERTON METAL TRADES COUNCIL

AFL-CIO

(Labor Organization)

and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

AFL-CIO

(Labor Organization/Intervenor)

and

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT

EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1931, AFL-CIO

(Labor Organization/Intervenor)

SF-CU-50071

_____

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART AN

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

June 24, 1996

_____

Before the Authority: Phyllis N. Segal, Chair; Tony Armendariz and Donald S. Wasserman, Members.

I. Statement of the Case

This case is before the Authority on an application for review filed by the Department of the Navy, Fleet and Industrial Supply Center, Puget Sound, Bremerton, Washington (Activity) under section 2422.17 of the Authority's Regulations.(1) The Activity seeks review of the Decision and Order of the Regional Director (RD) granting in part and denying in part its petition concerning the bargaining unit status of two groups of employees following a reorganization. No opposition to the application for review has been filed.

The RD found that one group of affected employees, located at Everett, Washington (Everett Detachment), accreted into the unit sought by the petition for unit clarification (CU) filed by the Activity. The RD concluded that a second group of affected employees, located at Concord, California (Concord Detachment), did not accrete into that unit because the Activity was a successor employer. In its application for review, the Activity challenges the RD's decision with respect to the Concord Detachment employees as inconsistent