DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND, SOUTHEAST REGIONAL MAINTENANCE CENTER, MAYPORT, FLORIDA AND MAYPORT REGIONAL MAINTENANCE CENTER COUNCIL

 

                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY                   OALJ 13-25
                                                      Office of Administrative Law Judges
                                                                WASHINGTON, D.C.
 
   

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY                         NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND SOUTHEAST REGIONAL MAINTENANCE CENTER, MAYPORT, FLORIDA               

                                                   RESPONDENT

 

AND

MAYPORT REGIONAL MAINTENANCE CENTER COUNCIL   

                                               CHARGING PARTY

 

 

 

 

Case No. AT-CA-13-0413

 

                            

 
 
Mark D. Halverson
Brent S. Hudspeth
               For the General Counsel
 
Larry A. Brown
Kate D’Andrea
                For the Respondent
 
Before:    RICHARD A.PEARSON     
                Administrative Law Judge
 
 
DECISION AND ORDER REMANDING CASE

            On May 7, 2012, the Mayport Regional Maintenance Center Council (the Union), filed an unfair labor practice charge against the Department of the Navy, Naval Sea Systems Command, Southeast Regional Maintenance Center, Mayport, Florida (the Respondent). On January 17, 2013, the Regional Director of the Atlanta Region of the Federal Labor Relations Authority (the Authority), on behalf of the Authority’s General Counsel (the General Counsel), issued a Complaint and Notice of Hearing alleging that the Respondent violated section 7116(a)(1) and (2) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute), by terminating probationary employee DeWayne Mack for engaging in protected activity. On February 5, 2013, the Respondent filed an Answer in which it denied violating the Statute as alleged.

 

A hearing in the matter was held on March 19, 2013, and the parties subsequently filed post-hearing briefs. 
 
On August 29, 2013, Counsel for the General Counsel filed a Motion for Permission to Withdraw Complaint in Order to Approve Charging Party’s Request to Withdraw. In the motion, the General Counsel indicated that the parties have reached a settlement of their underlying dispute, pursuant to which the Charging Party has requested to withdraw its charge, and that the General Counsel concurs in the withdrawal. Therefore, pursuant to section 2423.31(e)(1) of the Authority’s Regulations, the General Counsel now seeks permission to withdraw the complaint. I conclude that settlement of this case on terms and conditions amicably determined by the parties effectuates the purposes and policies of the Statute, and that remanding the case to the Regional Director for such action is appropriate.
 
                                                                                             ORDER
 
Pursuant to section 2423.31(e)(1) of the Authority’s Regulations, 5 C.F.R. § 2423.31(e)(1), permission to withdraw the complaint is GRANTED. 
 
The case is hereby Remanded to the Regional Director for further action as he deems appropriate to effectuate the purposes and policies of the Statute.
 
Issued, Washington, D.C., September 3, 2013
 
 
 
                                                                       &nb