Table of Decisions and Digests Previous Digests Next Digests Quick List of Decisions and Digests

Unfair Labor Practices Digest Series

Click here to view the decision.

55 FLRA No. 44

FAA and National Air Traffic Controllers Association MEBA/AFL-CIO, et al, Case Nos. AT-CA-70058, AT- CA-70067, AT-CA-70072, DE-CA-70121, DE-CA- 70201, WA-CA-70064, WA-CA-70134, WA-CA- 70140, AT-CA-70043 (Decided February 26, 1999)


      The consolidated complaint alleged that the Respondent violated section 7116(a)(1), (5), and (8) of the Statute by failing to provide the Union with information requested to facilitate the administration of a seniority policy determined by the Union at its National Convention. The Authority adopted the Judge's findings, conclusions, and recommended Order only to the extent consistent with this decision.

      The Authority concluded that the judge correctly determined that the union's showing of particularized need outweighed the respondent's countervailing interests in non-disclosure of the requested information. The Authority also concluded that the case was not moot. The Authority noted that an unfair labor practice case becomes moot where the former exclusive representative is no longer recognized, and where no individual rights are involved. In determining mootness, consideration is given to whether any decision rendered by the Authority could have a practical legal effect. However, a case does not become moot simply because a particular remedy may no longer be appropriate. The Authority further noted that when a cease and desist order and the posting of notice remain viable remedies, a case is not moot.

      Here, the Authority found that the Union was still the exclusive representative. Regardless of the ultimate disposition of NATCA, the Authority's Order here still had practical legal effect. The Respondent committed an unfair labor practice by failing to provide the Union with information necessary for the administration of a portion of the Agreement. The Authority further noted that even if the underlying seniority policy was to be ruled invalid, the Union still had a right to determine seniority policy and could still articulate a particularized need for the information to formulate and administer that policy.



Table of Decisions and Digests Previous Digests Next Digests Quick List of Decisions and Digests